<discussion ref="http://jpmorgenthal.com/morgenthal/index.php?entry=entry090522-213329" />
Interesting post, because understanding of relationships between elements (i.e. BPM, SOA, and EA) of a system is the way to understand these elements. A few comments.
I define BPM and SOA slightly different.
BPM, actually, covers three different concepts (see Should we consider third (forgotten) BPM?):
1) BPM as a discipline or methodology
2) BPM as some software, i.e. BPM suite
3) BPM as a system for managing of business processes with an enterprise
SOA is architectural approach for constructing software-intensive systems from a set of universally interconnected and interdependent services (service is an operationally independent unit of functionality)
Relationship between BPM and SOA :
BPM discipline, by revealing the artefacts and the relationships between them, provides the necessary context (e.g. granularity) for the definition of services.
SOA provides recommendations for the implementation, execution and governance of services.
To build a good enterprise BPM-system, others (BPM discipline, BPM suite, and SOA) are necessary, but not sufficient. A good architecture is mandatory.
BPM and SOA are more than views of enterprise architecture (EA). Classic EA gives only "enterprise genotype” (a full nomenclature of enterprise artefacts) and it does not provide “enterprise phenotype” (a set of observable characteristics such as performance). A possible way to achieve a formal link between "enterprise genotype” and “enterprise phenotype” can be enhancing of EA by BPM and SOA which are able to define "enterprise executable description”.
Top Down or Bottom Up ? I recommend pinball style (see "Linkedin: Top Down or Bottom Up ?")
Thanks,
AS
Kind of
2 hours ago
1 comment:
It is important for all people who are doing research in BPM to share all their views and experience with interested people. This blogspot is nice platform to do that.
Post a Comment