Skip to main content

STKI Summit 2011 – SOA Perspective: Business Services or only Integration




On March 28th 2011 I participated in the STKI Summit by the local analysts company STKI. 
The company headed by Dr. Jimmy Schwarzkopf is focused on the Israeli market. 
Presentations were based on an Israeli market survey performed by the company.
The company's analysts presentations topics were Infrastructure Trends, Applications Trends, Office of the CIO trends and Infrastructure Services Trends, followed by wrap-up IT Trends presentation by Jimmy.
The survey may not be accurate but the information is valuable and probably reflects the overall market status.    


The theme of this year conference was: Manage Scattered.
The prime areas appearing in all presentations were: Mobile Computing, Social Computing and Cloud Computing


The combination of them is the basis for creation of totally different IT industry, as well as Business and Personal Interaction and Collaboration.


The theme is about IT efforts and solutions which are executed without the IT department involvement (e.g. SaaS and other Clod Computing solutions implemented by outsourcer, Inter Enterprise Collaboration by Facebook, Blogs by company's employees etc.). It was described by an analogy of a shepherd losing his scattered sheep. The The theme is about recommending to the CIO's to regain control over all scattered IT related efforts.


SOA Perspective 
Pini Cohen STKI's Vice President and Senior Analyst discussed Application Development and SOA in the Israeli Market. 



Unlike previous STKI summit events, SOA is no longer a prime conference topic.  


The Highlights of the SOA related part of the presentation are:

  • The SOA implementation levels (termed  in the presentation as SOA Maturity levels) are low in most organizations
  • SOA is used for Integration and not for Implementing Services
  • In most cases the implementation is ESB Centered, therefore the local SOA market was described as Integration Brokers and SOA Infrastructure.
  • Market Leaders are: IBM, Tibco, Oracle, Magic (Magic products are invented and built in Israel therefore the local market is biased in favor of that product in comparison to the Global market). The leaders are followed by Software AG and Microsoft

My Take
SOA Value Proposition is in the domain of Business and IT Alignment i.e. reducing the Business-IT gap. 
Usually it is not possible to realize significant benefits without implementing Business Services.

The Israeli SOA Market is actually an ESB market with limited Business Services deployment.
ESB is SOA based Integration.  Many SOA evangelists believe that SOA value propisition is mostly in Business Services and not in Integration. Some of them argue that SOA did not deliever its Integration promise. Read for example Loraine Lawson post


I already addressed the ESB-SOA issue in a previous post titled: ESB for an Orphan



Recently, I presented in the Israeli Systems Analysts conference. 
My Presentation was focused on Organizational and Methodological aspects of SOA and BPM. These aspects are crucial for successful SOA implementation. 


Pini Cohen's presentation is focused only on SOA infrastructure, mainly on ESB, not because he does not understand the importance of other aspects. It is focused on these aspects, because that is the focus of most SOA implementations in Israel.   


No wonder, that the ratio of successful SOA implementations in Israel is even lower than the same ratio in Europe and North America. 


 What is wrong in SOA implementations in Israel? 


The following highlights are generalizations, so there are exceptions whose SOA efforts are better than the average Israeli SOA implementation.    



  • The SOA initiatives are driven and executed by IT department with limited Business involvement and sponsorship.



  • ESB is the beginning or starting point of SOA

There are three main approaches for starting SOA initiative:

Approach 1: Planned SOA
Including training of key IT and Business staff, building an initial Reference Architecture and  selecting a small pilot project which will be executed with appropriate SOA tools or sometimes prior to purchasing SOA tools.

Approach 2: Pain points
The initiative begins by addressing a Pain point by small SOA implementation, hoping that success will promote other SOA projects and even planned SOA initiative.

Approach 3: Implementing SOA infrastructure products which facilitate relatively easy SOA projects implementations
It should be noticed that for some Enterprise a Planned SOA (approach 1) may include purchasing of SOA Infrastructure product in the beginning.

In most Approach 3 cases ESB tools is the first implemented product.
Beginning SOA implementation by implementing ESB is the best approach for the ESB Vendor. In many cases the decision to begin by implementing an ESB was based upon consulting of the vendor's  SOA experts.

The IT department also favors this approach: No need for collaboration with Business people is required, it is IT Department's SOA, which can be executed and controlled more easily.

The problem is that it is like looking for a lost coin near the street lampspot even though the coin was lost somewhere else.

After the ESB implementation in many cases there is no real Business Value and sometimes no Business Services implementation following the ESB installation.

In my opinion in many Approach 3 SOA implementations you should start with implementing service Registry and Repository product and not an ESB product.

If there are already many Web Services in production (and this is often the reality) implementing a Registry can save redundant efforts and stop usage or maintenance of unused or improper Web Services.

  •   Inappropriate Governance


  • The vendor has multiple roles: Infrastructure Products Sale and support, Planning, Consulting, Project execution, Training etc. 


  • No Architecture Group or Center of Excellence


  • Unrealistic expectations of completing transition to SOA in a short time and /or realizing SOA major benefits in short time.





Comments

Popular posts from this blog

The mainframe: still alive and kicking

Recently, I was interviewed by  Pcon   (unfortunately the link points to an Hebrew only site) as part of debriefing on Legacy Systems.  Pcon is an Israeli company investigating IT topics by quoting professional articles and interviewing experts. They publish the results of the investigations including practical recommendations. This post is mainly about topics raised by me during the interview, but not included in the debriefing, which will be published.    What are Legacy Systems? The term Legacy Systems refers to old application systems and/or veteran technologies still in use.  Usually, the term Legacy Systems is associated with: 1. Mainframe Hardware e.g. IBM System z and its Operating Systems or Proprietary Servers and Operating Systems such as HP Alpha and OpenVMS Operating System, IBM AS/400 and OS/400   Operating System. 2. Development and Production Environments, e.g. COBOL , Natural and DBMS systems such as Adabas  ...

Will Business and IT Aligned?

For decades we are talking about closing the gap between business and IT , but the gap is still as wide as it was. In the beginning of the ERP era, we focused on aligning Business Processes and Core Systems, but in most enterprises we failed. SOA was the next alignment promise: defining the SOA Services in Business boundaries instead of Technical boundaries, should narrow the gap. However, despite of SOA Business Value ( Agility and Reuse )  in most enterprises,  the large Business-IT Gap remained as large as it was.  The IT Community aimed at the next alignment attempt: SOA is technical and BPM is its Business related complement.  Will the current BPM based alignment attempt succeed? I do not know, but Nick Heath's article  titled: Stop doing what the vendors tell you, CIOs told , published in  Tech Republic , suggests that the root of the problem is not Technological .   Stop Doing What the vendors Tell You Nick Heath's article is based ...

Vendors Survival: Will Software AG Survive until 2019?

This post is another post in the Vendors Survival series following posts on Microsoft , Google , HP , Sun and EMC . On July 14 th Software AG and IDS Scheer announced that Software AG is going to take over IDS Scheer . The intended acquisition is an opportunity to add another post in my Vendors Survival posts series. A brief history of Software AG Mainframe products Software AG is larger than any German software company except SAP . It was established in the Mainframe age (in 1969). I worked with many customers, who used and some of them are still using, its two flagship products Adabas and Natural . Although these products support many platforms, their main platform is IBM Mainframe. Adabas is a database and Natural is a development environment. Like other pairs of Database and Development Environment in the mainframe environment (e.g. Ideal and Datacom , Mantis and Supra) build by the same vendor, they are tied together. As a result, although it is possible t...