The SOA Maturity Model
Introduction
The SOA Maturity Model (SOAMM) developed by Progress Software Corporation is one of the most well known SOA maturity models. It is based on the CMMI structure and therefore uses five levels of maturity. SOAMM’s two main goals are to provide a basis upon which organizations can build a roadmap to a successful SOA adoption and to articulate the business benefits enabled through the SOA adoption at each level of maturity [PRO07]. The model is derived from three sources. CMMI acting as a basis for the maturity model, papers of successful SOA adoptions, and experience with Progress’ own customers in the deployment of SOA projects [PRO07].
Structure
According to CMMI, the model is divided into five levels which correspond to the CMMI levels one to five. As shown in [1], level three is further divided into two subparts called Business Services and Collaborative Services. Such a division is not defined by CMMI and should indicate two distinct ways of adoption. On the right hand side of [1] the prime business benefit for each level is shown. Besides the prime business benefit, SOAMM defines six other categories which have defined characteristics for each level. The categories are:
- Prime Business Benefit
- Scope
- Critical Technology Success Factors
- Critical People & Organizational Success Factors
- Selected Relevant Standards
- Key Goals
- Key PracticesAlthough these characteristics allow to understand the model at a glance, they are coarse grained and are hence providing only a limited basis for a roadmap.In the following maturity levels of a Service Oriented Architecture according to [PRO07] are explained:
- Level 1 – Initial ServicesProjects at level one are typically many small projects across the organization. They serve the purpose of technical skill building in a more or less laboratory environment.
- Level 2 – Architected ServicesAt level two the architecture department has managed to implement SOA standards such as UDDI and WSDL which, according to [PRO07], ultimately results in cost reductions due to the use of standard infrastructure and components. From a neutral point of view it has to be challenged whether a true cost reduction occurs, taking into account the limited productive use of the SOA at this stage and the high initial costs.
- Level 3a - Business Services and Level 3b - Collaborative ServicesAfter having applied standards at level two, level three focuses on the linkage between business processes and digital SOA processes. It can be attained either by improving the internal business process and SOA alignment (3a) or by improving the alignment of SOA and collaborative processes with external partners (3b). Putting both ways (3a and 3b) into practice is of course also a way to attain level three.
- Level 4 – Measured Business ServicesLevel four unambiguously reveals the derivation from CMMI because it is all about implementing measures in order to enhance manageability and controllability from reactive to real-time mode.
- Level 5 – Optimized Business ServicesFinally, at level five a SOA should be able to implement self-correcting business processes based on the metrics developed at level four. An example of such a self-correcting business process could be a dynamic pricing service determining the price of a product and substitutional products based on their individual availability. Thereby, the availability could be determined by either invoking the own stock service or by invoking a supplier’s service.
Appraisal
In general SOAMM shows a good approach of using a maturity model to support the SOA adoption process, although it has a primarily technical focus and is therefore not covering some aspect areas (e.g. governance). Because it is a generic model it sometimes lacks preciseness in order to be of use. A strong connection to proprietary software solutions developed by Progress Software Corporation becomes obvious. Furthermore, the promised benefits resulting with the attainment of a particular level should be challenged due to a potential conflict of interests of the model developer.
[MAS07] criticizes that the SOAMM proposes a bottom-up strategy which is in his opinion in conflict to the SOA paradigm which should focus on functional services in the first place.
Letzte Änderung: 07.05.2009, 21:23 | 688 Worte