10 years, 7 months ago

Are Service Architects and Designers like Cobbler’s Children?

During October I ran a survey asking Architects, Designers and Project Managers about Service Specification practices. I have just completed the analysis and report, see link below. There are some interesting conclusions:
1. DIY is the dominant service specification approach.
Respondents report there’s a wide range of approaches to service specification in use, and the most common approach by far (50%) is “do it yourself”. Sure, DIY will mean that practitioners are like magpies, they pick up ideas from a variety of sources, and create their own capability. But this, by any measure, must represent a failure of industry standards. While consistency of specification meta data may not be a primary goal for designers and developers, architects should consider a range of risks including use of development automation support tools, standardization of technical components of outsourcing contracts, opportunity to find/reuse pre-existing services, and crucially standardization of tooling. Which takes me onto the next point . . .

2. Documents and Spread-sheets still dominate tool usage for service planning, reporting and management. 
In the early stages of service adoption almost everyone simply uses the tools that are available to hand. But as the service portfolio evolves and matures these tools become a strategic liability in areas of planning, reuse management, portfolio and asset management, governance and reporting. I note not one respondent mentioned the EA Repository in context with service support tools. And again this is closely connected with the third interesting conclusion . . .

3.   64% dissatisfied with tool support. 
There was a very high level of dissatisfaction with tools, particularly in the context of communicating service specifications between the different roles and groups across the organization. We all appreciate high quality service specifications are the result of multi-disciplinary efforts, spanning Business Analysis, Architecture, Design, Developers, Product Management, IT Service Management, Outsourcing, Procurement,  Governance etc . So this is much more than reporting, there’s an evident need for modern tools that facilitate the collaboration process.

See Service Specification Practices Survey 2013 – Report

10 years, 7 months ago

Are Service Architects and Designers like Cobbler’s Children?

During October I ran a survey asking Architects, Designers and Project Managers about Service Specification practices. I have just completed the analysis and report, see link below. There are some interesting conclusions:
1. DIY is the dominant service specification approach.
Respondents report there’s a wide range of approaches to service specification in use, and the most common approach by far (50%) is “do it yourself”. Sure, DIY will mean that practitioners are like magpies, they pick up ideas from a variety of sources, and create their own capability. But this, by any measure, must represent a failure of industry standards. While consistency of specification meta data may not be a primary goal for designers and developers, architects should consider a range of risks including use of development automation support tools, standardization of technical components of outsourcing contracts, opportunity to find/reuse pre-existing services, and crucially standardization of tooling. Which takes me onto the next point . . .

2. Documents and Spread-sheets still dominate tool usage for service planning, reporting and management. 
In the early stages of service adoption almost everyone simply uses the tools that are available to hand. But as the service portfolio evolves and matures these tools become a strategic liability in areas of planning, reuse management, portfolio and asset management, governance and reporting. I note not one respondent mentioned the EA Repository in context with service support tools. And again this is closely connected with the third interesting conclusion . . .

3.   64% dissatisfied with tool support. 
There was a very high level of dissatisfaction with tools, particularly in the context of communicating service specifications between the different roles and groups across the organization. We all appreciate high quality service specifications are the result of multi-disciplinary efforts, spanning Business Analysis, Architecture, Design, Developers, Product Management, IT Service Management, Outsourcing, Procurement,  Governance etc . So this is much more than reporting, there’s an evident need for modern tools that facilitate the collaboration process.

See Service Specification Practices Survey 2013 – Report

10 years, 8 months ago

SURVEY: Service Specification Usage

Question: What’s the difference between a Web Service, an API and an SOA Software Service?

Answer: The Web Service and the API are technical interfaces, that may or may not be well-formed services that comply with SOA principles of loose coupling, autonomy, encapsulation (of the service), reusability and composability. A well-formed Software Service will usually have some form of Service Specification that defines and governs the compliance with SOA principles.

From observation, the use of Service Specifications by architects and designers is highly variable. In our work at Everware-CBDI we have encouraged more formality of specification over many years in order to increase the quality of delivered services. We have done this by making templates,UML profiles and methodology guidance freely available. Today we are actively engaged in delivering automation methodology and tools at all stages of the delivery life cycle. We plan to deliver some specification capabilities on the same freely available basis. We are therefore interested to learn what others are doing and we are inviting participation in a survey to establish some independent data around how services are specified.
The survey is intended for architects, designers and project managers.
–  It should be very quick to complete; about 10 minutes.
–  Participation is anonymous. Just click here to commence
If you would like to get more involved, please:
     a.      Join the CBDI Forum LinkedIn Group and or
     b.      Register with the Everware-CBDI site
We will keep these groups up to date and of course publish results of the survey in due course.
————————————————————
Everware-CBDI Rich Service Specification:
Download the CBDI-SAE Rich Service Specification Template and view the Service Specification Reference Framework
10 years, 8 months ago

SURVEY: Service Specification Usage

Question: What’s the difference between a Web Service, an API and an SOA Software Service?

Answer: The Web Service and the API are technical interfaces, that may or may not be well-formed services that comply with SOA principles of loose coupling, autonomy, encapsulation (of the service), reusability and composability. A well-formed Software Service will usually have some form of Service Specification that defines and governs the compliance with SOA principles.

From observation, the use of Service Specifications by architects and designers is highly variable. In our work at Everware-CBDI we have encouraged more formality of specification over many years in order to increase the quality of delivered services. We have done this by making templates,UML profiles and methodology guidance freely available. Today we are actively engaged in delivering automation methodology and tools at all stages of the delivery life cycle. We plan to deliver some specification capabilities on the same freely available basis. We are therefore interested to learn what others are doing and we are inviting participation in a survey to establish some independent data around how services are specified.
The survey is intended for architects, designers and project managers.
–  It should be very quick to complete; about 10 minutes.
–  Participation is anonymous. Just click here to commence
If you would like to get more involved, please:
     a.      Join the CBDI Forum LinkedIn Group and or
     b.      Register with the Everware-CBDI site
We will keep these groups up to date and of course publish results of the survey in due course.
————————————————————
Everware-CBDI Rich Service Specification:
Download the CBDI-SAE Rich Service Specification Template and view the Service Specification Reference Framework