IT-Analysis.com
IT-Analysis.com Logo
Enterprise SME Business Issues Technology Services Channels
Module Header
Dale VileOpen Reasoning
Dale Vile
7th January - Enterprise 2.0 and the issue of workforce composition
Dale VileOpen Reasoning
Dale Vile
6th January - Breaking out of the social media echo chamber
Clive LongbottomQuocirca
Clive Longbottom
5th January - Matching IT service with business needs
Dale VileOpen Reasoning
Dale Vile
5th January - Downturn perception versus reality?
Peter AbrahamsAbrahams Accessibility
Peter Abrahams
5th January - How to tag documents with multiple languages and scripts.
Fern HalperFern Halper
Dr Fern Halper
23rd December - Data visualization and the dynamic dashboard
Module Header
Q. What features do you want to see on this site?
 
Blogs > MWD
More big vs small thinking: SOA vs BPM
Neil Ward-Dutton By: Neil Ward-Dutton, Research Director, Macehiter Ward-Dutton
Published: 27th July 2007
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons License
Logo for Macehiter Ward-Dutton

I was on the way back to the office from a briefing with BPM vendor Pegasystems yesterday, where we'd had an interesting discussion about the relative roles that BPM and SOA can play in business transformation for customers.

We agreed that BPM, done right, is as much of a discipline that organisations can use to transform the way that they do business, as it is a technology (or set of technologies). What's more, we observed that many BPM initiatives revolve around making big changes to the way that organisations deal with customers, partners and suppliers—and creating organisations that are really focused around delivering real service to those other parties.

Let's review that for a second: BPM thinking helps organisations get their houses in order so that they can deliver coherent and quality services (and not just disjointed experiences).

So from a business perspective, it's BPM that delivers service-orientation!

But wait—in IT we're saying that service-orientation comes from something called SOA. And in IT circles, there's a lot of discussion that positions BPM as if it's a layer of technology that sits on top of SOA technology. Kind of like we've just reinvented three-tier application design with BPM instead of business logic, and SOA instead of database access logic.

This "application architecture" lens for BPM and SOA is all wrong. It's another example of small thinking.

The more profitable way of thinking about the relationship between BPM and SOA is not to think of them as a stack of technologies: it's to think of BPM as being about "how" you do things and service-orientation being about "what" you do. Service definitions are definitions of commitments: they say what you will do, how well you can do it, and (possibly) how much it will cost you to use. Process definitions are definitions of work: they say how commitments will be fulfilled, by whom, and under what conditions.

So, BPM and SOA are interlinked—but not because one adds value to the other or because one sits on top of the other: both ideas are two sides of the same "business and IT transformation" coin.

If you do insist on thinking of the world in terms of stacks of technology tools or stacks of models or assets, think of SOA and BPM as alternating layers of concepts and practices. Services define "what" you will do at a given level; processes define "how" services will be delivered. Processes rely on foundation services to get some work done; those services in turn rely on processes of some kind.

I'm sure not everyone will agree with this, but I do hope there's one thing we can all agree on—as Sinatra once sang: "this, I tell you brother: you can't have one without the other."

Reader Comments

We are no longer accepting comments against this item. We suggest contacting the author directly.

30th July 2007: 'Rob' said:

I'm not sure this column stated anything significant or posed any important question. You wrote "...from a business perspective, it's BPM that delivers service-orientation!". An organization can be service-oriented without BPM, and BPM can be used outside the context of service to "customers, partners and suppliers", i.e. automating processes that do not involve humans or groups of humans. You also wrote "...BPM, done right, is as much of a discipline that organisations can use to transform the way that they do business, as it is a technology". BPM is ONLY a discipline; it has never been a technology. You can't install "BPM" and do something with it, like Java, .NET, SQL, etc. BPMN might almost qualify as a technology, but it's a standard, not something you install and use on its own. If you mean BPM software products, be precise please and say that. You also wrote that "...in IT we're saying that service-orientation comes from something called SOA". Overlooking the self-referential use of the "SO" part of "SOA", service orientation of software pre-dates even two-tier Client/Server architecture. If you mean "web services based on SOAP messages", be precise and say that. Finally, you wrote "....as Sinatra once sang: "this, I tell you brother: you can't have one without the other." Yes you can, as I mentioned above. BPM products aren't the only discipline to leverage service-orientation, and BPM can be (and has been done before) without SOA, web services, or orientation to serving humans and organizations. I suspect that you wrote a buzzword-compliant column that conveys nothing.

Reply to Rob?

Advertisement



Published by: IT Analysis Communications Ltd.
T: +44 (0)190 888 0760 | F: +44 (0)190 888 0761
Email: