The BPM vendor view of SOA
Oh dear. Once again I am about to be drawn into a row about vendor claims around SOA. Oh well – so be it.
I saw a link recently to a White Paper available through Information Week, by Metastorm Inc., which started off
While an SOA can go far in addressing the important security, reliability, and re-usability of services, SOA is nonetheless a technical approach. Thus, the challenge of SOA — and the key to achieving business value — is elevating service enablement beyond just technology functions. The reality is that SOA has limited value unless it encompasses disparate applications and platforms, and most importantly, it moves beyond technology and is orchestrated and controlled in the context of business processes.
OK, I see where the BPM vendor is going with this. But there is a glaring issue here in my mind. Stating that SOA is a technical approach, and discussing the need to move beyond technology (via the use of BPM) creates the false impression that SOA services are technical pieces of functionality as opposed to business services, and that implementing an SOA is jsut a technical exercise. This is absolutely not the case. I have discussed this many times, even in this blog. SOA services lie on business rather than technical boundaries – they execute a piece of business functionality as opposed to a technical one. Indeed, as I have also stated previously, this leads users into a position where they may be ‘backing into’ BPM through building orchestrated SOA services, but this does not require a BPM suite. In addition, a successful SOA implementation is almost NEVER just a technical exercise – it has to involve all sorts of disciplines.
I am not against BPM suites – in fact, I think they can add a lot of value when users have the enterprise-wide maturity to realize the full range of benefits they bring. But let’s make sure we keep the facts straight.
Steve
Recent Comments
November 1, 2010 (8:36) CICS and PHP - DON'T PANIC It's great to see transactional support of any kind for a cloud language... be it PHP or not (whi...
July 16, 2010 (12:41) Does Micro Focus Server for SOA miss the point? I think Micro Focus has done a tremodeous introduction of Web Service from a COBOL. May not be a ...
June 15, 2010 (6:14) CICS and PHP - DON'T PANIC Hi Steve, Well, we don't actually *demand* that you host the PHP in regions separate to those ru...
April 3, 2010 (12:27) AMQP - Great idea, but it will never work As someone who has worked on DDS from an implementation perspective as well as an OMG standards p...
December 12, 2009 (9:15) Did Teilhard's JuxtaComm patent wipe out IBM, Microsoft and SAP? Subsequent to my post, the Calgary Herald ran an article (http://www.calgaryherald.com/business/P...
December 10, 2009 (9:01) AMQP - Great idea, but it will never work Now, this is a late reply! @Thorlin. I looked at DDS before embarking on AMQP (I also looked a...
December 7, 2009 (2:40) Come in Texas East District Court, your time is up The important thing to remember about patents is that they're all about the claims. While the bu...
October 27, 2009 (9:08) BAM vs BI Good article. Thanks, Emil
October 23, 2009 (11:04) So Oracle got Sun - but why? Oracle has stepped up the rhetoric when it comes to its plans for Sun. In a message to Sun custom...
September 16, 2009 (1:15) IBM gets Cognos to fill the gaps IBM has two BAM solutions now Cognos Now! and Websphere Business Monitor. Why two BAM solutions f...