A major gripe of mine about
service oriented
architecture (SOA) is the lack of a clear definition of the
term by the software industry.
My view is that
SOA is not really about technology, but rather that it is a
means of solving a set of enterprise issues, mainly to do with
business processes. However, the vast majority of suppliers talk
about how SOA uses standard protocols, and how the use of XML
enables information to be handled in a coherent manner.
The techies may like this, but are not in a position to go to
the business and say, "I know I have promised you this before, but
this time I mean it: there is a new technology that is great and
will solve all your problems. All we need to do is rip everything
out and start again."
Even though the majority of suppliers try to show how existing
systems can be made to work with SOA and be used within
the greater SOA scheme, it is very unlikely that many companies
will show much interest based on these promises.
With this in mind, it was nice to see IBM at its Impact
conference begin to focus on looking at what SOA does for a
business, and at providing products that are firmly aimed at the
business leader.
IBM takes five different "entry points" to SOA
(
business process management, people, information, connectivity
and functional reuse) and presents the possible benefits of SOA in
terms that should resonate from a business perspective.
For example, functional reuse is not touted as the universal
answer to the developer's dream, with the developer having a
multitude of functional components available to them for use within
their overall system.
IBM is one supplier that has realised that this has been tried
over and over again, from the mainframe days through to
computer-aided software engineering tools and approaches such as
Corba. Developers like developing, and as a result reuse is not as
high on their list as it possibly could be.
However, from a business perspective, reuse speeds up
time-to-market, improves manageability of the business environment
and means that a single functional update can benefit all processes
dependent on that function. This all provides definite business
value and makes the sale of SOA much easier.
Another example is using master data management. This is a
complex matter that technical experts are only just beginning to
get to grips with. However, when it is explained to businesses as a
means of ensuring that core information used commonly across an
organisation and its value chains (such as customer information,
product numbers and HR information) is maintained once and once
only, without the need for highly complex data manipulation,
business leaders begin to show interest.
When they realise that this ensures that the information the
business uses will always be up to date, and that contracts will
not be drawn up using dated information, it suddenly gains
commercial value.
However, there are still blank looks from many business people
when SOA is mentioned. Although there has been great interest in
trying to understand SOA from a technical perspective, little
impact seems to have been made at the business level.
For IBM, it helps that IBM Global Business Services leads much
of IBM's SOA work in large organisations, helping businesses to
understand the various opportunities that can be delivered using
SOA. IBM Global Technical Services then helps in the implementation
and management of SOA infrastructures.
This approach should have a lot of impact at management level in
large organisations. But getting the SOA message through to smaller
organisations remains a major issue.
Increasingly, I expect to see business functions being provided
as discrete services available to the mid-market and SME through a
software as a service model.
Already, Google is making functions such as Google Maps
available, which can be utilised as a base for making
geographic information available through combining
applications.
Google is also providing more comprehensive systems such as
Google Office, and has signed a deal with Salesforce.com. This
partnership enables Google to provide not only Salesforce.com's
helpdesk systems, but also use its Apex development platform to
provide other online services.
In the end, it may not be the case that an organisation has to
know that it is utilising SOA. The technology can remain like the
engine in a car: drivers and passengers do not have to know that
there is a differential box, a drive train and a clutch under the
bonnet. They just buy the car, complete with engine, and drive
it.
Similarly, organisations do not need to know about SOA,
component registries, XML meta data and wrappering. All they need
to do is get the composite system that supports their business
application needs and use it.
That the system is then far more able to adapt to future needs
is a clear benefit to business users. Again, the user organisation
does not need to know how this works, it simply has to know that by
ensuring support for open standards, business flexibility will be
ensured for the future.
So, a detailed knowledge of the workings of SOA is the preserve
of techies. A full understanding of SOAs at the technical level is
not likely to become important to most business people. What
businesses will benefit from is a flexible technical environment
that allows users to add new processes as they become
necessary.
The onus is now on the suppliers of SOA systems to get this core
message across to business leaders.
More on SOA in
business >>
Quocirca's information on SOA
use >>
Salesforce.com >>
Comment on this article:
computer.weekly@rbi.co.uk