260f Jaywalk » Technology

Technology


Last fall, I had the great privilege of mentoring one of the student groups at Special Course in Information Systems Integration at Helsinki University of Technology. Together with the end client Logica, I was playing the customer role for the project, whose purpose was to devise a comparison framework for BPMS and then compare two Open Source BPM tools with the framework: Intalio BPMS and JBoss jBPM.

The group finalized its work last week and generously let me publish the resulting report. Well done, guys!

204b

In his landmark paper “The Principles of Sociotechnical Design” (1976), Albert Cherns provides a basic framework for understanding and designing sociotechnical systems with consideration to human and social aspects. Building upon the notion of a participative process, he defines nine key principles of sociotechnical design.

I came to think how a collaborative business process supported by Human Interaction Management System would align with these principles as a sociotechnical system. At first glance, the principles of Human Interaction Management would be congruent with good sociotechnical design:

(more…)

Today, the fall seminar of Service-Oriented Architecture Subject Interest Group (SOA SIG) took again place in Innopoli II, Espoo, Finland. The topic of the day was EA and SOA, which attracted around 30 people.

After my welcoming words as the SOA SIG chairman, Kari Hiekkanen, senior researcher, HUT, provided a brief introduction to SOLEA (Service-Oriented Locally adapted Enterprise Architecture), a new research project on EA and SOA. As an exemplary research topic, Kaisa Rommel then presented her master’s thesis work on SOA roadmaps.

I also put my HUT researcher hat on and gave a presentation entitled “Enterprise Architecture Enabling Organizational Change”, introducing some work-in-progress models that we have been developing in SOLEA recently: Service-Oriented EA Framework, SOA Maturity Model and Agile Governance Model. The response was encouraging.

Jouni Lähteenmäki, Enterprise Architect, OP Bank Group, presented OP-Pohjola’s approach to Enterprise Architecture and recounted the organization’s travel experiences in its EA/SOA journey in the last few years.

Last but certainly not least, Jaakko Riihinen of Nokia Siemens Networks gave a very insightful and interesting presentation on how Enterprise Architecture relates to Systems Engineering and how EA and SE capabilities should be created. No-one minded that Jaakko went a bit overtime with his extra slides exemplifying some of the topics that arose.

220f

Today, I was lecturing at the Special Course in Information Systems Integration at Helsinki University of Technology again. I gave the following three lectures:

  1. Business Process Integration
  2. Business Process Management
  3. Business Process Standards and Modeling

My seminar “Competitive Advantage through Agility: EA, BPM and SOA” was premiered on September 19 in co-operation with International Merito Forum. If you missed the show, the event will be reorganized in Helsinki, Finland, by Merito Forum on February 13, 2009 and will be given in English. You may also book a separate seminar day or individual presentation(s) conveniently at your own premises.

Please find the presentations of my seminar at my company web site.

I was unable to attend Oracle’s BEA Strategy Briefing on July 1, but fortunately enough I made it to their respective BEA Day in Hotel Kämp, Helsinki, today.

Kimmo Vilen, CEO of Oracle Finland, opened the day on behalf of both companies. He referred to the previous successful mergers of Oracle in Finland (e.g. Siebel, Hyperion) and asssured that the coming integration with BEA will be “seamless”. In his opening note, Ari Pussinen, General Manager in BEA, also convinced the audience that the merger will be valuable.

The main presentations of the morning were given by two Martins of Oracle: Martijn Vlek, Solution Specialist Director, and Martin Percival, Senior Director, Product Management.

(more…)

Email is the most popular form of asynchronous, distributed interaction. It is simple to use and provides knowledge workers complete flexibility to conduct their work. Despite the pervasiveness of email in contemporary office work, the concept has its disadvantages: there is no process, no visibility, no control, no goal and limited accountability.

And as we all know from our own experience, email can be overwhelming. It is not unusual that one spends as much as two hours every day just to sort and read all the email, not to speak of responding to it. According to a study, 43% of people have actually fallen ill because of email-induced stress.

Various collaboration tools such as knowledge management, content management, groupware or online conference applications attempt to bring some structure into human interactions. They bring the knowledge workers at the same centralized information repository, facilitating information access and communication, but thereby the tools are also exacerbating the problem of information overload. People have to run faster and faster to even stand still.

The biggest challenge is not finding information, but keeping up with it. The scarcest resource is no longer storage or bandwith but human attention. In order to cope with the white water of information rushing through our daily lives, we need new means to organize information temporally (e.g. news feeds) and means to filter the relevant information (e.g. semantic tagging, collaborative filtering).

To this end, a proliferation of social networks and social media sharing services are harnessing the power of collective intelligence, but they are also, for their part, contributing to what Keith Harrison-Broninski calls network overload: the increasing volume of human interactions overall. As all the world is a project and we are moving from Information Age to Process Age, people are expected to participate in an increased number of collaborations.

To deal with the network overload, communication in collaborative activities must be structured and goal-driven. People need to understand the process context of their interactions: their capabilities, roles and responsibilities as well as those of others.

Traditional Business Process Management tools address static, structured processes that account for approximately one fifth of all business processes, but they fail to address the remaining 80% of ad-hoc, dynamic tasks that knowledge workers perform. Human Interaction Management (HIM), or Dynamic BPM, extends process management to this kind of dynamic collaborations, in which the process takes shape as it unfolds.

First tools such as HumanEdj by Rolemodellers or BizFlow by Handysoft are emerging in this space and large vendors are expected to follow. However, dynamic collaborations are very different from workflows and structured collaborations and as Jon Pyke points out extant BPM tools do not readily lend themselves to knowledge work: “I doubt there are many BPM products on the market today which will be able to meet this seismic shift in requirements - certainly those that rely on BPEL and SOA won’t; what’s more, any that have been in the market for longer than five years will need radical surgery to meet the coming challenge.”

I recently came across with this interesting and thought-provoking article entitled “The Future of the Desktop” by Nova Spivack, founder and CEO of Twine. I came to think how BPM could move to the cloud as well… Each process participant would be viewed as a generic event-processing agent in a “personal cloud” capable of performing some basic operations: subscribing to channels, publishing to channels, maintaining information and applications. Not only would it enable sharing information like in Twine or documents like in various Office 2.0 apps, but it would give the collaborations a structure, goal and process execution context like in HIM.

I am imagining an ubiquitous communication, collaboration and connectivity framework that would:

  • enable mobile processes adhering to pi-calculus
  • provide connectivity infrastructure to standard interfaces
  • provide workflow foundation to orchestrate resources in the private context
  • specify an interface for plug-n-play Ajax widgets
  • leverage collective intelligence and social networks

Such a framework would bring together the best of Web 2.0, BPM and Collaborative Software. Is my thinking clouded or could this be the cloud nine of BPM?

I am just back from Pune, India, where I attended training in designing with TIBCO iProcess Modeler. Having prior experience in BEA’s AquaLogic BPM, it is now interesting to compare these two tools:

(more…)

This week, I attended the Seminar on Enterprise Information Systems at Helsinki University of Technology, whose topic this year was Service-Oriented Architecture and Software Engineering. The lectures were given by Kari Hiekkanen, Director of Technology at Logica CMG, Finland, whom I also happened to know from my earlier employment at WM-Data.

Having focused on the area of Service-Oriented Architecture for several years, I had a fairly good view on the topics of this course, already. Nevertheless, I wanted to take this opportunity of hearing a coherent story of the overall field of SOA and reflect my own conceptions thereagainst, while including the course in my academic curriculum. There are always new things to learn and new viewpoints to consider.

Hiekkanen is working on a dissertation on service-oriented software development and has already been teaching this course last year. Even so, it surprised me how comprehensive yet concise introduction to all relevant facets of SOA he had managed to compile.

(more…)

29a6

Today, SOA SIG spring seminar was held in Innopoli II, the same place as last year. The theme of the day was “War Experiences in SOA”. Three great presentations were featured:

Samuel Rinnetmäki, The Finnish Centre for Pensions, provided insights into how to design service interfaces. He maintained that services can be discovered in use cases as well as in data stores. The contents of a service can be derived from conceptual models, vocabularies or ontologies. Operations on these data are typically CRUD functions.

Rinnetmäki argued for keeping the size of services small. Small services are more readily reusable and their implementation, testing, publishing and maintenance is easier. Only information that logically belong together should be fetched in a single service. Composite services of larger granularity can be built upon these elementary services, if needed. Reasons for this may be that information from various sources are used as a coherent set or calling of several small services bears too much performance overhead.

Jarmo Laine, TietoEnator, gave a presentation entitled “Implementing SOA — Experiences From the Trenches”. Indeed, he had a great war story to tell: a multi-year, international business process driven SOA endeavor that encompassed architecture, infrastructure, development process, service development, governance and domain data model.

The presentation brought a wealth of practical insight and sparked a good discussion. As his concluding remarks, Laine shared some of his lessons learnt in the spirit of “Do as I say, not as i do”:

  • Enough time should be reserved in the beginning for the new tools, environments and resources as well as for defining the architecture. Vendor expertise and experience should be leveraged.
  • Clear interfaces and responsibilities between architectural layers should be defined. First, a stub should implement the interface, then real implementations in several iterations.
  • A development process/methodology suitable for SOA/BPM projects should be established. In the project, top-down and bottom-up considerations were balanced in the iterative meet-in-the-middle approach.
  • Information of back-end systems and their constraints should be involved early in the analysis process.
  • A standardized development guideline (e.g. naming standards, error handling, logging, common utilities etc.) must be created to unify and speed up the development work.
  • Utilities and common technical services (e.g. logging, data type conversions, error handling) should be created to unify and speed up the development work.
  • Supporting infrastructure should be in place and properly supported: version control, test management, change management.
  • Test cases should be closely involved early in analysis and design phase to assure consistency in testing phases. Also management and ownership of related test data should be arranged and resources allocated early on.

The third presentation was given by Timo Itälä, Conceptia Oy. He proposed a top-down method for identifying the core process and the underlying core services in healthcare patient treatment. In order to find the connection points to the services, the process was only considered from the doctor’s point of view, abstracting out any other perspectives.

An interesting idea was to view treatment as a generic coarse-grain control-type service, implemented as an orchestration of more fine-grained action services that brought about the specifics of that treatment. According to Itälä, this pattern of core processes notifying the template-like control services that in turn orchestrate the action and entity services where the specific implementation resides is readily generalizable to other domains, of which he mentioned case handling in public sector organizations.

Another brilliant idea that Itälä put forward: from the process instances of a core process one can derive how much the process adds value; from the services one can reckon how much the core process costs.

« Previous PageNext Page »

0