SOA governance

from Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

As SOA governance (also known as Service Governance refers), the activities, decisions, roles and responsibilities (assigning roles to activities or decisions) for the regulation and control of a service-oriented architecture (SOA) , respectively. Conflicts should not be avoided, but rather handled through standardized and accepted processes. In contrast to IT governance , novel approaches are necessary, as SOA not only includes information technology (IT), but also business processes ( BPM governance ), but also addresses completely new issues (service governance).

target

The aim of SOA governance is to strengthen the service-business alignment or to enable strategies through service thinking. SOA governance provides a structure in the form of roles, tasks, decisions and responsibilities.

Typical goals that are set at different levels, such as B. technical or business-related level, are:

  • Offering and using services in the service ecosystem within interorganizational company networks or the Internet (enabling strategy through service thinking)
  • Flexibility and agility of business processes (service-business alignment)
  • Enterprise application integration and reuse (service-business alignment)

These goals are partly contradicting one another. B. Reuse comes at the expense of flexibility. Therefore, overarching goals must be defined, which is part of the SOA strategy and not of SOA governance.

SOA governance specifies the appropriate structures with the above-mentioned elements for achieving goals through the SOA strategy. Both are not independent of each other: Certain strategies require certain structures, and different structures can make sense in a strategy. A structure can also apply to several strategies. However, SOA governance has different characteristics and is subject to different requirements when changes occur.

requirements

SOA governance must pursue the same goals and be integrated with other forms of governance in the company. Functioning corporate governance is therefore a prerequisite for SOA governance . In addition, SOA governance must be coordinated with all other forms of governance for the various assets (e.g. IT governance , BPM governance , data governance ).

properties

Similar to corporate governance, SOA governance should meet the characteristics of a long-term nature, difficult to change and enforceable.

Levels

SOA governance can be viewed at different levels:

  • Life cycle of a service
  • Composition of services
  • Services in the service ecosystem within interorganizational company networks or the Internet

Mechanisms

SOA governance mechanisms implement and support the structure that is specified by activities, decisions, roles and responsibilities. Not every mechanism fits every company, since not every structure fits every company.

Some possible mechanisms are:

  • Incentive systems for optimal results that support the goals
  • SOA Center of Excellence: Central contact point that initiates and coordinates SOA in the company
  • Service Level Agreement (SLA)
  • Communication guidelines (both formal and informal)
  • Documentation guidelines

These mechanisms can be supported by software, e.g. B. Enterprise Service Bus, monitoring tools, policy tools, modeling tools or workflow systems.

Measurement

The success of SOA governance is difficult to measure. It is just as difficult to measure the benefits of certain forms of SOA governance. This is also the case with corporate governance. However, good governance can be distinguished from bad. A necessary condition for successful SOA governance is the efficiency (= doing things right) of the SOA processes, which can be measured using various process metrics. A sufficient condition is the effectiveness (= doing the right things) of the SOA governance. Effectiveness can e.g. B. be determined based on IT governance according to Peter Weill by questioning the different roles. A scientifically based questionnaire for the various roles does not currently exist. Another way of measuring is benchmarking . Measurements have to be carried out regularly, as the corporate environment changes and the SOA governance may have to be adjusted. A change in SOA governance, however, is based on different factors than an SOA strategy.

Typical questions

Typical questions in SOA governance are:

  • Who is responsible for specific information and functional functionality in the company?
  • How are services identified that can be shared? Who decides whether a service is provided?
  • How are shared services funded? Who bears what responsibility in such a ministry?
  • How are the functionalities, properties (e.g. reliability, response times) and technical interfaces of services documented?
  • How is the use of shared services enforced? Which rules and framework conditions apply?
  • How can a service that several users depend on be changed?
  • How is compliance with the non-functional requirements ensured? In particular, the question of how necessary investments in infrastructure are financed.

Compliance with the rules developed in this way is monitored within the framework of SOA governance. The creation and monitoring of the rules form a control loop . Violations can indicate that the rules need to be adjusted. If this is not the case, it is important for effective SOA governance that compliance with the rules is enforced.

swell

  1. ↑ Service Governance Work Package in the Service Ecosystems Management for Collaborative Process Improvement project ( Memento of the original from January 1, 2008 in the Internet Archive ) Info: The archive link was automatically inserted and not yet checked. Please check the original and archive link according to the instructions and then remove this notice. @1@ 2Template: Webachiv / IABot / www.bpm.fit.qut.edu.au
  2. ↑ Weill, Peter; Ross, Jeanne W. (2004). IT governance. Harvard Business School Press, Boston, Massachusetts, ISBN 1-59139-253-5

Web links

  • M. Kuffner et al .: Governance structure. In: SOA-Know-How.de : Cross-manufacturer SOA guide. Retrieved February 28, 2008 .