Category Archives: ITANA

EA Practitioners – SOA Reality Check Panel

The panel is reitteratng that you cannot buy SOA in a box. It is an architecture, a long term process and transformation of the enterprise. It is beyond the scope and capability of the I.T. folks but really has to come from business leaders – the C-Level executives.

What impact with the economic downturn have on these SOA projects? Those companies that are thinking tactically and quarter-to-quarter will be at greatest risk of failure. Those that are more strategic thinking will see the value and move through the downturn.

Standards – missing standards. The vendors need to fix it. The standards actually come out of the marketing arm not the R&D of the vendor’s shop. There are 156 standards that I’m tracking.

REST: Tom on RESTful services. Chose the RESTful services because the WS standards weren’t really ready.

Enterprise Mash-Ups: Doing real applications of value in rapid iterations is a way to demonstrate the value of SOA. Mash-ups as an orchestration and integration layer. Google maps as a service provider for mapping and real-time traffic information. Mash that with delivery systems inside the enterprise and delivered to a web browser inside the truck. Can save a company $15-20K a month by missing traffic issues.

Business Process Modeling:

“There is a marriage that everyone keeps talking about but they have yet to go on their first date.” The business process people think that they should own the BPM/BPEL layer. The I.T. folks think that they know what it takes to actually implement the process so they are uncomfortable with giving complete control to the business people. There are the BMP Tribe, The SOA Tribe and the EA Tribe and they aren’t talking even though they are completely intertwined.

Technorati Tags: , , , , , ,

SOA – Bumps in the Roadmap

In preparing for battle I have always found that plans are useless, but planning is indispensable.
Dwight D. Eisenhower

Some time ago, I was on the circuit talking about Service Oriented Architecture and a roadmap for moving forward. Since then, we have had many false starts and hit many snags along the path. There is slow movement: we are standing up an ESB for testing, we have started a project to expose Course Roster data as an enterprise service, and groups are moving towards Web Services as there preferred integration technology. This is still a long way away from from SOA as an enterprise architecture.

Continue reading

EDUCAUSE ITANA Constituent Group Meeting

ITANA’s Constituent Group meeting was on Thursday at 4:55PM. Approximately 40 people attended the meeting. Many of the attendees were from newly formed architecture groups.

The notes from the meeting are posted on the ITANA.org web site: EDUCAUSE 2007 CG Meeting Notes

itanacg.jpg

My slides are posted on the EDUCAUSE Annual Meeting Site: IT Architects Session

Future State Models

The Gartner Group describes Enterprise Architecture as:

“The EA group will translate business vision and strategy into effective enterprise change by creating, communicating and improving the key principles and models that describe the enterprise’s future state and enable its evolution.”

The statement that caught my eye was “models that describe the enterprise’s future state”. Keith and I talked about future state models. We both agree that it is impossible and not very productive to produce and all-encompassing future state document – a single document that describes the future state of the whole enterprise. It is impossible because of the complexity of our enterprise and the fluidity of the various disconnected portions.

We do future state documents for small project spaces. For example, there is a future state document for our Course Roster Interface project. This future state describes an Web Service and Event Driven architecture for all services that need Course Roster like information.

I am currently working on one with Human Resources for their employee forms delivery systems. Having the future state model gives them a star to guide by. It also provides them with talking points as they work with other campuses and stakeholders.

This started me thinking about what is the right level for a future state document? Is it just project by project? Should it be at a higher level like a domain within the enterprise (e.g. Student Enrollment Information, HR Employee Information)? Are others doing future state models?

Beautiful Data Visualizations

These movies of air traffic flight patterns are making the rounds on the internet. They are really gorgeous and intriguing to watch. One of the cool things about movies like this or Hans Rosling’s work is the fact that they transform pretty boring data into beautiful moving pictures. These pictures let the larger patterns emerge. These movies make the data easily understandable by almost anyone.

Rather like what I try to do at work in some ways. Make pretty pictures that display complex systems in simple terms.

Very cool stuff.

Planesinflight

Technorati Tags: ,

Doris Kearns Goodwin on Leadership

Doris Kearns Goodwin opened the EDUCAUSE general meeting this morning, recounting her years as an intern in the Johnson White House and talking about Abraham Lincoln. She received a standing ovation at the end of her talk – the first that I have ever seen at EDUCAUSE.

Her talk was full of great stories from her time as an intern along with stories from Abraham Lincoln’s and Johnson’s life. She brings great humor to her subject and the ability to reflect historical facts against current events and current issues.

She recounted her list of leadership qualities that she learned from researching Lincoln:

  1. Listen to disparate opinions. Allow debate but once a decision has been made, move on. Seeking consensus can be disabling.
  2. Learn on the job. Learn from mistakes.
  3. Share credit for success.
  4. Shoulder the blame for your subordinates.
  5. Set deadlines for action.
  6. Lincoln wrote hot letters that he would not send. He would vent his anger but not act on it.
  7. Possessed the strength to adhere to his fundamental goals.
  8. Know how to relax and re-energize yourself.
  9. Managed by walking around. Lincoln visited the troops in the field.

At the end of her talk, I instantly put her new book in my Wish List. I wonder if there was a mini-rush on the book at Amazon.

Technorati Tags: , , ,

Agility – it keeps me up at night

Our last CIO, Annie Stunden, used to talk about “what keeps her up at night”. These were the big intractable things or the big high-risk, highly visible projects she was working on. For me, it’s agility. How does an enterprise that prides itself on tradition and autonomy of everyone at every level become agile – that is able to embrace change and implement new ideas and technology quickly.

Agility is the ability to change course or direction with ease and grace.  An agile athlete can cut and leap while making it look effortless.  An agile enterprise can implement new technologies or embrace changes in the world with ease and grace.  Universities are not thought of as being agile but rather the opposite – steeped in tradition and long-deliberating on new changes.

There was an announcement about a new (worthy) initiative to improve the education skills of our faculty. Faculty are highly trained in their fields. They have spent years becoming expert on some are of study. We hire them for their great intellectual achievements and their promising research careers. And then we ask them to teach a class. For many, this is the first time they have been asked to build and run a course. So, we have a new initiative to study  ways to improve the teaching skills of our new (and old) faculty. I fully support this effort in case there is any doubt. It is pretty easy to imagine a time-line that looks something like this:

  • Year 1:  Research and Planning
  • Year 2:  Implementation, pilot and roll-out
  • Years 3 – 4:  Early adopters and success stories
  • Years 5 – 6:  Majority adopters and general improvement

This is me guessing at the time-line but I think it makes approximate sense.  If, six years from now the new program for improving teaching and had reached 66% of the faculty and shown a improvement in overall education; it would be a great success.  I think that it is likely that it will do so.

What I think about when I hear of something like this is agility.  Students today have a laptop with 1GB of RAM, an 80 GB hard drive, 10 – 50 Mb/second wireless connections.  They have an iPod with 80 GB of storage with a screen that has a 640X480 screen.  Their cell phone has a web browser, MP3 player, camera, video camera and a suite of messaging clients (text messaging, voice messaging and email).  If we follow Ray Kurzweil’s thinking and  Moore’s Law; then the student who comes in at the end of this 6 year plan will have 2 to the 4th more computing power at their fingertips.  The 1 GB of RAM will be 16 GBs.  The network speed will be 160 – 1000 Mb/second wireless connections.  Their iPod and laptop both will hold a terabyte of information.  Their cell phone will have a high definition video camera and a 16Mb still camera.

These are just the attributes that are doubling – the capabilities increase dramatically as these technology pieces double.  What happens when I can point my laptop camera at an object, have it recognized and instantly retrieve high-def movies about the object to my cell phone?  What does that mean to instructional style?

The technology and the students are highly agile.  Vendors are designing products for launch 2 years out expecting technical capabilities to double in the meantime.   What is too big, too expensive and requires too much computing horsepower now; is perfectly reasonable 18 months from now.  The students who are entering college now have had access to the World Wide Web their entire educational life.  They have always been able to “look it up on the web”.

There is another project that is on-going here which I’ll call “anonymous”.  They are also on a 5 to 6 year adoption plan.  Their vision is to pick a standard software package and then hope that people migrate to it.  After 5 or 6 years, the majority adopters will be using the system and then more rigorous standards can be developed for its use.   This is a common approach in higher-ed where there is no top-down approach and where autonomy is highly valued.   The shortcomings of this approach are that: (1) it takes the approach that each software solution is a silo which has no effect on any other activity in the enterprise and (2) it assumes a stable environment – “we have 6 years for this to be adopted and that’s okay because much else won’t change over that time”.

Back to my student with 2 terabytes of data and high definition video capture and gigabit wireless everywhere – does a system we think of now take into account the rapid change of our user’s world?   I’m not a futurist but I do see, and I agree with Ray Kurzweil, that  paradigm shifts are coming more and more quickly.  The world is changing with greater and greater rapidity.  The way to deal with that change is through agility.  We need to be able to change with greater and greater agility.  Fortunately, technology can help us to some extent.

SOA and Web Services, when fully implemented, allow for changes in business process and new applications to happen at a much higher level in the enterprise.  These changes become almost configuration changes rather than whole new applications stacks that are implemented.  But technology is only part of the solution to this problem.

The greater more difficult problem has to do with culture change.  The academic culture is thick with individualism and heritage.  People still complain about changes that were made a decade ago or two or three.  This individualism allows our institutions to foster great experimentation and wonderful debate.  Faculty and students can state disagreeable viewpoints in the safety of the institution and their rights.  Departments can experiment with new ways to deliver their courses and information to the world.  Researchers can band together with whomever they want anywhere in the world to chase an idea.  All great and marvelous stuff.

But this leads to a belief system that has two elements: “You can implement any technology you want as long as I can do what ever want however I want”. And the partner belief, “you can implement a new system as long as I don’t have to change anything that I do.”

How do we become agile as an institution is this environment of individualism, autonomy and self-determination?  How do we shorten those projects from 6 years to 3 or 2?  How do we get people to see that each project is actually part of larger whole and that we each need to give a bit of autonomy to increase the overall functionality of the organization?  In some ways, our institution is more like a colony of early single-celled organisms.  Each one with its own complete functions.  Somehow we need to grow to that next stage where there is differentiation so we can move up the evolutionary tree.  That means that each cell will give up some functionality to become a specialist but overall all of the functions will be better carried out.

How do we become agile, not just technically but also organizationally, this is the issue that keeps me up at night.

ITANA.ORG – I.T. Architects iN Academia takes off

I have been talking with peers, pushing ideas around and working with various groups for a while and it seems that the work is finally paying off. ITANA.ORG (http://www.itana.org) is a peer group for I.T. Architects in Academia. We will share ideas, tricks and tools; work on common deliverables and working group projects; spread the word about what I.T. Architects do and help new Architects get their feet. At least, that is my vision for the group.

Head over to ITANA.ORG and sign up for the email notices, pick up the RSS and request an account. Have an idea for a post? Send me an email.

Thanks for everyone’s help, support and enthusiasm.

– Jim