Friday, April 25, 2008

SOA maturity Matrix, Agile Chain Management System

Today I would like to present a very nice article in a IT french journal “Solutions logiciels”. This is related to sustainable architecture. I’m working with Pierre Bonnet, the author of this article, on this matter, and try to share experiences on BRMS, as one of the corner stones of the Agility Chain Management System, I will try to summarize the main points of this article in french as it is relevant over the world:

The IT infrastructure in a lot of companies suffers from a lack of investment to modernize the legacy, which adds complexity when development team deploys new applications. Business and IT managers are focusing in short term ROI putting on hold long term investments needed to build a long term sustainable architecture.

Added to these, we can foreseen three layers of IT staff: the senior with their knowledge of the current legacy systems and the business requirements, the intermediate layer with people skilled in client/server and EAI technologies, and the younger one with object oriented skill, and web, web services development backgrounds. Younger are involved in tactical projects, using agile methodology, but most of the time generate rigid systems not able to change and supporting a long term logical architecture. The seniors are starting to retreat leaving a deep gap in knowledge which is most of the time not transferred to younger population. These are future bombs in the IT organization. What to do?

IT management needs to start long term projects to rebuild the IT architecture for the next generation. Pierre proposes to start by looking at what is the current situation at the enterprise level and being able to build a plan to transform the IT architecture for long term needs. The second point is to take risk: we can manage an IT organization just by controlling the existing. The rapid changes in economy, new regulations, and technology progresses force managers to take risky choices. But the risk is also to look at change in IT staff population, skill transfer, and risk to deploy new application on a fragile architecture.

Finally his last point is about clearly communicating to business and executive management about the non quality contract of current IT system, the medium to long term degradation of the IT services, and so the company competitive advantage. The communication has to leverage a strong action plan leveraging a risk management plan.

Three principles support the argumentation:

1- The re-engineering of any IT architecture cannot being done in one shot. The diagram below presents a progressing path to migrate existing architecture to a sustainable one. Starting from a SOA to expose the existing legacy functions as services, then moving to the extended SOA where BPM, BRMS and MDM are used in conjunction to offer agility at the service level for change in referential data, decision logic, and business process. The end of the path references the use of those technologies for the enterprise architecture.

2- The Agility Chain Management System: Using the MDM, BRMS and BPM technologies, IT staff can start by externalize referential data and parameters using the MDM, business rules and decision logic using BRMS, and orchestrate services and support business process with BPM.

3- A Enterprise Level Methodology: the migration path enforces a strong use of methodology like TOGAF, Praxeme, CEISAR)

Pierre addresses in this article some very important points and principles to take care during a SOA migration. Currently we are seeing a lot of project focusing on re-vamping legacy function as web services but this is not the end of the story of a SOA. I like very much the path to the extended SOA and the maturity matrix as a tool to explain to IT management the long term vision. Project managers can position where their project stands on this matrix to clearly articulate what is the value of their project’s product for the long term IT vision.

I modified slightly the original maturity matrix to clearly mention that any project falling into the bottom-right corner is the beginning of decision service re-engineering using the MDM-BRMS-BPM technologies, that IT development team has to leverage for the long run. When people embrace those technologies they are seeing the value and how to leverage them at the enterprise level. As you can see green path is the way to go and the red path is going no-where as it falls back into a rigid application behind a web service...

As an example of this kind of project we can take a claim processing application where the development team and architect decided to migrate one of their service (Claim Coverage Verification) to use business rules to verify the coverage of the insured person around his claim. MDM was used to define all the referential data as the medical codes, the US states, zip code,.. and other application parameters. The legacy application offers some data and business services with a re-vamped web service approach, and the BPM was used to call the services, to dispatch the set of XML documents over the process steps, and to offer the GUI for the claim processors: the actors of the business.

Starting from there the team can enhance the migration of such application and design reusable, agile technical and business services.

Tuesday, April 22, 2008

Book your agenda: May 7 10.00 am PST. Web seminar on ABRD

Make Developing Business Rule Applications Easier

What: 60-minute best practices webinar
When: Wednesday, May 7
Who should attend: Architects, developers, application programmers, software engineers, IT senior managers, IT team leaders, and anybody who wants to learn more about developing business-rule applications

Learn about a rules-specific methodology designed for short turnaround times: Agile Business Rule Development (ABRD)

When you're building business rule applications, generic software-development methodologies just aren't enough.

Agile Business Rule Development (ABRD) is a step-by-step process for developing business rule applications. An iterative methodology, ABRD employs agile software-development values. Rule development is organized as a series of cycles: discovery, analysis, authoring, validation, and deployment. Your team stays on schedule, delivering outstanding business rule applications.

Attend this free one-hour webinar and learn how to:

  • Leverage ABRD as first open-source methodology for business rules
  • Implement and deploy rules in an SOA or BPM context
  • Engage in rule discovery and analysis

Wednesday, April 2, 2008

Software Development Life Cycle for BR-BPEL application

The purpose of this article is to present an integrated software life cycle for development team who wants to leverage the capabilities offered by technologies such as BPM-BPEL and Business rules management system.

Each new business application development is triggered by a business needs to support or enhance and improve business efficiency. Even with an Agile approach, to trigger the project, architect, business users, project manager and project sponsor have to work together during the Inception phase, to define the business case, the requirements and justifications of the project. Once the project funded, the team may work on specification and requirement documents. I simplify a little here because in reality a lot more documents may be produced, but the goal here is to present how those requirements are supported in an Agile way using the BRMS and BPM products and not discussing about requirements management. So let state the specifications are our main entry point to detail the major work that needs to be done for developing the applications. The format of the specification can be user stories, or a more detailed description. (a good reference to write specifications and user case is Alistair Cockburn work ). Specifications are classically managed by a standard SDLC which includes design, build, test, and deploy of working code to the different staging platforms (development, test, or production).

The Agile approach enforces short iterations to deliver quick value to the business. The blue tasks in the diagram below represent a set of iterations that build the core of the business application.

The horizontal axe of this diagram represents time. The pools are used to contain activities executed in the different development environment. The top pool is the business analyst team which is triggering change to the application. When the development team is using BPEL and BRMS technologies, there are parts of the specifications which go directly to those components: Business processes will be implemented using BPEL and BPM process map, and business rules using BRMS. In the first release (you can see a release as a vertical slice of the above diagram) the agile value of each of these technologies is not clearly articulate. This is true that BPEL and BRMS help to develop in less time, and adopt an agile approach of development. But the main value proposition will come in longer term by the ability to efficiently support the two types of change requests the business user may ask:
• The business rules and policies changes: business want to improve the decision done by the rule engine
• The process tuning or improvements: the process needs to change due to legal constraints, better error and exception path management, or for better execution.

Business Rule changes will be done in the BRMS using a web based interface or IDE like JRules Rule Studio. The hot deployment capability of a rule set authorizes to deploy a newly updated rule set in a question of seconds. This helps a lot to support quick change on the decision logic attached to decision services called by the BPEL process instance. Rule Developer can do a lot of try and catch in a pre-production environment to improve the quality of the rule set, so the quality of the decision. Some IT organization implements the “champion – challenger” pattern to evaluate a new rule set against the production one. The champion rule set is in production and process transaction request with a certain level of metrics: metric can be number of automatic decision, or other business key performance indicator. On the pre-production server, the challenger rule set receives the same data flow, and metrics are compared. If challenger beats the champion it becomes the new champion in production.

Business process improvement requests are managed using the BPMS system, and a new process definition can be released to the different platforms. We can definitively see more change requests coming for business rules change, than on the business process: When we have a working process it is more sensitive to change it. Still business process changes will happen to support for example an improvement of the exception management, or to find some short-cut on the global processing so that the time to complete the process is better.

The core application can still evolve with a new release path. Change to the GUI, or data model will most likely be managed by a new release of the full application.
As a conclusion it is important to consider using an agile development methodology which support quick change when using BPM – BPEL – BRMS technologies, if you do not adapt your way to develop business application, you may lose the opportunity to be agile.