This month I have been working with my colleague Denzil Wasson to define an agile project approach to Application Modernization.
In a previous report I introduced the Application Modernization process decomposing it into Disciplines, Process Unit and Tasks. In this report, Denzil and I discuss an agile project structure and organization and provide a detailed breakdown of the Application Modernization process in terms of Project Phases and Work Packages, starting with the Assess and Plan phases.
Saturday, 6 February 2010
Thursday, 21 January 2010
SOA Fundamentals - Now Available as a Book
I had requests from some of our certification students as to whether they could get the elearning materials in some other format they could study and use offline. Though elearning aids understanding with animations and voice overs, there is no doubt that having a printed copy to hand also has other uses - such as for reference - as well as convenience and the familiarity of a tried and trusted format.
Consequently, our SOA Fundamentals eLearning materials are now available in printed book form.
SOA Fundamentals is not a pure technology book, but covers a wide range of topics including
- SOA Concepts and Principles
- Web Service Protocols
- SOA Technology Infrastructure
- Service Architecture
- Service Specification
- SOA Project Management
- SOA Governance
- SOA Adoption
- Business Architecture
- Business Value from SOA.
SOA Fundamentals is aimed at anyone who needs to understand the basics of SOA. That includes IT architects and developers, IT managers and IT specialists of all kinds, as well as business analysts and other business people working together with IT to deliver a service-based business.
As well as providing a basic understanding of SOA to any reader, this guide particularly supports students who are undertaking CBDI Forum certification in SOA Fundamentals as the certification questions are all based on the content of this guide.
Wednesday, 6 January 2010
Application Modernization Reports - Freely Available
We have recently made two of our recent reports on Application Modernization freely available.
These can be download from the website. See the Application Modernization Tab.
Monday, 4 January 2010
SAE2 - Supporting the Application Modernization Process
We start the new decade at CBDI Forum with a major focus on Application Modernization (AM). The need to reuse existing assets in new SOA solutions is not itself new, and we have covered this before in various reports, whilst the CBDI-SAE SOA Process has always included a ‘Legacy to Service Transition Planning’ discipline.
Equally, at Everware-CBDI, we have considerable practical experience in AM via a number of engagements our consultants have worked on, primarily in the CA Gen domain. We also recently announced the SOA4GEN program along with partners Jumar Solutions.
However, we recognize that in many organizations AM has increased in priority, whilst SOA is becoming ‘business as usual’. That doesn’t mean AM is replacing SOA, rather it puts SOA in context. AM is the objective, and SOA is one of the key elements in achieving it. Consequently, we wanted to increase our coverage of AM in our research and guidance, and further explore the relationship between AM and SOA.
One of my focuses in this work has been on the process. To date, our CBDI-SAE SO Process has been focused primarily on disciplines covering the planning and provisioning of the Service Portfolio, and its use in solution delivery. To support AM, we have now begun to document additional disciplines such as Application Modernization Planning and Knowledge Discovery (understand the As-Is system, and extract knowledge of the current assets), and give them equal weight and depth of coverage to these in comparison with the existing SO disciplines and detail how they interact.
Thursday, 26 November 2009
Modeling for Smart Ecosystem Architecture
In a new CBDI Journal report this month I have been looking at the modeling requirements to support our Smart Ecosystem Architecture (SEA) concept.
It is evident there are two major architectural patterns in play – service oriented and event driven. But in addition we need to recognize a new dynamic which we might characterize as “post enterprise” including cloud computing, Web 2.0 and so called smart IT that encourages ecosystem collaborations over internal enterprise processes.
There is a lot of superficial (marketing) noise suggesting a close relationship between Event Driven Architecture (EDA) and SOA, Actually the two domains are in practice islands of automation. SOA is much more widely used, whereas EDA is still largely restricted to narrow focus, point solutions. This is changing, but slowly as there are considerable complexities to deal with in an integrated world. Not least event data availability, architecture contention and difficulties in testing. Of course the solution to broader utilization is integrated modeling approaches.
Similarly cloud, Web 2.0 and smart IT are separate domains and narrowly focused and capturing the requirements for either still tends to exist in two separate domains. However, to recognize the real opportunities in the smart ecosystem requires us to take a more coordinated view of modeling that spans all of these considerations.
CBDI has a vast amount of business modeling guidance and advice; much of it has pioneered thinking around modeling services, events, capabilities, meta data, dynamic business intelligence and ecosystems. See for example the CBDI report series on Business Modeling for SOA that begins specifically with the event-response concept at a high level as part of business modeling , and the report Event Driven Service Architecture that examines the convergence of EDA and SOA.
In this new report Modeling for Smart Ecosystem Architecture I advise on how to integrate these different perspectives across the broader set of architectural views. We also explore the dual requirements to consider both events and services, and also consider some of the meta model impacts.
On that last point it is interesting to note the lack of any 'standard' meta model for EDA, and hence similarly the EDA/SOA relationship. Whilst OMG have been working on a RFP for an ‘Event Model and Profile’ (EMP), this has yet to be issued.
Today, the requirements are quite likely to be captured directly into a format prescribed by proprietary event management products used for the EDA implementation.
We are currently evaluating how we add the necessary concepts to support EDA and SOA convergence in the SAE Meta Model and our associated UML profile, and discussing how we may contribute to emerging standards activity in the same way as we have done with SoaML.
It is evident there are two major architectural patterns in play – service oriented and event driven. But in addition we need to recognize a new dynamic which we might characterize as “post enterprise” including cloud computing, Web 2.0 and so called smart IT that encourages ecosystem collaborations over internal enterprise processes.
There is a lot of superficial (marketing) noise suggesting a close relationship between Event Driven Architecture (EDA) and SOA, Actually the two domains are in practice islands of automation. SOA is much more widely used, whereas EDA is still largely restricted to narrow focus, point solutions. This is changing, but slowly as there are considerable complexities to deal with in an integrated world. Not least event data availability, architecture contention and difficulties in testing. Of course the solution to broader utilization is integrated modeling approaches.
Similarly cloud, Web 2.0 and smart IT are separate domains and narrowly focused and capturing the requirements for either still tends to exist in two separate domains. However, to recognize the real opportunities in the smart ecosystem requires us to take a more coordinated view of modeling that spans all of these considerations.
CBDI has a vast amount of business modeling guidance and advice; much of it has pioneered thinking around modeling services, events, capabilities, meta data, dynamic business intelligence and ecosystems. See for example the CBDI report series on Business Modeling for SOA that begins specifically with the event-response concept at a high level as part of business modeling , and the report Event Driven Service Architecture that examines the convergence of EDA and SOA.
In this new report Modeling for Smart Ecosystem Architecture I advise on how to integrate these different perspectives across the broader set of architectural views. We also explore the dual requirements to consider both events and services, and also consider some of the meta model impacts.
On that last point it is interesting to note the lack of any 'standard' meta model for EDA, and hence similarly the EDA/SOA relationship. Whilst OMG have been working on a RFP for an ‘Event Model and Profile’ (EMP), this has yet to be issued.
Today, the requirements are quite likely to be captured directly into a format prescribed by proprietary event management products used for the EDA implementation.
We are currently evaluating how we add the necessary concepts to support EDA and SOA convergence in the SAE Meta Model and our associated UML profile, and discussing how we may contribute to emerging standards activity in the same way as we have done with SoaML.
Tuesday, 24 November 2009
The Shape of Business - Drivers for Smart Ecosystems
A report this week from the Confederation of British Industry (CBI) entitled The Shape of Business – The Next 10 Years provides some useful insight into emerging business drivers that reinforce our concepts of smart ecosystems.
Taking at some of the key headlines in the report, you can see the increasing need for organisations to develop ecosystems, and adding smart behaviour.
Movement to a more collaborative business model. The recession has made businesses much more aware of the complexities and interdependencies in their operations, their financing, supply chains and customers, but they are still not able to fully assess or capture these in their business planning. To gain greater control of these uncertainties, businesses will seek to ‘simplify’ their operations and will enter into more partnerships and joint ventures. In particular, this will be important for businesses moving to a ‘core plus periphery’ model
= a need to develop ecosystems
= the need for a smarter supply chain, hence smart ecosystem. Though supply chain optimization is hardly new, the emphasis on this is clearly going to grow. There are also additional ways of thinking about the supply chain – e.g. as a source of finance, not just ‘goods’. i.e. don’t invest in stock, and certainly don’t lend money to buy stock, but rely more on the support of participants in the supply chain and on its optimisation to lower inventory and provide 'just in time' fulfilment.
Rationalization to the Core. The recession accelerated the need to address inefficiencies and non-core activities across the enterprise. It has also provided the stimulus for companies to re-think themselves and re-evaluate their future.
= a need for greater collaboration across an ecosystem consisting of an internal core and an external periphery (what Moore might term context)
Technology will enable new ways of working. Businesses will increase their use of social networking techniques to solve problems – many more companies will use Facebook, Twitter and other web 2.0 developments
= making sense out of what is going on in complex social networks is going to require a lot of ‘smart’. It isn’t going to save money if it requires an army of people to monitor and participate in social networks
There were also some interesting comments that identify the need for agility.
For example, there is a current trend of “localism” in some organisations or industry sectors, relocating certain supply chain activities back to the UK. What is evident is that the decisions about what should be done locally or globally, or what should be in-house or outsourced, will be fluid. It is not a one-off decision but one of constant re-evaluation in the face of prevailing conditions. Equally, large organisations may find that the decision varies across different product lines, with ‘no one size fits all’ solution. As such, organisations will need to be very agile if they are to quickly capitalise on changes in those conditions.
Or course it is very difficult to predict what will happen across the next 10 years. How many predicted the current situation a decade ago?
And there is of course the need to survive 2012 first!
Taking at some of the key headlines in the report, you can see the increasing need for organisations to develop ecosystems, and adding smart behaviour.
Movement to a more collaborative business model. The recession has made businesses much more aware of the complexities and interdependencies in their operations, their financing, supply chains and customers, but they are still not able to fully assess or capture these in their business planning. To gain greater control of these uncertainties, businesses will seek to ‘simplify’ their operations and will enter into more partnerships and joint ventures. In particular, this will be important for businesses moving to a ‘core plus periphery’ model
= a need to develop ecosystems
= the need for a smarter supply chain, hence smart ecosystem. Though supply chain optimization is hardly new, the emphasis on this is clearly going to grow. There are also additional ways of thinking about the supply chain – e.g. as a source of finance, not just ‘goods’. i.e. don’t invest in stock, and certainly don’t lend money to buy stock, but rely more on the support of participants in the supply chain and on its optimisation to lower inventory and provide 'just in time' fulfilment.
Rationalization to the Core. The recession accelerated the need to address inefficiencies and non-core activities across the enterprise. It has also provided the stimulus for companies to re-think themselves and re-evaluate their future.
= a need for greater collaboration across an ecosystem consisting of an internal core and an external periphery (what Moore might term context)
Technology will enable new ways of working. Businesses will increase their use of social networking techniques to solve problems – many more companies will use Facebook, Twitter and other web 2.0 developments
= making sense out of what is going on in complex social networks is going to require a lot of ‘smart’. It isn’t going to save money if it requires an army of people to monitor and participate in social networks
There were also some interesting comments that identify the need for agility.
For example, there is a current trend of “localism” in some organisations or industry sectors, relocating certain supply chain activities back to the UK. What is evident is that the decisions about what should be done locally or globally, or what should be in-house or outsourced, will be fluid. It is not a one-off decision but one of constant re-evaluation in the face of prevailing conditions. Equally, large organisations may find that the decision varies across different product lines, with ‘no one size fits all’ solution. As such, organisations will need to be very agile if they are to quickly capitalise on changes in those conditions.
Or course it is very difficult to predict what will happen across the next 10 years. How many predicted the current situation a decade ago?
And there is of course the need to survive 2012 first!
Sunday, 15 November 2009
Time to Eat the Programmer?
One of my colleagues asked the question of whether the work that we do (at Everware-CBDI) could ride the ‘green’ bandwagon. After all he suggested, some of our key services in helping customers to transform their existing systems, and reuse software components and software services via CBD and SOA, might be considered ‘green’.
My first reaction was “that’s a bit of a stretch”. However, some of the news recently that has accompanied the publication of the book “Time to Eat the Dog” by Robert and Brenda Vale highlights just how complex the ‘green’ issue is.
For example, the authors point out that the ecological footprint of a keeping a medium sized dog as a pet is in fact greater than that of driving a large SUV 10,000km a year. This presents a double ecological challenge for my colleague who raised the question as he has both a Labrador and a SUV.
It struck me therefore that if those authors can determine the effect each pet has on the environment, then similarly we ought to be able to determine the ecological impact of each line of code produced by a programmer.
I don’t intend to do so here (determining the equation would itself be a waste of valuable resources – well my time at least). But it does illustrate just how complex the issues of all things ‘green’ truly are.
Most ‘green’ IT efforts today are focused on reducing energy consumption by using more efficient computers. Similarly, many of the ‘green’ messages focused on the population at large are also focused on reducing energy consumption by using more efficient means of transport.
But if as demonstrated by the ecological impact of pets, we need to consider much more complex factors in order to truly establish our impact on the environment, then I guess it is just as valid to ask not just how much electricity does a CPU use, but also what is the ecological impact of programming – or other IT development activities.
Perhaps organizations that are serious about ‘green’ IT ought to better consider the options of software ‘recycling’ before they simply create yet another new system. No longer is it just an economic decision of whether it is cheaper to recycle components of an existing system or build new one, now it is also an ecological decision too.
Yes, it is still a “bit of a stretch”. But nevertheless, not perhaps quite as extraneous as you might have first thought.
(you can read more about “Time to Eat the Dog” via New Scientist, BBC News, Guardian Newspaper)
My first reaction was “that’s a bit of a stretch”. However, some of the news recently that has accompanied the publication of the book “Time to Eat the Dog” by Robert and Brenda Vale highlights just how complex the ‘green’ issue is.
For example, the authors point out that the ecological footprint of a keeping a medium sized dog as a pet is in fact greater than that of driving a large SUV 10,000km a year. This presents a double ecological challenge for my colleague who raised the question as he has both a Labrador and a SUV.
It struck me therefore that if those authors can determine the effect each pet has on the environment, then similarly we ought to be able to determine the ecological impact of each line of code produced by a programmer.
I don’t intend to do so here (determining the equation would itself be a waste of valuable resources – well my time at least). But it does illustrate just how complex the issues of all things ‘green’ truly are.
Most ‘green’ IT efforts today are focused on reducing energy consumption by using more efficient computers. Similarly, many of the ‘green’ messages focused on the population at large are also focused on reducing energy consumption by using more efficient means of transport.
But if as demonstrated by the ecological impact of pets, we need to consider much more complex factors in order to truly establish our impact on the environment, then I guess it is just as valid to ask not just how much electricity does a CPU use, but also what is the ecological impact of programming – or other IT development activities.
Perhaps organizations that are serious about ‘green’ IT ought to better consider the options of software ‘recycling’ before they simply create yet another new system. No longer is it just an economic decision of whether it is cheaper to recycle components of an existing system or build new one, now it is also an ecological decision too.
Yes, it is still a “bit of a stretch”. But nevertheless, not perhaps quite as extraneous as you might have first thought.
(you can read more about “Time to Eat the Dog” via New Scientist, BBC News, Guardian Newspaper)
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)