How EA, BPM, SOA and ECM work together
Alexander Samarin for the BPM mini-conference
https://www.dataforeningen.no/program.316567.no.html
EA – Enterprise ArchitectureBPM – Business Process ManagementSOA – Service Oriented ArchitectureECM – Enterprise Content Management
Architecting synergy v2 2
• A digital enterprise architect– from a programmer to a systems architect – have created systems which work without me
• WHY I do what I do– I believe that many improvements (“sooner, better, cheaper, more
flexible”) in operational excellence and strategy execution are achievable with reasonable efforts and commodity tools
• HOW I do what I do– architecting synergy between strategies, technologies, tools and
best practices for client’s unique case and transfer the knowledge
• WHAT is the result of my work for clients
– less routine work, less stress, higher performance, higher security, less risk, higher predictability of results, better operations, and liberating the business potentials
About me
© A. Samarin 2014
Architecting synergy v2 3
• Context – manage complexity in the digital age
• BPM reference model
– BPM and SOA
– BPM and information security
• Platform-based architecture
– ECM, Electronic Publishing
• Enterprise as a system of processes
– Patterns
• Combined examples
– Shared services, legacy application architecture, e-gov, healthcare, SIC
© A. Samarin 2014
Agenda
Architecting synergy v2 4
– It is not about “just the website”, “online services” or “transactions”
– Everything becomes digital: products, information, content, documents, records, processes, money, rights, communications
– If digital then intangible thus news tools and new execution speed “immediately”
– Digital things are at new scale – petabytes and exabytes
– With this new speed and scale, there is no time for human intervention and errors in routine operations and at interfaces
© A. Samarin 2014
Digital age
Architecting synergy v2 5
• Experience shows that business wants separate requests for change to be implemented quickly in existing IT solutions and systems
• These changes are typically small (from the point of view of the business) and unpredictable (from the point of view of the IT)
• To carry out these changes easily and in a managed way, business systems must be properly architected / designed / engineered
© A. Samarin 2014
Business reality
Architecting synergy v2
• Different estimations of the development/maintenance life-cycle cost ratio
© A. Samarin 2014 6
Solutions need to be adaptive
2 – Estimated average in the IT industry
maintenance
development 80 %
20 %
2
40 %
60 %
1
95 %
5 %
33 – A real scenario (governmental client)
1 – Estimated by an IT staff member
Architecting synergy v2
• Co-existence of many artefacts
– vision, plans, processes, capabilities, services, etc.
• Dynamic and interrelated
• Not all relationships between artefacts are explicit
• Not all relationships between artefacts are interpreted consistently by different staff members and systems
• Small changes can be very destructive
© A. Samarin 2014 7
Complexity
Architecting synergy v2 8
• There are two different sources of complexity:
– natural as we use more and more complex products produced by more and more interlinked companies and
– undesired as we do things with inadequate tools, without using the best available knowledge, via communicating in not the “same” language, by reinventing the wheel, following contradictory recommendations from consultants, drawing a process and executing something else, etc.
• The purpose of enterprise architecture
– guide solution architecture to follow the natural complexity to avoid adding undesired complexity
– promote the use explicit and executable techniques to reduce the natural complexity
– “liberate” resources to better handle the natural complexity© A. Samarin 2014
Managing complexity
Architecting synergy v2 9
• EA coordinates people, process and technologies in 4D
1. Business domain span (organisational unit, segment, enterprise, …)
2. Architecture span (business, data, application, technology, …)
3. Time span (solution life-cycle, technology life-cycle, tool life-cycle, project life-cycle, …)
4. Sector span (common patterns in unique processes from different sectors)
© A. Samarin 2014
EA as a systemic coordinator
Architecting synergy v2 10
• Context – manage complexity in the digital age
• BPM reference model
– BPM and SOA
– BPM and information security
• Platform-based architecture
– ECM, Electronic Publishing
• Enterprise as a system of processes
– Patterns
• Combined examples
– Shared services, legacy application architecture, e-gov, healthcare, SIC
© A. Samarin 2014
Agenda
Architecting synergy v2© A. Samarin 2014 11
BPM is a tool for improving enterprise business performance
The theoryBPM as a discipline (use processes to manage an enterprise)
The toolsBPM as software:BPM suite (BPMS)
The practiceAny process-centric enterprise has some BPM (as discipline and tool), but how can we industrialise this BPM?
A natural evolution of BPR, Lean, ISO 9001, 6 Sigma
The aim is to have a single description of business processes:- model in design- input for project planning and execution- executable program for coordination of work- documentation for all staff members- basis for management decisions
An enterprise portfolio of the business processes as well as the practices and tools for governing the design, execution and evolution of this portfolio
A multitude of tools “handle” processes
© A. Samarin 2014 Architecting synergy v2 12
Be ready for common (mis-)understanding
Architecting synergy v2 13
• Enterprise functioning can be considered as business activity flows spanning the applications, employees, customers and partners within and beyond the boundaries of the enterprise
• Business activity is a unit of work
• A business process is an explicitly-defined coordination for guiding the purposeful enactment of business activities
• Process-based disciplines (TQM/QMS, BPR, TPS, 6Sigma, BPM, etc.) exploit the concept of business processes for the better management of the enterprise functioning in support of the enterprise goals
© A. Samarin 2014
BPM definitions (1)
Architecting synergy v2 14
• Business Process Management (BPM) is a process-based discipline involving any combination of modeling, automation/implementation, execution, control, measurement and optimization of business processes
© A. Samarin 2014
BPM definitions (2)
Architecting synergy v2 15
• Process template – a formal description of the process
• Process instance – enactment of a process template
• Different variations of relationship between template and instance
Process templates and instances
Templates and their versions
Instances
© A. Samarin 2014
Architecting synergy v2 16© A. Samarin 2014
Variant 1 – classic (one template is used for many instances)
Architecting synergy v2 17© A. Samarin 2014
Variant 2 – tailoring (a template is adjusted for each instance)
Architecting synergy v2 18© A. Samarin 2014
Variant 3 – reactive (no initial template and next activity is selected based on
the current situation)
Architecting synergy v2 19© A. Samarin 2014
Variant 4 – proactive planning (similar to variant 3, but a few next activities [fragment] are executed together)
Architecting synergy v2 20© A. Samarin 2014
Variant 5 – scenario-based (similar to variant 4, but a few scenarios are
considered)
Process fragments are used; those may be patterns
Architecting synergy v2 21
• An enterprise is a complex, dynamic and adaptive system; one can improve it by:
– measuring
– observing
– deciding
– implementing
BPM reference model:Improvement loop
1
2
3
4
© A. Samarin 2014
Architecting synergy v2 22
BPM reference model:Process-based disciplines
© A. Samarin 2014
Architecting synergy v2 23
BPM reference model:Process-oriented view of an enterprise
(before BPM)
© A. Samarin 2014
Architecting synergy v2 24
BPM reference model:Process-oriented view of an enterprise
(with BPM)
© A. Samarin 2014
Architecting synergy v2 25© A. Samarin 2014
BPM reference model:BPM suite components
Architecting synergy v2 26© A. Samarin 2014
BPM reference model:BPM suite components (extended list)
Architecting synergy v2 27
• Context – manage complexity in the digital age
• BPM reference model
– BPM and SOA
– BPM and information security
• Platform-based architecture
– ECM, Electronic Publishing
• Enterprise as a system of processes
– Patterns
• Combined examples
– Shared services, legacy application architecture, e-gov, healthcare, SIC
© A. Samarin 2014
Agenda
Architecting synergy v2 28
• Events
• Roles
• Data structures
• Documents
• Rules
• Audit trails
• KPIs
• Processes
• Services
© A. Samarin 2014
BPM artifacts
KPIs
Processes Services
Events
Roles Data structures
Documents
Rules
Human “workflow”
Audit trails
Architecting synergy v2 29
• Who (roles) is doing What (business objects), When (coordination of activities), Why (business rules), How (business activities) and with Which Results (performance indicators)
• Make these relationships explicit and executable
What you model is what you execute
“The map is the app”
© A. Samarin 2014
Business processes are complex relationships between artefacts
Architecting synergy v2 30
• Services are considered to be explicitly-defined and operationally-independent units of functionality
– Formal description
– Operational independence
– Invisible implementation
Services
© A. Samarin 2014
Architecting synergy v2
• Definition
– architectural approach for constructingsoftware-intensive systems from a setof universally interconnected and interdependent services
• Advantages
– use of standard and pre-fabricatedbuilding blocks
– high level of system flexibility
– reducing complexity
– building bigger services from smaller ones
31
Service-Oriented Architecture (SOA)
© A. Samarin 2014
Architecting synergy v2
• BPM, 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
• BPM provides a mechanism for the explicit and executable assembling of bigger services from smaller ones
© A. Samarin 2014 32
Synergy between BPM and SOA (1) – structuring relationships
Architecting synergy v2
• The relationship between services and processes is “recursive”
– All processes are services
– Some operations of a service can be implemented as a process
– A process includes servicesin its implementation
© A. Samarin 2014 33
Synergy between BPM and SOA (2) – structuring relationships
Architecting synergy v2
• Each enterprise is a complex, dynamic, unique and “recursive” relationship between services and processes
– Services can be replaced by processes
– Processes can be replaced by services
– Some of them are moved to clouds
© A. Samarin 2014 34
Synergy between BPM and SOA (3) – structuring relationships
service process
Architecting synergy v2 35© A. Samarin 2014
Synergy between BPM and SOA (4) – Implementation layers of artefacts
Architecting synergy v2 36© A. Samarin 2014
Synergy between BPM and SOA (5) – Relationship with other technologies
Architecting synergy v2 37© A. Samarin 2014
Synergy between BPM and SOA (6) –no applications – just coordination of
services
Architecting synergy v2 38
• Context – manage complexity in the digital age
• BPM reference model
– BPM and SOA
– BPM and information security
• Platform-based architecture
– ECM, Electronic Publishing
• Enterprise as a system of processes
– Patterns
• Combined examples
– Shared services, legacy application architecture, e-gov, healthcare, SIC
© A. Samarin 2014
Agenda
• Align access rights with the work to be done
© A. Samarin 2014 Architecting synergy v2 39
BPM and information security: dynamic access control
Do something
Grant necessary rights to a person who will carry out this activity to access involved business objects
Revoke previously granted rights
Architecting synergy v2 40© A. Samarin 2014
BPM and information security:Extra relationships between activities (1)
Mandatory: different actors because of the separation of duties
Potentially: different actors because of performance impact – avoid assigning mechanical (low-qualified “red”) activities and added-value (“green”) activities to the same actors
Architecting synergy v2 41
Responsible Accountable
Consulted Informed
BPM and information security:Extra relationships between activities (2)
© A. Samarin 2014
Architecting synergy v2 42
• There are security-related relationships between activities
• Example
– “Activitiy_B” relates to Activity_A as “Validating the work”
– These activities may be in different processes
– No actors must be assigned to both “Role_1” and “Role_2”
© A. Samarin 2014
BPM and information security: Extra relationships between activities (3)
Activity_A
Activity_B
Carry out the work
Carry out the work Validating the work
Role_1
Role_2
Architecting synergy v2 43
• Doing the work
– To which ROLES the work can be delegated
– To which ROLES the work can be send for review
• Assuring the work
– other ACTIVITIES to audit (1st, 2nd and 3rd party auditing)
– other ACTIVITIES to evaluate the risk (before the work is started)
– other ACTIVITIES to evaluate the risk (after the work is completed)
• Validating the work
– Other ACTIVITIES to check the output (errors and fraud prevention)
• Some ACTIVITIES must be carried out by the same actor, some ACTIVITIES must not
© A. Samarin 2014
BPM and information security: Extra relationships between activities (4)
Architecting synergy v2 44
• Context – manage complexity in the digital age
• BPM reference model
– BPM and SOA
– BPM and information security
• Platform-based architecture
– ECM, Electronic Publishing
• Enterprise as a system of processes
– Patterns
• Combined examples
– Shared services, legacy application architecture, e-gov, healthcare, SIC
© A. Samarin 2014
Agenda
Architecting synergy v2 45© A. Samarin 2014
Platform-based architecture (1)
• Business concern: How to deliver many similar applications for various highly-diverse clients; define everything up-front is not possible (typical BPM or ECM project)
• Logic
– Developing individual applications will bring a lot of duplications
– The provisioning of solutions should be carried out incrementally with the pace of the target client
– Consider a platform
1. must standardise and simplify core elements of future enterprise-wide system
2. for any elements outside the platform, new opportunities should be explored using agile principles
Architecting synergy v2 46
• Principles
– The platform frees up resource to focus on new opportunities
– Successful agile innovations are rapidly scaled up when incorporated into the platform
– An agile approach requires coordination at a system level
– To minimise duplication of effort in solving the same problems, there needs to be system-wide transparency of agile initiatives
– Existing elements of the platform also need periodic challenge
© A. Samarin 2014
Platform-based architecture (2)
A2A1
A3Platform
S2…S
1S3
Functionality
Delivery by solutions Delivery by applications
Scope
Architecting synergy v2 47
• There are two primary types of activity.
– On-going and centralised platform evolution
– Rapid implementation of solutions as mini-projects
• Platform evolution is carried out by an inter-organisational-units coordination committee
• The roles within mini-projects
– A stakeholder
– The team lead for administrative coordination
– The product owner for functional coordination
– The solution architect for technical coordination
– The team member
© A. Samarin 2014
Overall platform governance
Architecting synergy v2 48
• Context – manage complexity in the digital age
• BPM reference model
– BPM and SOA
– BPM and information security
• Platform-based architecture
– ECM, Electronic Publishing
• Enterprise as a system of processes
– Patterns
• Combined examples
– Shared services, legacy application architecture, e-gov, healthcare, SIC
© A. Samarin 2014
Agenda
Architecting synergy v2 49© A. Samarin 2014
Advantages of the corporate ECM platform
Dev env 1 Dev env 2
Development environment 3Generic web-
development platforms
DEVELOPMENT
Functionality
Basic features of a common ECM platform
Advanced features of a common ECM platform
Company-specific features
Process-centric integration
• Current development cost & time for a collaborative application
– Cost: 40 – 200 K $
– Time: 0,5 – 2 years
• Corporate platform program cost & time
– Cost: 600 K $
– Time: 1 year
• Expected development cost & time for a collaborative application within the corporate platform
– Cost: 20 - 60 K $
– Time: 1 - 3 months
© A. Samarin 2014 Architecting synergy v2 50
Financial estimations
N apps.
$$
N≈8
Without common platform
With common platform
Architecting synergy v2 51© A. Samarin 2014
Solutions vs components
Architecting synergy v2 52
• Context – manage complexity in the digital age
• BPM reference model
– BPM and SOA
– BPM and information security
• Platform-based architecture
– ECM, Electronic Publishing
• Enterprise as a system of processes
– Patterns
• Combined examples
– Shared services, legacy application architecture, e-gov, healthcare, SIC
© A. Samarin 2014
Agenda
Architecting synergy v2 53
• The users told us that their processes are unique thus they need different applications
• We modelled their processes with the same modelling procedure
• We found the same services and very similar processes
© A. Samarin 2014
Example – replacing 23 electronic publishing applications
Architecting synergy v2 54
• Context – manage complexity in the digital age
• BPM reference model
– BPM and SOA
– BPM and information security
• Platform-based architecture
– ECM, Electronic Publishing
• Enterprise as a system of processes
– Process Patterns
• Combined examples
– Shared services, legacy application architecture, e-gov, healthcare, SIC
© A. Samarin 2014
Agenda
Architecting synergy v2 55
• In the context of enterprise functioning, business activities must be coordinated
• Various coordination techniques– template-based– state-based – event-based– role-based – rule-based or decision-based or intelligence-based – managerial (tacit knowledge)– community-based– instance-based or inter-process– resource-based or life-cycle-based– goal-based
© A. Samarin 2014
Enterprise as a system of processes (1)
Architecting synergy v2 56
• Various coordination techniques
– decomposition cascade
– assembling cascade
– combine cascade
© A. Samarin 2014
Enterprise as a system of processes (2)
Architecting synergy v2 57
• Coordination maybe strong (e.g. as in the army) or weak (e.g. as in an amateurs football team)
• Coordination maybe implicit or explicit
• Coordination maybe declarative (laws) and imperative (orders)
• Based on coordination, let us think about “levels of cohesion” between activities and thus find out coordination constructs (in addition to activities)
1. process patterns (coordination within processes)
2. processes
3. cluster of processes (coordination between processes)
4. system of processes (coordination between clusters of processes)
© A. Samarin 2014
Enterprise as a system of processes (3)
Architecting synergy v2 58
• Business case: typical “claim processing” process – claim, repair, control, invoicing, and assurance to pay
© A. Samarin 2014
Process fragments – patterns
SI
PAR
SI
IPS
Click for animation
• Business concern: Interactions between two independent parties – public administration and partner (citizen, local business, etc.)
• Logic
– partner submits some documents (including forms) to administration
– administration checks those documents
– administration may request partner to provide more documents or to carry out some corrections
– administration checks those documents again
– and so on
© A. Samarin 2014 Architecting synergy v2 59
Process pattern:Submission Interface (SI)
© A. Samarin 2014 Architecting synergy v2 60
SI animated diagram
Click for animation
Architecting synergy v2 61
• Simple event-based (which looks like a state machine)
© A. Samarin 2014
Coordination between processes (1)
Architecting synergy v2 62© A. Samarin 2014
Coordination between processes (2)
1. state-machine
2. synchronous invocation
3. asynchronous invocation
4. fire and forget
5. parallel processes
6. co-processes (pattern SI)
Architecting synergy v2 63
• CLOPs are usually functional processes which are implemented a particular business function, e.g. Field Services
• And a “halo” of extra processes
1. monitoring
2. operating
3. governance
© A. Samarin 2014
CLuster Of Processes (CLOP)
Architecting synergy v2 64© A. Samarin 2014
Enabler group, supporting group and customer group of clusters
Architecting synergy v2 65© A. Samarin 2014
Is a system of processes like a PCB?
Architecting synergy v2 66© A. Samarin 2014
Implicit coordination between CLOPs (1)
Architecting synergy v2 67© A. Samarin 2014
Implicit coordination between CLOPs (2)
Architecting synergy v2 68© A. Samarin 2014
Implicit coordination between CLOPs (3)
Architecting synergy v2 69© A. Samarin 2014
Functional view at a system of processes (1)
Architecting synergy v2 70© A. Samarin 2014
Functional view at a system of processes (2)
Architecting synergy v2 71© A. Samarin 2014
Functional view at a system of processes (3)
Architecting synergy v2 72
• Context – manage complexity in the digital age
• BPM reference model
– BPM and SOA
– BPM and information security
• Platform-based architecture
– ECM, Electronic Publishing
• Enterprise as a system of processes
– Patterns
• Combined examples
– Shared services, legacy application architecture, e-gov, healthcare, SIC
© A. Samarin 2014
Agenda
Architecting synergy v2 73
• Many process patterns are available from my bookwww.samarin.biz/book
• And from my blog http://improving-bpm-systems.blogspot.com/search/label/practical%20process%20patterns
© A. Samarin 2014
Process patterns
Architecting synergy v2 74
• Context – manage complexity in the digital age
• BPM reference model
– BPM and SOA
– BPM and information security
• Platform-based architecture
– ECM, Electronic Publishing
• Enterprise as a system of processes
– Process Patterns
• Combined examples
– Shared services, legacy application architecture, e-gov, healthcare, SIC
© A. Samarin 2014
Agenda
Architecting synergy v2 75
• Situation
– a company (3rd world-wide biggest in its sector) has about 800 semi-independent business units (BU); 130+ ERPs; 5 000 apps
– the strategy of the company has two contradictory objectives 1) “Make the diversity efficient” and 2) “Standardize wherever it bring value”
– several company-wide IT initiatives to bring standard solutions to all BUs have failed
– as all BUs have different level of computerization, a standard solution from the IT department is not good for everyone
© A. Samarin 2014
Anisotropic enterprise and shared services (1)
BU1 BU2 BU3 Standardsolution
Level of computerization
Architecting synergy v2 76© A. Samarin 2014
Anisotropic enterprise and shared services (2)
BU1 BU2 BU3
Level of computerization
A CBB BAC
1) Standardsolution is based on processes and shared services
2) Each BU is moving to platform-based architecture
Architecting synergy v2 77
• Context – manage complexity in the digital age
• BPM reference model
– BPM and SOA
– BPM and information security
• Platform-based architecture
– ECM, Electronic Publishing
• Enterprise as a system of processes
– Process Patterns
• Combined examples
– Shared services, legacy application architecture, e-gov, healthcare, SIC
© A. Samarin 2014
Agenda
Architecting synergy v2 78
• From disparate IT applications to a business execution platform which will “liberate” people for business innovations
• Agile (with the pace of business) provisioning of solutions
• Step-by-step technical transformation in two interrelated and intermixed streams:
1. Disassemble into services
2. Assemble via processes
• Business evolution to drive technical transformation
• Combine various tactics: assemble, rent, buy, build, outsource, centralised vs. kept locally, standardised, re-engineered or automated
© A. Samarin 2014
Legacy application architecture modernisation
Architecting synergy v2 79
• Business processes make richer functionality from smaller functions (like an orchestra)
• Who (roles) is doing What (business objects), When (coordination of activities), Why (business rules), How (business activities) and with Which Results (performance indicators)
© A. Samarin 2014
Assemble via processes
Architecting synergy v2 80© A. Samarin 2014
Disassemble a legacy application into services
Monolithic application
GUI screen 2
GUI screen 1
GUI screen 3
Business logic
Business object “Partner”
persistence
Business object “Competition”
persistence
Business object “Event”
persistence
BPM/SOA modular solution
Business logic service
Interactive service 1
Interactive service 2
Interactive service 3
Coordination service
Business object “Partner” persistence
service
Business object “Competition”
persistence service
Business object “Event” persistence
service
Architecting synergy v2 81© A. Samarin 2014
Disassemble a legacy ERP into services
Legacy ERP functionality
DM service B
DM service A
DM service C
Industrial ECMIndustrial ERP
HR
Fin
Procurement
Business logic suite (BRM)
Coordination suite (BPM)
Specific service 1
Specific service 2
Specific service 3
In-house development
10-15 % 10-15 %20-40 %10-20 %
Industrial generic suites Industrial specific tools
Event management
…
20-30 %
Note: Specified values are just estimations
Architecting synergy v2 82
• Context – manage complexity in the digital age
• BPM reference model
– BPM and SOA
– BPM and information security
• Platform-based architecture
– ECM, Electronic Publishing
• Enterprise as a system of processes
– Process Patterns
• Combined examples
– Shared services, legacy application architecture, e-gov, healthcare, SIC
© A. Samarin 2014
Agenda
Architecting synergy v2 83
• Majority of the governmental entities (federal, provincial/cantonal, regional/district, communal) provide the same governmental services but via slightly different processes, by various tools and with different results
• We, the people, are paying many times for the “same”
• How to implement this “same”:
– not 100+ times (with different quality)
– but 1 time (with superior quality) via cooperation among 100+ contributors?
© A. Samarin 2014
E-government and e-governance
Architecting synergy v2 84
Four communication patterns for exchanges between a partner and the
government
Government
2. Patrner-declaration
1. Government-announce
4. Partner-demand
Spread in time
3. Government-demand
Spread in time
Partners (citizen, business, and other organisations)
1. Government-announcement, e.g. broadcasting changes in a law2. Partner-declaration, e.g. communicating a change of the partner’s address3. Government-demand, e.g. inviting to pay taxes4. Partner-demand, e.g. requesting a certificate (fishing license)
© A. Samarin 2014
Architecting synergy v2 85
A partner-initiated-demand may required several exchanges between the
partner and the government
Government
Time© A. Samarin 2014
1 2 3 4
Architecting synergy v2 86
The partner may need to deal with some ministries
Government
Ministry A Ministry B Ministry C
Time
Methodologies:+ data modelling+ electronic document exchange
Tools:+ standard data schemas+ electronic signature
• data flow (black dashed lines)
© A. Samarin 2014
Architecting synergy v2 87
Process
+ + + +
E-gov coordinates partner’s interactions with the government
Government
• control flow (black solid lines)
• data flow (black dashed lines)
Ministry A Ministry B Ministry C
Time
1 2 3 4
Methodologies:• data modelling• electronic document
(ED) exchange+ BPM discipline+ process modelling
Technologies:• standard data schemas• electronic signature+ BPM suite
1
2 3
4
5
6
7
8
© A. Samarin 2014
Architecting synergy v2 88
Process --
E-gov unifies the communication between the partner and the ministries
Government
Ministry B
Time
1
2
3
45
2
2a 2cx
2b
• control flow (black solid lines)
• data flow (black dashed lines)
Methodologies:• data modelling• electronic document
(ED) exchange+ BPM discipline+ process modelling
Technologies:• standard data schemas• electronic signature+ BPM suite
© A. Samarin 2014
… …
Architecting synergy v2 89
Process
+ + + +
E-gov provides a social collaborative extranet for partners
Government
Ministry A Ministry B Ministry C
Time
Methodologies:• data modelling• ED exchange• BPM discipline• process modelling+ ED management+ records management+ collaboration+ social
Technologies:• standard data schemas• electronic signature• BPM suite+ ECM
Social collaborative extranet
• control flow (black solid lines)
• data flow (black dashed lines)
© A. Samarin 2014
Architecting synergy v2 90
Partner’s view
© A. Samarin 2014
Architecting synergy v2
Partners
Existing application
Coordination and integration backbone
e-Government
© A. Samarin 2014 91
E-gov application architecture view
Social collaborative extranet
e-gov service
Existing application
Existing application
Government
Technologies:• BPM suite• SOA orientation• ECM
e-gov service
e-gov service
Architecting synergy v2
Partners
Existing application
© A. Samarin 2014 92
E-gov traditional application architecture
Portal
Existing application
Existing application
Government
Appl
icati
on
Appl
icati
on
Appl
icati
on
Architecting synergy v2
Partners
Existing application
Coordination and integration backbone
e-Government
© A. Samarin 2014 93
E-gov introductory application architecture
Social collaborative extranet
e-gov service
Existing application
Existing application
Government
e-gov service
e-gov service
Architecting synergy v2
Partners
Existing application
Coordination and integration backbone
e-Government
© A. Samarin 2014 94
E-gov transitional application architecture
Social collaborative extranet
e-gov service
Existing application
Government
e-gov service
e-gov service
Coordination backbone
Service Service
Existing application
Architecting synergy v2
Partners
Coordination and integration backbone
e-Government
© A. Samarin 2014 95
E-gov target application architecture
Social collaborative extranet
e-gov service
e-gov service
e-gov service
ServiceService Service
Architecting synergy v2
Partners
Coordination and integration backbone
E-social system
© A. Samarin 2014 96
E-social system application architecture
Social collaborative extranet
Public service
Private service
Professionalservice
Social service
Voluntary service
Architecting synergy v2 97© A. Samarin 2014
Steps of evolution in application architecture
Introductory architecture
Target architecture
E-Social system architecture
Portal-centric architecture
Transitional architecture
Architecting synergy v2 98
• Context – manage complexity in the digital age
• BPM reference model
– BPM and SOA
– BPM and information security
• Platform-based architecture
– ECM, Electronic Publishing
• Enterprise as a system of processes
– Process Patterns
• Combined examples
– Shared services, legacy application architecture, e-gov, healthcare, SIC
© A. Samarin 2014
Agenda
Architecting synergy v2 99
NEEDS
RESULTS
Enrich Knowledge
Improve Operations
acquisition channels for external data/information/ knowledge
disseminationchannels of internal data/information/ knowledge
Methods, practices, laws, international regulations, etc.
Knowledge for Healthcare
Processes & Services
… … …
DiagnosticPreliminary
analysis Treatment Recovery
PartnerPartnerPartnerPartnerPartners
Coordination
© A. Samarin 2014
Healthcare reference model (1)
Architecting synergy v2 100
Healthcare Platform
acquisition channels
disseminationchannels
Specialised Apps.
Specialised Apps.
Specialised Apps.
Web access
Mobile access
PatientCRM
Web acces
s
Mobile access
DoctorCRM
Access
EDI
Enrichment
RBACKnowledge Mgmt. Procedures
BPMECM
StorageECM
Coordination
BPMsBI
PartnerPartnerPartnerPartnerPartners
Healthcare reference model ()
© A. Samarin 2014
Architecting synergy v2 101
Healthcare reference model (3)Modern Healthcare System (MHS)
Hospitals Clinics
MHS
Virtual Doctor’s Offices
MHS
MHS
MHS
Insurance Social
PatientsMHS WEB & Cloud
MHS
Labs
© A. Samarin 2014
Architecting synergy v2 102
• Context – manage complexity in the digital age
• BPM reference model
– BPM and SOA
– BPM and information security
• Platform-based architecture
– ECM, Electronic Publishing
• Enterprise as a system of processes
– Process Patterns
• Combined examples
– Shared services, legacy application architecture, e-gov, healthcare, SIC
© A. Samarin 2014
Agenda
Architecting synergy v2 103
• Combining some patterns from other patterns
© A. Samarin 2014
Strategy Implementation Chain (SIC)
Architecting synergy v2 104
• Unfortunately, IT and IS are internally-focused areas of human activities
• Unfortunately, in other departments, abstract and conceptual thinking is very rare (no skills, no time)
• Fortunately, EA is more than IT and IS
• EA is capable to break this situation and bring systems thinking at the enterprise level
• EA is considering an organisation as a whole and what composition of parts (business capabilities) would best position the organisation to achieve its goals
© A. Samarin 2014
Conclusions
Architecting synergy v2 105
• QUESTIONS?
• Personal website: http://www.samarin.biz
• Blog http://improving-bpm-systems.blogspot.com
• LinkedIn: http://www.linkedin.com/in/alexandersamarin
• E-mail: [email protected]
• Twitter: @samarin
• Mobile: +41 76 573 40 61
• Book: www.samarin.biz/book
Thanks
© A. Samarin 2014
Architecting synergy v2
• “Enterprise genotype” (a full nomenclature of enterprise artefacts) – classic EA
• “Enterprise phenotype” (a set of observable characteristics such as performance)
• Formal link between them via “enterprise executable model” – EA enhanced by BPM and SOA
© A. Samarin 2014 106
Enterprise executable model
Architecting synergy v2
• Capturing artefacts and relationships is not sufficient – actionable models are necessary
– all artefacts are versionable throughout their life-cycle
– all artefacts are evolved to become digital, externalised, virtual and components of clouds
– all relationships between these artefacts are modelled explicitly
– all models are made to be executable
• Since many models are designed for people, these models should not be very formal
• Enable changes at the pace of the business
© A. Samarin 2014 107
Main architecting principles
Architecting synergy v2 108
• Reveal all hidden relationships and structure them – examples:
– static (in design phase)
– dynamic (in execution phase)
– composition (from atomic artefacts to a composite artefact)
– instantiation (from a template to instances)
– compatibility (between different versions)
• If possible, model relationships as formal, explicit, traceable, testable, secure, SLA aware and executable
© A. Samarin 2014
Relationships between artefacts
Architecting synergy v2 109
Different deployment ZONEs
© A. Samarin 2014
HQ
VIOLET ZONE - outside enterprise and service-provider-managed public cloud
GREEN ZONE - outside enterprise and enterprise-managed private cloudYELLOW
GOLD
GOLD ZONE - classic within enterprise computingORANGE ZONE - within enterprise private cloud
BLUE ZONE - outside enterprise and service-provider-managed private cloud
Architecting synergy v2 110© A. Samarin 2014
Profiling services - example
Architecting synergy v2 111© A. Samarin 2014
Decision taking - example