Business and Technology Alignment – Page 7

Service Orientated Architecture (SOA) Migration Case Studies and Lessons Learned – A Critical Review

Service Orientated Architecture (SOA) is a framework that allows business processes to be highlighted to deliver interoperability and rapid delivery of functionality. The benefits of SOA include reuse of generalized services, reduce costs and better business and IT alignment. If done correctly, it helps an organization respondent to ever-changing business needs efficiently. If done incorrectly, it can create bureaucracy and silos. This article evaluates the decisions, assumptions, and conclusions made by the research paper, SOA Migration Case Studies and Lessons Learned.

In the research paper, two research and evaluation methods are used to assess different cases for SOA. The first method is the Case Study Method where the researchers develop a theory and based on that theory they develop criterions to select the case studies that will be assessed. This Case Study Method is shown below:

The second method uses a customized version of the Evolution Process Framework (EPF) to evaluate SOA. This customized version is called EPF4SOA and the phases involved in the evaluation are shown below:

EPF4SOA Phases

With the research and evaluation methods in place, the research paper goes on to assess three multibillion-dollar organizations that have been around for at least 50 years. These organizations have legacy systems that have become archaic and thus they are unable to respond to rapidly changing business needs. Keeping these limitations in mind, these organizations go on the path to extract as much functionality from these legacy systems as possible by creating SOA services that could be used in the organization. Based on the EPF4SOA, the research paper goes on to claim that for effective SOA migration, organizations need to have a strong business case, services design, technology selection, SOA governance, and education and training.

As we read this report, it seems obvious that the researchers have done a good job of evaluating these large organizations from the finance and telecommunications sectors and in highlighting the lessons learned on SOA migrations. However, this research has made some decisions and assumptions that need to be understood. Firstly, in the Case Study Method, there seems to be an element of confirmation bias when the cases being selected are based on an initial theory. This confirmation bias can lead to selecting cases that fit what the researchers are looking for rather than selecting cases and then determining what theories can be derived from those cases. Secondly, the research looks at organizations that have been around for a long time and by their very nature are most likely to have legacy system issues and make the assumption that other organizations would have the same issues. Lastly, the research report alludes to that SOA can help in business and technology alignment but does not take into account strong leadership and organizational change management capabilities that are needed for SOA migrations.

Keeping the above in mind and carefully reading the case descriptions, we can extrapolate that there might be some potential challenges in the cases being presented in this report. These potential challenges are explained below:

SOA is not only an IT concern: One of the lessons learned in this report indicates the need for a strong business case for SOA developed by IT in order to get management support. The fundamental problem with these lessons learned is that it automatically puts the burden of implementing SOA across the entire organization on IT and takes it away from the business side’s responsibility and involvement with SOA. While IT is responsible for creating SOA services but the business has to work collaboratively with IT. Business has to understand how the organization came to a point where it became difficult for quick system changes and how to avoid situations like this in the future. Thus, SOA is not only an IT issue but an organizational endeavor that involves all parts of the organization as well.
Organizational processes need to be reevaluated: One of the cases mentions the presence of too many point-to-point integrations that are reducing the ability of the organization to be more agile. While this might be the case but there is a bigger perspective here that is missing. This perspective revolves around organizational processes in place that led to this in the first place. These organizational processes not only entail IT but also the business side. It seems like in this case IT would do what businesses ask them to but there has to be some mutual understanding that the requests have to be understood holistically. Even after a SOA migration, if these organizational processes are not optimized they might still result in ad-hoc requests from the business leading back to point-to-point integrations.
A long-term view on legacy systems is needed: The cases in the report indicate that replacing the legacy systems was not an option since it would be costly to do this. While in the short-term this seems like a good idea but in the long-term, there are issues with this approach. These issues entail the constant “patching” to upgrade underlying hardware and software in addition to overburdening legacy systems where new services are being added on top of systems that should be replaced rather than being continued to extend their end of life. While for some organizations it might not be possible to replace legacy systems altogether but there should be a plan to retire these systems with new systems eventually.
No measurements mean no ROI exists: While some organizations in the research report did measure SOA migration ROI but that was done after the fact. So, if the organizations were not measuring pre-SOA how would they know if what SOA migrations promised is what the organization was able to achieve. Herein lies the problem where quantification and justification are made to show SOA being a success without doing the due diligence before embarking on the SOA journey.

In addition to the above-identified problems, the research report does not put enough emphasis on the importance of governance that is needed for SOA. Let’s explore what is governance and why it could be one of the differentiating factors in SOA migrations.

Governance: Governance is the policy of how things should be done and provides a framework in which business processes can operate under regulatory, time and other constraints. Thus, governance is an organizational responsibility even for SOA and not only an IT one. In order to accomplish this, a governance board should be set up that consists of a cross-functional team from both IT and business. Additionally, governance should not only include the overall organization and management of SOA activities but also the creation of success and failure measurements. These measurements should be used to actually determine the state of SOA within the organization instead of people doing vaporware measurements that have no grounds in reality.

In conclusion, while the research report is interesting in its own right but it should not be taken as the only lessons learned for successful SOA migrations. Based on a few cases these lessons learned cannot be applied across various organizations such as smaller organizations, governments, and nonprofits but should be taken with a grain of salt. The lessons learned should be a start but not the bible for successful SOA implementations. A successful SOA implementation will depend upon context, processes, technologies, and people since broadly speaking SOA is an organizational change management journey.

References:

1. SOA migration case studies and lessons learned

5 Questions to Ask About Predictive Analytics

Predictive Analytics is a branch of data mining that uses a variety of statistical and analytical techniques to develop models that help predict future events and/or behaviors. It helps find patterns in recruitment, hiring, sales, customer attrition, optimization, business models, crime prevention and supply chain management to name a few. As we move to self-learning organizations, it is imperative that we understand the value of Business Analytics in general and Predictive Analytics in particular.

It turns out that Predictive Analytics is about Business Transformation. But in order for this Business Transformation to take place, you have to take into account the organizational contexts in the following ways:

Strategic Perspectives: Not all organizations are the same and thus what works in one organization might not work in yours. Based on the knowledge of your organization’s maturity, you have to decide if Predictive Analytics is going to be a top-down, bottom-up, cross-functional or a hybrid approach. Additionally, take into account what should be measured and for how long but be flexible in understanding those insights might be gained from data that might initially seem unrelated.
Tactical Perspectives: One of the key factors in Business Transformation is change management. You need to understand how a change would affect your organization in terms of people, processes, and technologies. You have to take into account the practical implications of this change and what kind of training is needed within your organization.
Operational Perspectives: It is all about how the execution of Predictive Analytics is done within your organization. To fully integrate Predictive Analytics into your organization, you have to learn from best practices, learn the pros and cons of your technology infrastructure and determine if the necessary tools are intuitive enough for people to make use of them.

Now that you understand the different organizational perspectives, it is time to ask the following:

	Today	Tomorrow
	Who uses Predictive Analytics to make decisions?	Who should use Predictive Analytics to make decisions?
	What happens to decisions when Predictive Analytics is used?	What would happen to decisions if Predictive Analytics will be used?
	Where does the data for Predictive Analytics come from?	Where should the data for Predictive Analytics come from?
	When is Predictive Analytics relevant?	When should Predictive Analytics be relevant?
	Why Predictive Analytics is being used?	Why Predictive Analytics should be used?

When you ask the above questions, keep in mind that the reliability of the information and how it is used within the organization is paramount. A pretty picture does not guarantee that the insights you get are correct but you can reduce decision-making errors by having people who understand what the data actually means and what it does not.

5 Questions to Ask About Your Information

Information collection, understanding and sharing has been a worthwhile pursuit since the dawn of humanity. In the beginning, now and in the foreseeable future, this pursuit will continue, even if the “tools” change. We will continue to use the information to make short-term and long-term decisions for our groups and ourselves. But depending upon the sources of the information, we might make good decisions or we might not. It is only until the results of the decisions are evident that we will know if where we ended is where we wanted to be. Sometimes we will make quick decisions and sometimes we will take our own time to make a decision. But in all of these circumstances, we will always hope that the information sources that we used to make our decisions are credible.

In order to understand the information, we need to understand the various “flavors” of information that we receive. Let’s explore them below:

Redundant Information: Think about how many times you have received the same information from two different secondary sources. In your mind, you might be thinking that since two different secondary sources are providing the same information then it must be true. But what if the primary source of the information is the same? What if nothing new has been added to the information that you received? This is the concept of Redundant Information where the primary source of the information is the same and nothing new has been added to it.
Corroborated Information: Think about how many times you have received the same information from two different secondary sources and are sure that the primary sources of the information are different. In your mind, you might be thinking that since the two primary sources are different then it must be true. This is the concept of Corroborated Information where the primary sources of the information are not dependent on each other.
Contradicting Information: Think about how many times you have received the same information from two different secondary sources and found out that they were saying the opposite things. This is the concept of Contradicting Information where the information that we receive does not agree with each other.
Perspective-Dependent Information: Think about how many times you have received the same information from two different secondary sources and determine that there are various versions of the truth. One version might be at a high level while another version might be at a lower level. This is the concept of Perspective-Dependent Information where information that you receive has been looked at from top-down, bottom-up and horizontal perspectives.
Biased Information: Let’s face it, everyone has biases at some level based on their history, culture, societal norms, politics, religion, age, experiences, interactions with others and various other factors. These biases can creep into the information that we receive from others but also influence us when we make our own decisions. This is the concept of Biased Information where even in front of mounting evidence that challenges your views, you are still holding on to your conscious and unconscious thought processes to make decisions.

Now that you understand the various flavors of the information that you receive, it is time to ask the following:

	Today	Tomorrow
	Who receives the information?	Who should receive information?
	What happens to the information?	What would happen to the information?
	Where does information come from?	Where would information come from?
	When is information being shared?	When would information be shared?
	Why information is collected?	Why should the information be collected?

When you ask the above questions, keep in mind that the information flavors and contexts are closely related. Even if you understand the information flavors being used but do not understand the context around them then your decisions will be skewed. On the other hand, be mindful of only looking at information that confirms your views (aka cherry-picking) since you will miss something that might have helped you better understand the world around you.

5 Questions to Ask About Your Business Processes

The term business process is used to describe the connectivity of the various “steps” performed to achieve a certain goal. These steps are performed by information systems (e.g., calculate products sold per region), individuals (e.g., print/read reports) or a combination of both. The basis for these steps comes from policies (e.g., thou shall not eat at the computer), procedures (e.g., after you have created a report make a list of people who actually read it), governance (e.g., when information comes in or created by the organization then who and how it should be distributed), etc. These steps can be for a particular division (e.g., finance) and/or cross-functional (e.g., financial reports used by HR to make offers to potential hires). On the other hand, these steps can be wasteful (e.g., a division is creating reports for an individual who is not with the organization any more).

In order to understand the complexities of the business processes that are ingrained into the organization, the following questions need to be asked about your current and future business processes:

	Today	Tomorrow
	Who follows business processes?	Who should follow business processes?
	What happens in business processes?	What should happen in business processes?
	Where do business processes take place?	Where should business processes take place?
	When do business processes happen?	When should business processes happen?
	Why business processes happen?	Why business processes should happen?

When you are asking the above questions across all levels of the organization, keep in mind that there is an interconnectedness among the information that you are collecting even if it is not evident at first glance. During or after the collection of this information, it is useful to create business process maps to show what happens and what would happen in the future. These maps should not be created just to be created but should be created to make intelligent decisions. These maps should be kept at a central place where people can easily have access to them and should be able to understand them without the need for an expert.

Another thing to be cognizant of who you talk to in the organization since depending upon who you talk to their definition of “a business process” might be different than what you are trying to understand. Yet one more term that is interchangeably used for the business process is workflow. For technical folks, this can also mean the business process that happens within an information system.

In conclusion, too often it is seen that organizations are struggling because of the ineffective communication and management mechanisms in place. By mapping the business processes, determining their qualitative and quantitative values, you will be able to see these gaps and make decisions that can prove to be beneficial to you as an individual and the organization as a whole.

Zillow.com and the MLS CIO

Let’s suppose that you are Chief Information Officer (CIO) of a Multiple Listings Service (MLS) and a proposal has been put forth by Zillow.com to join Zillow’s Partnership Program (ZPP). For this scenario assume: (1) hiring, business processes, and technology infrastructure would remain unchanged and (2) a budget would only be provided to create data feeds used by Zillow.com. Here are some of the risks, disadvantages, and advantages of joining ZPP:

Risks to MLS:

Brand recognition: The MLS brand recognition would be compromised if (1) current MLS users completely transition over and prefer to use Zillow and (2) future MLS users may not be aware of MLS’s existence.
Zillow’s Zestimate: Zillow provides a property’s cost estimate to users based on a proprietary algorithm called the “Zestimate”. Research indicates that (1) in certain areas these estimates are wildly off and (2) Zillow has changed the algorithm in the past without prior notice. This would result in user confusion and the perception that it could be an MLS issue thus affecting the MLS’s credibility.
Zillow’s acquisition strategy: Zillow has grown through acquisition and it is expected that this strategy would continue. Due to the complexity of management and systems integration during acquisitions, there is a possibility that not enough resources would be available from Zillow if there were issues with the MLS at the same time.
Customer conversions: By joining ZPP, the MLS would exponentially increase the users who can view the MLS data through Zillow’s website and mobile applications. However, the increase in the number of views is not a guarantee that those users would become customers.

Risks to MLS Information Systems:

Technology infrastructure: The MLS could encounter an exponential increase in the number of users who can view MLS data that could overwhelm the servers. This could be an issue if MLS is currently (1) running at full capacity and (2) does not have an updated technology infrastructure.
Data security incidents: Due to sharing data with Zillow, the MLS could anticipate an increase in security incidents either from (1) data in transit from the MLS systems to Zillow and/or (2) data compromised at Zillow

Disadvantages by not joining ZPP:

Users: 55.7 million mobile and web visitors access Zillow compared to the entire population of a major metropolitan area. The MLS would not have access to such a large user base if ZPP were not joined.
Adoption: If MLS does not adopt in a timely manner then it would be perceived by the industry in general and the MLS community in particular as behind the times and could erode MLS’s ability to hire top talent for projects.
Information relevance: Since (1) Zestimate pulls information from previous years’ tax assessments and (2) users have the ability to edit data, careful consideration should be made about the relevance of the information since the accurate reflection of the up-to-date fair market value could be an issue for the user.

Advantages by joining ZPP:

Users: Access to 55.7 million mobile and web visitors that access Zillow monthly.
Account Executive: A dedicated account executive would be assigned to the MLS. This could help in coordination and quickly resolving issues between Zillow and MLS.
Metrics and traffic statistics: Zillow would be sharing user metrics and traffic statistics. This information (1) could be used by MLS to prepare for peak times and enhance maintenance schedules and (2) could be used by brokers and agents to improve their business through trends and predictive analytics.

Recommendations:

Based on the above, the disadvantages and advantages of joining ZPP, the MLS would not be ready however joining would be significantly beneficial. Thus the CIO should recommend:

Budget increase needed to develop data feeds and updates the technology infrastructure to make it robust, resilient, scalable and highly reliable that could handle exponential user growth.
New policies, procedures, processes and governance models need to be developed to address optimal firewall settings, data integrity issues, security, escalation, prioritization, communication channels between the MLS and Zillow.
Recruit an experienced account executive that has taken their MLS through the same ZPP process.

Share This!

Share This!

Share This!

Share This!

Share This!