Enterprise Initiatives

Dave Linthicum wrote a post today called Open Source SOA provides some major advantages. In his post Dave stated:

When it comes to SOA, I think open source provides two major advantages:

• First, it's typically much less expensive than the tools and the technology that are proprietary.
• Second, they are typically much more simplistic and easier to understand and use.

To the second point, simplicity. The open source SOA vendors seem to take a much more rudimentary approach to SOA, and their tools seem to be much easier to understand and, in some cases, use. While some people want complex, powerful tools, the reality is that most SOAs don't need them. If you're honest with the requirements of the project, you'll see that good enough is, well, good enough.

Great point Dave. I would also add another clear advantage which I learned the hard way. On a previous enterprise wide SOA initiative, I drank the cool-aid that the vendor stack was an integrated stack and was simpler to deploy and manage over a stack of a mix of vendors. What I found out is that the mega vendors (IBM, Oracle, etc.) have bought so many pure play tools (rules engines, BPMs tools, data services and MDM tools, governance tools, etc.) that the smooth integration ends when the Power Point decks are closed. In reality, the mega vendor stacks are a hodge podge of rushed acquisition and integration efforts. The underlying architecture of each tool within the stack are completely different and there are very few people (if any) within the organization who understands the complete stack. In fact, we were dealing with two very different organizations when dealing with support and they were not in sync. Eventually the entire company was consumed by another mega vendor (you can probably guess which acquisition this was) and the whole product roadmap was turned upside down.

Now let's look at some of the well established open source stack vendors like WSO2, MuleSource, and RedHat. These vendors do not suffer from acquisition madness and chaos. If fact, they are all built on a consistent architecture and do offer smooth integration between the various layers of the stack. Do they have all of the features of the commercial products? No. Do they have enough features for most SOA initiatives. Definitely. I wrote a post on CIO.com called Tight Budgets? Try open source SOA. Here is a quick summary of the advantages I discussed (read the article for the details):

1. Try before you buy
2. Lower cost of entry
3. Cost effective support
4. Core competency
5. For the people by the people

So what open source options do I have, you might ask? The following picture shows the open source tools that I prefer for my new SOA initiative. We are using a combination of WSO2, Intalio, Drools, Liferay, and PushToTest.



This is just one example of many. You can mix and match tools from different open source communities or you could standardize on one community. Here is an example of Red Hat's jBoss SOA stack.



And MuleSource has a well known suite of tools as well.


Many organizations are still not very comfortable with open source for mission critical initiatives. I have debunked many of the open source myths in the past (here, here, and here).

If there ever was a time to embrace open source, the time is now in this harsh economy. As commercial SOA vendors continue to get gobbled up by the mega vendors, it is time to seriously consider alternatives.

As I have mentioned in many posts before, SOA built right can provide business agility and flexibility. Yesterday I discussed how to leverage data services and a few days back I discussed enterprise mashups. Today the focus is on business processes.



Separating business processes from code is an ideal way to build an architecture that enables systems to adapt more readily to change. Let's make believe that we are working for a large eCommerce site that sells many different categories of products from multiple suppliers and warehouses each with their own distinct business processes. Abstracting the business processes gives us some very important advantages:

• Creates a set of standard business processes for a consistent user experience
• Allows us to quickly bring on additional suppliers
• Allows us to change a core business process once and apply it to all suppliers
• Allows the business to make modifications to its processes with minimal or even no coding

Here is an example of an order fulfillment process.



This work flow speaks to my first point "Creates a set of standard business processes for a consistent user experience". The complexities of working with multiple suppliers, each with their own processes and systems is hidden from the end user. Regardless of what products the customer is buying and which supplier is fulfilling the order, the user experience is exactly the same. On the other side of the equation, bringing on a new supplier can be as simple as collaborating on a set of services to integrate the supplier's back end system to the core business processes of the eCommerce site. Had we not separated the business processes from the code, we would have to make modifications to our existing code base which is already running in production and would have to go through a complete testing cycle. Instead, we simply tell the business processes which set of new services to integrate with for the new supplier. All of the existing code is not impacted and does not need to be retested. Instead, we can just validate the new services and the new supplier flow.

Here is another benefit. Let's say that we just signed agreements with three new suppliers and have contracted to launch them all in 4 weeks. Without the separation of business processes from code, all three supplier integration efforts would have to be coordinated and most likely bundled into one build. This creates huge project risks because slippage in any one integration effort can delay all three. By separating the business processes from the code, each supplier integration can be implemented whenever it is ready. We can stub out a call for each supplier and assign the appropriate WSDL when the services are completed. For example, the "Fulfill Order" process could be an integration with SAP for supplier 1, PeopleSoft for supplier 2, a custom built fulfillment process written in Java for supplier 3, and a custom built fulfillment system written in .Net for supplier 4. The business and the business processes have no need to be concerned with the technologies behind the fulfillment process. They are only concerned with the inputs, the outputs, and the quality of service (QoS).

As we move up the stack it gets even better! Next post I will discuss the importance of business rules. Stay tuned.

The promise of SOA is flexibility and agility. I define agility as the ability to adapt to change at the speed of business. In today's global economy which has been fueled by collaboration and Internet technologies, businesses change at a much faster rate than ever before. So how does SOA help companies become agile? Let's look at a logical view of a typical SOA.



You can see in this diagram how each layer of the architecture has been abstracted and is mutually exclusive or "loosely coupled" from the other layers of the architecture. Why is this important? The answer is simple.....ease of change! Here are some advantages of this approach.

• Share services, components, rules, etc. across the enterprise (reuse)


• Isolate changes and reduce dependencies (speed to market)


• Minimize impact of business changes (speed to market)


• Easier to maintain (maintainability)

Let me give an example of how this approach helps companies become agile.

Use Case: New customer data from a new client


Let's say your company provides a service for customers in the retail industry. You have a website that offers online services for consumers and your white label solution is tailored to look like it is hosted by the individual retailers. The problem is that each retailer has their own customer database. In the past you would have to write a ton of code for each retailer that you signed up to use your services. With SOA, now it is a simple data mapping exercise. By abstracting data services, the other layers of the architecture use the logical representation of customer, not the physical implementation. Behind the scenes, the data services layer is translating the request for customer data from logical view to physical implementation. So when you bring on new clients, you simply use a tool in the data services layer to map the new clients customer data to the standard logical definition as defined by the architecture.



You can see from this example that all three retailers have an entirely different implementation of their customer database including different naming conventions and even different attributes. In the data services layer, you can map all of these physical implementations to one standard customer definition. You can also see how the business processes all use the logical view of customer. This allows us to add and change customer definitions on the back end without changing code on the front end. If two more retailers were to sign up tomorrow, we can map their definitions to the logical customer view and be done. No Code!!! That is agile!

I will give examples of agility within the other layers in future posts. If you would like help establishing a data services strategy, give me a shout!

The Dilemma
I have been spending a lot of time recently learning about enterprise mashups. The new startup that I am working for is building a SaaS solution that will be consumed by various types of customers and partners. These customers and partners may want to consume our data services as a RSS feed, gadget, SMS message, web page, within a portal or portlet, or a number of different ways. I do not want to spend the rest of my life developing new output mediums for our services. Instead, I would rather spend my time adding new business services to enhance our product and service offerings hence contributing to the bottom line.

Enterprise Mashups to the rescue
Enterprise mashups will allow me to offer my partners and customers the ultimate flexibility to access our products and services in ways that are convenient for them without having to wait on my IT shop to decide if (a) we think the request is important enough in our priority list, (b) if we have the time and resources to work on it, and (c) how much we will charge them. On the IT side of the house, with an enterprise mashup strategy in place we can be assured that whatever mashups our customers and partners create, they will be subject to the same security and governance as the services we have developed. The diagram below shows a logical view of how our SOA will be designed.



As you can see, we have clearly abstracted the various layers within the architecture and they all inherit our overall security policies. SOA governance is applied to this architectural approach to enforce our standards and design principles. Overall IT governance provides oversight over the entire enterprise which includes legacy systems (we don't have any legacy yet), third party software, etc.

Now let's add the enterprise mashup layer. We want to hide the complexity of our architecture from the end user and expose data services to them to consume. At the same time we want these mashups to be equally secure as the services we write and adhere to the same governing principles. Enterprise mashup products provide tools to make managing this layer easy and efficient. The diagram below shows the enterprise mashup layer inserted into the architecture as a layer on top of SOA.

From SOA Slides

Enterprise Mashups in simple terms
If the concept of Enterprise Mashups is still not clear, check out this white board discussion with JackBe's CTO John Crupi.



I spent some time talking to JackBe's VP of Engineering Deepak Alur a few week's back. Deepak discussed how enterprises have been focusing more on infrastructure and technology and not on the consumers of data. As he coined it, many shops are "developing horizontally and not addressing the needs of the users". He talked about how users were doing their own brute force mashups by cutting and pasting data from various places into Excel. This creates various issues within the enterprise due to lack of data integrity, security, and governance. It is ironic how corporations spend huge amounts of money on accounting software and ERP systems, yet they still run the business out of user created Excel spreadsheets! The concept of enterprise mashups addresses this by shifting the focus back to the user consumption of data. Here are some of the requirements for mashups that Deepak pointed out to me:

• User driven & user focused
• Both visual & non-visual
• Client & server side (although most are server)
• Plug-n-Play
• Dynamic, Adhoc, Situational
• Secure & Governed
• Sharable & Customizable
• Near zero cost to the consumer

Jackbe's enterprise mashup tool is called Presto. Presto is an Enterprise Mashup Platform that allows consumers to create "mashlets" or virtual services. IT's role is to provide the security and governance for each data service that will be exposed for consumer use.



Presto Wires is a user friendly tool to allow users to create their own mashups by joining, filtering, and merging various data services (as shown in the picture below).



In this example the user is combing multiple data points from many different organizations in an automated fashion. They could then present this data to multiple different user interfaces and devices. All without waiting on IT.

Here is a simple example of a mashup of Google Maps with a Carpool data service.


The folks who create the Carpool data service where able to leverage the Google Maps service without having to write their own mapping software and without having to know the underlying architecture behind Google Maps.

How this solves my Dilemma
Back to my dilemma. By leveraging a tool like Jackbe's Presto or WSO2's Mashup Server, I can now present various data services in a secured and governed fashion to my customers and partners without being concerned on how they want to consume it. Whether they want the mashup on their own intranet, as a desktop gadget, as an application on Facebook, or what ever they dream of, all I need to be concerned with is the SLA of my data services. This also makes my product offering more competitive than my competitors who have proprietary user interfaces that do not provide the flexibility and customization that the customers desire. As I said in the title, this is the Icing on your SOA cake. For those organizations who are disciplined enough to implement SOA and follow the best practices of design and governance, the reward can be an simple addition of an Enterprise Mashup Platform on top of your SOA stack. This is the ultimate flexibility and agility that SOA promises.

As I look out into the future of IT over the next 5 to 10 years, I see a huge shift in how IT shops will need to operate in order to help their companies survive. We are already well aware of the pressing needs for IT to provide agility and flexibility for its business partners due to the speed at which the business landscape is changing. The forces of globalization, economic pressures, and advancements in technology are creating as much change in an 18 month period than we used to experience in a decade. In order for companies to survive and thrive, they need to adapt. As Charles Darwin once said,

“It is not the strongest of the species that survives, nor the most intelligent that survives. It is the one that is the most adaptable to change.”

I wrote a post last year called How did we become a Dilbert cartoon which discussed my theory on how IT has become so out of touch and bogged down with trivial issues. I see Dilbert every day whether it is at the places I have worked, the case studies that I research, the discussions I have with peers at conferences, or from the forums and user groups I participate in. Somewhere along the line, many IT professionals in the US have forgotten what IT's purpose is and take their IT profession for granted. These people put themselves and their favorite technologies first and their business and shareholders second. How many important initiatives have you seen stalled because certain individuals refused to change or learn something new? Look how many companies are struggling implementing transformational initiatives like SOA, ITIL, business process reengineering. All of these types of initiatives can make a huge impact to the bottom line. But how many of these have stalled because people fought these initiatives with all of their might? The basic problem is that transformational initiatives requires transformational leadership! How many leaders within IT do you know who excel in the three critical areas of transformational leadership required to deliver technological solutions: Business Acumen, People & Organizational Skills, and Technology skills?

From Misc IT

Looking down the road, I see certain technologies maturing and becoming critical to helping businesses staying competitive. These technologies are:

• Infrastructure as a Service (IaaS)
• Platform as a Service (PaaS)
• Social Networking/Software within the enterprises
• BPM, SOA, and Event Processing working in harmony
  

I am amazed at the number of pundits that exist for all of these technologies, especially cloud computing. Many people are strongly against these advancing technologies at the expense of their own careers (they just don't realize that they are making themselves the equivalent of Y2K programmers yet). Sure, cloud computing has its challenges with data security, privacy, and in some cases reliability, but it is in its infancy state. Instead of focusing on what the limitations are, we should focus on the huge strategic and financial opportunities that it creates. Let me quote Darwin again.

“Ignorance more frequently begets confidence than does knowledge: it is those who know little, and not those who know much, who so positively assert that this or that problem will never be solved by science.”

I still remember the naysayers doubting PCs and distributed computing and declaring that nothing could beat the mainframe. Do you here the negatively by some about social networking and social software? Doesn't it sound like the negativity we heard when people were trying to bring the Internet into corporations?

Why do we get in our own way of progress? Why are we living in Scott Adam's world of Dilbert? Why do system administrators fight cloud computing? Is it fear of job elimination? Loss of control? Not wanting to learn something new after 20 years? Why do IT professionals revolt against SOA? Does it require them to actually architect something rather than drag-n-drop some code in their favorite Microsoft IDE? Does it force them to collaborate with other people including business people and take them out of their comfort zone? Is it hard work? I don't know what the answer is but I do know that with out transformational leadership, the resistance can put up huge barriers and can kill initiatives that can give a company an edge over its competition.

What about outsourcing? Do you really want to get IT professionals fired up? Just the mention of the word brings anger and negativity to many. But why? Maybe we all need a lesson in economics or should simply read the book The World is Flat. While we in the US are sitting here complaining about change, countries like China, India, Taiwan, Ireland, and many others are graduating engineers by the thousands. These folks are more than willing to work on any task that they have the privilege to be given. And there lies the problem. To these people, work is a privilege, a way to have a better, more prosperous life. In the US, many people see their job as something that is owed to them. How many people in your shop are actively working on improving their skills? Just the fact that you are reading this post puts you many steps ahead of most. Many people that I have worked with in my 23 years do not invest their own time and energy required to continue to learn and adapt to the world around them, both from the technology and the economic standpoint. I am fine with the fact that many people value their personal time way more than some of us do, but if you don't invest the time you do not have the right to impede in the advancement of the organization!

Getting back to the emerging technologies that I mentioned above. To be successful implementing the transformational change to embrace these technologies, IT shops need the following foundation:

1. Strong leadership with the ability to promote and manage change
2. A well run and planned Enterprise Architecture
3. Solid working relationships and trust with the business partners
4. Discipline
5. Fiscal awareness
6. Numerous Strategic Partners
   

Strong Leadership
The leader(s) must be visionary, strategic, emotionally intelligent, and must be able to execute. I have seen leaders who have great ideas and are pretty smart, but they fall down when it comes to execution. Nine times out of ten, the failure can be contributed to people not the technology. In other words, resistance to change prevails and the company reverts back to the status quo leaving IT with the reputation of a cost center. The following presentation speaks to how to anticipate and plan for change up front to reduce the odds of failure.




Enterprise Architecture
To enable a flexible and agile enterprise, it all starts with an architecture that maps to the overall business strategy. No longer can we afford to build software in silos and continue to pay huge sums of money to keep the lights on. In order to be efficient with our ever shrinking budgets, we must have an IT strategy that is supported with an architecture geared towards maximizing our resources (both human resources and technology resources). The more standard and consistent the architecture is, the easier a company can move to the clouds, alter business processes in days instead of months, change business rules on the fly, adapt to mergers and acquisitions, and connect to partners, suppliers, and customers. Remember this, your biggest threat tomorrow might be a company that does not exist today! Why, because a startup does not have legacy to deal with and will most likely embrace these new technologies from the start and race right by you to the finish line. Companies must change or die. The following presentation speaks to the value of EA.


Relationships and Trust
In order to accomplish transformational initiatives, IT must forge great working relationships with its business partners, both internally and externally. Without the trust, funding and executive level support will be extremely hard to come buy. To earn that trust, IT must understand the business and put forth solutions that are beneficial to the business first and IT second. The following presentation shows an example of how SOA was explained to the business in tangible business terms (increase sales, customer satisfaction, etc.) instead of technology terms (reuse, ESBs, services, etc.).


Discipline
This is critical. We can no longer fly by the seat of the pants anymore. It costs the company too much in maintenance and hinders agility. That is not to say that we should all embrace heavy methodologies like CMM. There needs to be the right balance between process and agility. And for those IT professionals who will fight process to their death beds, there are millions of knowledge workers in foreign countries hungry to do your job for you. Today's resistance is tomorrow's unemployment.

Fiscal Awareness
Being fiscally aware is a key contributing factor to allowing IT professionals to see the "big picture". After all, the main purpose of most companies is to make money, or in government, to make the best use of tax payer dollars. It's all about money! So why are so many IT professionals so clueless about the financial impacts of the work they do and the decisions they make? How many times have you sat in meetings with armies of people for an hour or two and nothing gets accomplished? How does that contribute to the bottom line. When technologists argue about .Net vs. Java, or IBM vs. Dell for months on end while projects get delayed, why doesn't anybody seem to care? When IT professionals make technology decisions primarily for the sake of technology, they often make a choice that is not fiscally responsible. When making these decisions we must think about more than how we will use the products within IT. There are many factors that need to be consider. We should look at the feasibility not just from a technical standpoint, but also from an economic, operational, and political standpoint as well.

Strategic Partners
And finally, there is so much change and so much to learn, it would be suicide to think that we could deliver anything transformational in a reasonable amount of time without the help of partners. The business can't wait for IT to train an entire staff to a high level of competence on these emerging technologies. They also can't wait for us to stumble and learn from failing in production. Instead we will need strategic partners in many areas to help build the agile enterprises of tomorrow. These partners may be used for the following reasons:

1. Business Process Outsourcing (BPO) - (example: Payroll, HR, web site hosting, etc.)
2. Acquire new skills (SOA implementers, BPM experts, Cloud specialists, etc.)
3. Strategic partners (Organizational Change Management expert, EA help, etc.)
4. Technology outsourcing (IaaS, PaaS, SaaS, etc.)
5. Project based outsourcing

Outsourcing does not mean the same as offshoring and outsourcing does not always relate to development. When cost is an overriding factor offshoring is a no-brainer. Of course without EA and discipline, outsourcing may cost more than expected. There is simply too much to do and so little time to do it. Find the right partners and hold them and yourself accountable for transferring the knowledge to members of your staff.

Summary
I apologize for the length of this post (if you made it this far). I am very concerned for the future of my IT colleagues in the US and had to do a "core dump" on this post. After many years of prosperity, many IT professionals in the US have become intellectually lazy and blind to the opportunities and challenges that this new economy has created. The combination of our financial crisis coupled with the forces of globalization and technological advances will create radical changes over the next decade. Many professionals are too wrapped up in reality TV to realize that the world is catching up and is ready to pass us by. Those who understand that can embrace the new opportunities that these conditions will create. The others will be the equivalent of the Y2K programmers who did not embrace the post 2000 innovations. I'll leave you with another great quote from Darwin...

“In the long history of humankind (and animal kind, too) those who learned to collaborate and improvise most effectively have prevailed"

I was invited to speak at a forum for IT executives in Detroit this week sponsored by Information Week. The purpose of the forum as described in the agenda goes like this...

This executive breakfast, specifically designed for senior business-technology executives, will explore why the pressure is on IT to help the business transform, and how it can meet those expectations. More than ever before, companies are demanding their CIOs to be strategic thinkers in helping them innovate and operate at peak performance - especially as businesses are under pressure from the poor state of the economy and the ever-faster pace of change in a global market. In this environment, you can't miss this opportunity to gain insight into the tactics and strategy that will help you be on your best game.

I was specifically asked to talk about why transformational IT initiatives like BPM & SOA fail and what advice I would offer to prevent failures from happening. I put together the following presentation which is a combination of some of my previous presentations, Preparing for SOA and SOA & Change.

I wrote a very popular article on CIO.com a while back about the Top 10 reasons why SOA fails. I speak to each of these points in the presentation and present solutions for each. I also discuss using John Kotter's 8-step process for managing change which I highlight in the presentation. Here are my keys for preventing failures.

1. Plan for and manage organizational change


2. Key drivers should be business focused not IT focused


3. Evaluate internal skills and fill gaps. Do not try it without help!


4. Don't let the vendors drive your architecture. Do your homework.


5. Grow your governance model over time

Speaking of governance, here is an analogy I like to use...

Implementing SOA without a solid governance model is the equivalent to having an airport without a control tower. Sure, there are some very good planes and talented pilots, but without the proper planning and timely information the end results would be disastrous. So make sure you build a control tower and hire some air traffic controllers!

If you would like me to create and present a custom presentation like this one, feel free to contact me

I am a huge fan of social software, especially when it comes to networking with experts in technology. Those of you who follow me on Twitter know that I am a fanatic NY Giants fan who travels from Florida to hostile stadiums in places like Dallas and Pittsburgh to watch my beloved GMen go to battle. Last week, Jordan Haberfield, an expert at finding and placing talented SOA technicians at major corporations, asked me about a wager on the game between the Giants and his favorite team, the sell proclaimed America's Team and arch rival Dallas Cowboys. My normal bet with friends is for lunch or a few beers. Since Jordan is in New Jersey and I am in Florida, that bet did not make sense. What did make sense was betting that the loser would have to post a congrats on his blog.

Well, that was like taking candy from a baby as the Giants put a thumping on the depleted and heartless Cowpokes. To see Jordan pay his debts, go to his website called Agile Elephant. Jordan did manage to find a picture of one of the few positive plays that his Cowboys had in the game. My favorite Cowboy moment is still the Terrell Owens "My Quarterback" crying session after the Giants knocked the 'Boys out of the playoffs last year.



So add wagers to your list of things you can do with social software. It's the gift that keeps on giving and is searchable on Google!

A few days ago I had a chance to catch up with iTKO's co-founder and "Chief Scientist" John Michelsen to discuss SOA Testing. For those of you unfamiliar with iTKO, they produce one of the industry leading SOA testing products known as Lisa.

I have been writing about SOA testing a lot lately and the folks at iTKO contacted me after I wrote Six Questions to Consider before Building a SOA Testing Team on CIO.com. Since this article was fresh on my mind, I asked John some of the same questions that were posed in the article.

My first question to John was to identify some of the characteristics of successful SOA implementations he has seen from his customer base. Without hesitation, John pointed to customers that integrated testing into the development cycle. Successful SOA implementations tend to shy away from old waterfall methodologies and involve QA early in the life cycle. In many cases, testers work side by side with developers. John mentioned that "development builds things from scratch, QA does not". He pointed to this three step process which is the trademark of successful SOA testing:

1. Development builds the testing framework
2. Development builds initial test cases
3. QA enhances the test cases

Steps 2 & 3 is an iterative process and requires good collaboration between development and QA. This advice is similar to what I recommend in my article SOA Skillsets: PArt 4 - The Testers. In this article I recommend that a Test Architect be part of the EA team and design the testing framework and strategy. This person needs to be extremely technical and have a deep understanding of SOA concepts. The test leads also need to have a thorough understanding of SOA while the remainder of the testing team does not need to be as strong technically. However, they do need to be able to write some code as the developers hand over their test cases for refinement.

I asked John how technical the testers need to be. He stated that "most QA folks are still business analyst types and it should stay that way. If QA gets too technical then they lose the focus on testing". I agree which is why I advocate having the Test Architect as a member of the EA team focusing on building out the framework, evangelizing, and training the QA team.

I asked John about the importance of testing tools. He stated that the "Testing tools need to let less technical people perform technical tasks". This is a good point because your testers need to more focused on validating that the business and technical requirements are met than figuring out how to master a new tool.

This last point led us to a discussion about iTKO's Lisa products. John mentioned that they have just released version 4 which has many new features. In addition to the core product, Lisa Enterprise, the Lisa Server product has two new important modules, Continuous Validation Service (Lisa CVS) and Virtual Service Environment (Lisa VSE). Lisa CVS addresses the challenges of integration testing, deployment issues, and validation of governance compliance. Anybody with experience in SOA will tell you that the distributed and loosely coupled nature of SOA adds a whole level of complexity in the areas of builds and deployments.


Lisa CVS helps manage and automate some of those complexities and takes a more proactive approach to management and governance by allowing you to "revalidate expected behavior". Lisa VSE takes advantage of virtualization technologies so that you can create images that can simulate behavior of your heterogeneous environment. They accomplish this by installing agents on your various environments (mainframes, database servers, web servers, etc.) which allows VSE to monitor and emulate performance by creating a server side model of your production environment. This model can then be deployed in a virtual testing environment and be tweaked to simulate various scenarios such as abnormal spikes in traffic, simulating new customer loads, or whatever scenario you wish to entertain.

John was real excited when he talked about version 4.6 that is due out towards the end of the year. In this release, Lisa will add functionality to allow customers to test stateful services. This has been the missing link in SOA testing up to this point. John also mentioned that Lisa is now integrated with all major registry and repository tools. In addition, Lisa is also being used for Web 2.0 testing due to the work they have done with web services and WS-* standards.

In summary, testing is a critical component in the quest to launch and implement a successful SOA. By creating a well thought out testing strategy that includes tools to automate and simplify testing, organizations can focus more on the business side of SOA and less time focusing on the technology side of the equation.

My friend and colleague Todd Biske has recently published a must read book about SOA Governance. Most books that discuss process can require a ton of caffeine in order to make it from cover to cover. Not this book! Todd uses a unique style of combining a story of a fictional company along with his well served advice. He walks us through a multi year SOA project with a fictional insurance company called Advasco. Advasco, like many of the companies that we work for, has years of silo legacy applications that are the direct result of acquisitions, mergers, and years of developing in silos. The goal of their initiative was to "provide sales agents and marketing staff for the insurance division with a single view of the customer".

Todd takes us through the evolution which spans five years. Over this time, you can see the company make continual strides towards the overall vision but not without challenges. With each challenge comes another opportunity to mature their governance model. At the end of the book, Advasco's IT staff have made a major impact to the company's bottom line and ability to react to market changes. This is one of the few books that actually shows us what success looks like. This is why the book is so good. Many books talk about processes, structure, and controls but fail provide us with a glimpse into what the fruits of that labor looks like. Todd takes us from project inception, to successes, to set backs, to mitigation strategies, and ultimately to enterprise wide success. By taking us through this journey we can get a better understanding of the impact of the recommendations that he makes for SOA Governance. I won't go into details on what he recommends. I will let you read it yourself. But I can guarantee that you will enjoy the book and will be able to relate your real world experiences with the experiences of the fictional characters who helped move Advasco forward by leveraging SOA.

What made Advasco successful?
If you follow everything that Todd recommends in this book, you still are not guaranteed success. There were some specific events and characteristics that made this journey a success. Here is a short list:

• Initiative was driven top down
• Very little resistance to change
• Great working relationship with business and IT
• Very talented staff that was willing to learn
• Effective EA team
• Project was business focused

Final Thoughts
SOA Governance is a must read for any company preparing for SOA or for companies struggling to make their SOA initiative successful. Follow the advice and examples that Todd provides but also address the bullets I listed above. If you have the great staff that Advasco has you will find success. But in the real world, the effort to promote this type of change in the enterprise will usually require much more focus on change. At the SOA Consortium meeting last month in Orlando, Todd provided us with a great presentation about SOA Governance. I followed that up with this presentation on change.



If you focus on Organizational Change Management and heed Todd's advice on SOA governance, your odds of succeeding with SOA will be greatly enhanced. Buy the book, it is the best book on governance that I have read so far.