Enterprise SOA and Cloud Planning
Presentation to
Association of Enterprise Architects, Washington DC Chapter
John Chi-Zong Wu peaitce@yahoo.com
8/10/2011
Presentation goals









EA plans for the enterprise SOA and cloud computing environment.
Distinguish cross-cutting architecture from top-down architecture.
The engineering of reuse.
The engineering of consolidation.
The political aspect of Cross Cutting Architecture.
The concept of standardization and compliance.
The interaction of CIO office and stakeholders.
The standardization approach.
The compliance enforcement approach.
EA to plan enterprise SOA and Cloud






SOA and Cloud computing does not replace EA.
On the contrary, SOA and cloud computing have further recognize
the value of EA.
SOA and Cloud computing can minimize the burden of technology
for an organization.
However, it does not free the organization from planning their SOA
and cloud computing environment.
The challenge of SOA and cloud computing is the planning on
defining the services and which one to outsource for cloud
computing rather than the technology.
EA is the effort to plan the enterprise SOA and cloud computing
environment.
The cross-cutting architecture


Planning for enterprise SOA and cloud computing is a cross-cutting
architecture effort in horizontal direction as shown in the figure.
The cross cut architecture design the reuse, interoperability,
consolidation, facilitate standardization and compliance in a
horizontal architecture direction.
Distinguish cross-cutting and top-down





EA community need to distinguish cross-cutting architecture from
top down architecture.
Under the top down culture Reuse and consolidation is only
considered as the fringe benefit when opportunity comes.
Top down architecture method is the rudimentary cause to
stovepipe culture.
Using the same method in EA can only create a larger stovepipe
system.
The solution is to distinguish the cross-cutting architecture from top
down architecture.
Why cross-cutting architecture?



Architecting Enterprise primitive, and building blocks to enable
enterprise agility
Establish enterprise agility by keeping it simple.
Clarify the myth of EA.
Architecting the enterprise primitives




The cross cutting architecture identify and design the enterprise
primitives and building blocks.
LEA is light to architect the Enterprise building blocks instead of the
enterprise blueprint.
Zachman said that “ Enterprise Architecture is the set of primitive,
descriptive artifacts that constitute the knowledge infrastructure of the
Enterprise.”
The DOD “Enterprise Architecture based on Design primitives and
patterns” employs Primitives and Design patterns to bring enterprise
architecture into the future.
Establish Enterprise agility


Cross cutting Architecture enable enterprise agility by establishing the
common infrastructure.
The Enterprise Agility increase with the level of common infrastructure
as shown in the following figure.
Clarify the myth of EA


Cross cutting architecture concept clarify the myth of EA.
Trying to understand EA from top down architecture
theory contributes to the following EA myth.





Confusing Reference model with reference architecture.
Conducting internal pattern recognition without learning
experience of the others.
Reuse and consolidation as the side kick.
EA community focused on designing the blueprint and looks for
opportunities for reuse.
EA to architect the enterprise blue print in a command and
control approach.
The cross-cutting architecture model

The cross-cutting
architecture is composed
of the following disciplines:






Learning experience of
others.
Reference models
Engineering of reuse.
Engineering of consolidation.
Standardization.
Governance and compliance
Internal pattern recognition is redundant




Traditional EA approach design the enterprise blueprint
and conduct internal pattern analysis to identify the
enterprise common blocks.
It is a stove pipe approach with redundant effort without
learning experience of the others. .
There is nothing new under the sun particularly in the
case of enterprise building blocks.
Each line of business have similar set of building blocks.
To learn experiences of others

Cross cutting architecture leverage on the human
gift of learn experience from the others.

But it is also human nature in declining do so.
There is nothing new under the sun and it is particular
true for the building blocks.
Each line of business has similar set of building blocks.



Human is the only creature with the gift to learn
experience of the other.
Learn right experiences




The risk of learning experience is to learn from the
wrong experience by comparing apple and orange.
Learn the right experience from the same line of
business.
Learn the building blocks and primitive rather than
copy the entire solution.
While the same line of business have similar set of
building blocks, each business have a unique solution.
Identify Enterprise LOBs via reference model



The key to learn the right experience is
to identify the common recognized
line of businesses using reference
models.
For example the OSI reference model
for network protocol and the US OMB
reference models.
Identify the common LOB using the
established works of enterprise maps,
knowledge management, master
planning and notional target
architecture
Clarify the myth of Reference models




Cross cutting architecture concept clarify the confusion of reference
model.
Reference models is the lessen 101 of EA but It is also the beginning
of EA confusion.
Many EA professional, under the shadow of top down architecture
culture, has confused Reference model with reference architecture.
In cross cutting architecture, reference models are used to bring
every on the same page to learn the right experiences and
communicate enterprise reuse.
The engineering of reuse and consolidation






In the center of cross cutting architecture model is the
Engineering of reuse and consolidation.
LEA propose the Engineering of reuse and
consolidation model to take both pattern analysis for
reuse and workload analysis for consolidation.
Service Oriented Architecture must consider both the
aspect reuse and consolidation.
Most of SOA research focus the logical aspect of
reusable pattern.
The physical aspect of consolidation is overlooked.
May SOA project failed due to lack of workload
analysis.
Reuse and Consolidation




Architect the enterprise
primitive via the engineering of
reuse and consolidation.
Reuse which is driven by reuse
pattern is a logical
consideration
Consolidation which is driven
by workload is a physical
consideration.
The engineering of reuse and
consolidation applies to four
layers of Enterprise
Architecture.
The engineering of reuse





Engineering of reuse is logical based on reusable
pattern.
John Zachman said “Reuse or interoperabitliy does not
happen by accident. It is the result of engineering”
The Engineering of reuse is driven by reusable patterns.
Reuse by learning experience of the others rather than
conducting redundant pattern recognition approach.
Reuse the business process, the application
components and the information resources.
Driven by reusable patterns
The engineering of reuse is
driven
by
reusable
patterns which include as
described in the IBM ebusiness patterns.






The business patterns.
Composite patterns
Integration pattern.
The Application patterns
The data pattern
The runtime pattern.
Reuse with reference architectures


LEA suggest business oriented reference architecture which is
different from the technical reference architecture.
The reference architectures are established base on the Line of
Business. For example: The reference architecture for :





Insurance
Banking
Human resources
"Reference architectures are an abstraction of multiple solution
architectures that have been designed and successfully deployed to
address the same types of business problems. Pattern have evolved
from design patterns to business oriented solution patterns.
Reference architectures incorporate the knowledge, patterns, and
best practices gained from those implementations into the reference
architecture.
Engineering of consolidation



Engineering of consolidation is physical based on
workload demand.
It is driven by workload distribution.
Engineering of consolidation is the foundation of :
 The data center consolidation.
 Service oriented architecture.

Cloud computing.
The business workload analysis




IT community have focus on
logical design and over look
work load analysis.
Mission workload and
performance requirements
based on enterprise statistic
information.
Mission workload is
supported by enterprise staff
and automation systems.
The mission workload is
converted to IT workload to
derived the technology
performance requirements.
Mission performance
Mission Workload
Staff Performance
Technology Workload
Technology Performance
Standardization and compliance





The cross cutting architecture model
describe the cycle of standardization and
compliance with the interaction of CIO
office and stakeholders.
Standardization is a form of governance.
buy-in from stakeholders is the major
challenge of cross cutting architecture..
CIO office lead enterprise
standardization by building consensuses
to earn buy-in from the stake holders in
compliance with standards as shown on
the standardization and compliance
model
Standardization and compliance is a
collaborative effort.
The political aspect of cross cutting architecture




Cross cutting architecture is not only engineering but also
political.
Governance is the effort to establish standards, policies.
Compliance is the effort to enforce the standards.
It is analogy to political environment:



The Legislative to establish the standards..
The Executive to establish the policies.
The Judicial to enforce the standard.
LEA Standardization approach




Standardization, the key of reuse and consolidation, is a
major Enterprise Architecture responsibility.
Standardization does not just happen, it is the major cross
cutting architecture practice.
LEA suggest the standard catalog approach to organize
enterprise standards via the structure of reference models.
The enterprise standards catalogs consist of:




The business process standards.
Application standards.
Data standards.
Technology standards.
The awareness of Enterprise Standards







It is difficult to comply standards without knowing the standards.
Enterprise standards must become a public knowledge for the
members to comply.
Standards must be organized to support easy comprehension.
The EA community organize enterprise standards via the reference
model.
For example the popular use of the Technical Reference model.
The standard catalog.
The dissemination of enterprise standards.
Standards compliance enforcement




Enforce enterprise standards for the purpose of reuse,
interoperability and consolidation.
Enforce enterprise standards during the following processes.
 architecture review.
 Change management process.
 Procurement process.
The burden of standardization and compliance can wipe out it’s
benefit.
Optimize and automate governance and compliance process to
minimize the burden of standardization
Minimize the burden of governance



The caveat is that the governance and compliance
process frequently become a burden without proper
planning.
The burden of standardization and compliance can wipe
out it’s benefit.
Organization can minimize the burden of governance
via


Optimize the governance and compliance processes
Leverage on governance and compliance process automation .
Cross cutting Architecture Framework

The Framework summarized the cross cutting architecture.
Conclusion





Recognize the design of reuse, consolidation,
standardization and compliance is a cross cutting
architecture practice.
Cross cutting architecture is not only engineering
but also political.
Cross cutting architecture is a collaborative effort.
Standardization and compliance is an investment to
enable simplicity and agility.
Cross cutting architecture is a paradigm shift from
vertical architecture theory to horizontal
architecture theory.