How EA, BPM, SOA and ECM work together

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 Architecture
BPM – Business Process Management
SOA – Service Oriented Architecture
ECM – Enterprise Content Management

• 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
Architecting synergy v2 2
About me
© A. Samarin 2014

• 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 Architecting synergy v2 3
Agenda

– 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
Digital age

• 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
Business reality

• Different estimations of the development/maintenance
life-cycle cost ratio
Solutions need to be adaptive
2 – Estimated average in the IT
industry
maintenance
development 80 %
20 %
2
40 %
60 %
1
95 %
5 %
3
3 – A real scenario (governmental
client)
1 – Estimated by an IT staff member

• 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
Complexity

• 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
Managing complexity

• 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)
EA as a systemic coordinator

– BPM and SOA
– Patterns
healthcare, SIC
Agenda

BPM is a tool for improving enterprise
business performance
The theory
BPM as a discipline
(use processes to
manage an
enterprise)
The tools
BPM as software:
BPM suite (BPMS)
The practice
Any 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

Be ready for common
(mis-)understanding

• 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
BPM definitions (1)

• Business Process Management (BPM) is a process-
based discipline involving any combination of modeling,
automation/implementation, execution, control,
measurement and optimization of business processes
BPM definitions (2)

• 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

Variant 1 – classic (one template is used
for many instances)

Variant 2 – tailoring (a template is
adjusted for each instance)

Variant 3 – reactive (no initial template
and next activity is selected based on
the current situation)

Variant 4 – proactive planning (similar
to variant 3, but a few next activities
[fragment] are executed together)

Variant 5 – scenario-based (similar to
variant 4, but a few scenarios are
considered)
Process fragments are used; those may be patterns

• 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

Process-based disciplines
© A. Samarin 2014

Process-oriented view of an enterprise
(before BPM)
© A. Samarin 2014

Process-oriented view of an enterprise
(with BPM)
© A. Samarin 2014

BPM suite components

BPM suite components (extended list)

– BPM and SOA
– Patterns
healthcare, SIC
Agenda

• Events
• Roles
• Data structures
• Documents
• Rules
• Audit trails
• KPIs
• Processes
• Services
BPM artifacts
KPIs
Processes
Services
Events
Roles
Data structures
Documents
Rules
Human
“workflow”
Audit trails

• 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”
Business processes are complex
relationships between artefacts

• Services are considered to be explicitly-defined and
operationally-independent units of functionality
– Formal description
– Operational independence
– Invisible implementation
Services
© A. Samarin 2014

• Definition
– architectural approach for constructing
software-intensive systems from a set
of universally interconnected and
interdependent services
• Advantages
– use of standard and pre-fabricated
building blocks
– high level of system flexibility
– reducing complexity
– building bigger services from smaller ones
Service-Oriented Architecture (SOA)
© A. Samarin 2014

• 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
Synergy between BPM and SOA (1) –
structuring relationships

• 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 services
in its implementation

• 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
service process

Implementation layers of artefacts

Relationship with other technologies

no applications – just coordination of
services

– BPM and SOA
– Patterns
healthcare, SIC
Agenda

• Align access rights with the work to be done
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

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

Responsible Accountable
Consulted Informed

• 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”
Activity_A
Activity_B
Carry out the work
Carry out the work
Validating the
work
Role_1
Role_2

• 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

– BPM and SOA
– Patterns
healthcare, SIC
Agenda

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

• 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
Platform-based architecture (2)
A2
A1
A3
Platform
S2
…S
1
S3
Functionality
Delivery by solutionsDelivery by applications
Scope

• 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
Overall platform governance

– BPM and SOA
– Patterns
healthcare, SIC
Agenda

Advantages of the corporate
ECM platform
Dev env 1 Dev env 2
Development
environment 3Generic web-
development platforms
D
E
V
E
L
O
P
M
E
N
T
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
Financial estimations
N apps.
$$
N≈8
Without
common
platform
With
common
platform

Solutions vs components

– BPM and SOA
– Patterns
healthcare, SIC
Agenda

• 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
Example – replacing 23 electronic
publishing applications

– BPM and SOA
– Process Patterns
healthcare, SIC
Agenda

• 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
Enterprise as a system of processes (1)

• Various coordination techniques
– decomposition cascade
– assembling cascade
– combine cascade

• 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)

• Business case: typical “claim processing” process – claim,
repair, control, invoicing, and assurance to pay
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
Process pattern:
Submission Interface (SI)

SI animated diagram
Click for
animation

• Simple event-based (which looks like a state machine)
Coordination between processes (1)

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)

• 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
CLuster Of Processes (CLOP)

Enabler group, supporting group and
customer group of clusters

Is a system of processes like a PCB?

Implicit coordination between CLOPs (1)

Functional view at a system of processes (1)

– BPM and SOA
– Patterns
healthcare, SIC
Agenda

• Many process patterns are available from my book
www.samarin.biz/book
• And from my blog
http://improving-bpm-
systems.blogspot.com/search/label/practical%20process
%20patterns
Process patterns

– BPM and SOA
healthcare, SIC
Agenda

• 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
Anisotropic enterprise and shared
services (1)
BU1 BU2 BU3 Standard
solution
Level of
computerization

Anisotropic enterprise and shared
services (2)
BU1 BU2 BU3
Level of
computerization
A CBB BAC
1) Standard
solution is based
on processes and
shared services
2) Each BU is
moving to
platform-based
architecture

– BPM and SOA
healthcare, SIC
Agenda

• 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
Legacy application architecture
modernisation

• 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)
Assemble via processes

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

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

– BPM and SOA
healthcare, SIC
Agenda

• 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?
E-government and e-governance

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 law
2. Partner-declaration, e.g. communicating a change of the partner’s address
3. Government-demand, e.g. inviting to pay taxes
4. Partner-demand, e.g. requesting a certificate (fishing license)

A partner-initiated-demand may
required several exchanges between the
partner and the government
Government
Time

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)

Process
+ + + +
E-gov coordinates partner’s interactions
with the government
Government
• control flow (black solid
lines)
• data flow (black dashed
lines)
Time
Methodologies:
• data modelling
• electronic document
(ED) exchange
+ BPM discipline
+ process modelling
Technologies:
• standard data schemas
• electronic signature
+ BPM suite

Process --
E-gov unifies the communication
between the partner and the ministries
Government
Ministry B
Time
2a 2cx
2b
lines)
lines)
Methodologies:
• data modelling
• electronic document
(ED) exchange
+ BPM discipline
+ process modelling
Technologies:
+ BPM suite
… …

Process
+ + + +
E-gov provides a social collaborative
extranet for partners
Government
Time
Methodologies:
• data modelling
• ED exchange
• BPM discipline
• process modelling
+ ED management
+ records management
+ collaboration
+ social
Technologies:
• BPM suite
+ ECM
Social collaborative extranet
lines)
lines)

Partner’s view

Partners
Existing
application
Coordination and integration backbone
e-Government
© A. Samarin 2014 91
E-gov application architecture view
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
E-gov traditional application architecture
Portal
Existing
application
Existing
application
Government
Application
Application
Application

Partners
Existing
application
e-Government
E-gov introductory application
architecture
e-gov
service
Existing
application
Existing
application
Government
e-gov
service
e-gov
service

Partners
Existing
application
e-Government
E-gov transitional application
architecture
e-gov
service
Existing
application
Government
e-gov
service
e-gov
service
Coordination backbone
Service Service
Existing
application

Partners
e-Government
E-gov target application architecture
e-gov
service
e-gov
service
e-gov
service
ServiceService Service

Partners
E-social system
E-social system application architecture
Public
service
Private
service
Professional
service
Social
service
Voluntary
service

Steps of evolution in application
architecture
Introductory
architecture
Target
architecture
E-Social system
architecture
Portal-centric
architecture
Transitional
architecture

– BPM and SOA
healthcare, SIC
Agenda

N
E
E
D
S
R
E
S
U
L
T
S
Enrich
Knowledge
Improve
Operations
acquisition
channels for
external data/
information/
knowledge
dissemination
channels of
internal data/
information/
knowledge
Methods, practices, laws, international regulations, etc.
Knowledge for Healthcare
Processes & Services
… … …
Diagnostic
Preliminary
analysis
Treatment Recovery
PartnerPartnerPartnerPartnerPartners
Coordination
Healthcare reference model (1)

Healthcare Platform
acquisition
channels
dissemination
channels
Specialised
Apps.
Specialised
Apps.
Specialised
Apps.
Web
access
Mobile
access
Patient
CRM
Web
access
Mobile
access
Doctor
CRM
Access
EDI
Enrichment
RBAC
Knowledge Mgmt. Procedures
BPMECM
Storage
ECM
Coordination
BPMsBI
PartnerPartnerPartnerPartnerPartners
Healthcare reference model ()

Healthcare reference model (3)
Modern Healthcare System (MHS)
Hospitals
Clinics
MHS
Virtual Doctor’s
Offices
MHS
MHS
MHS
Insurance
Social
Patients
MHS WEB
& Cloud
MHS
Labs

– BPM and SOA
healthcare, SIC
Agenda

• Combining some patterns from other patterns
Strategy Implementation Chain (SIC)

• 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
Conclusions

• QUESTIONS?
• Personal website: http://www.samarin.biz
• Blog http://improving-bpm-systems.blogspot.com
• LinkedIn: http://www.linkedin.com/in/alexandersamarin
• E-mail: alexandre.samarine@gmail.com
• Twitter: @samarin
• Mobile: +41 76 573 40 61
• Book: www.samarin.biz/book
Thanks
© A. Samarin 2014

• “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
Enterprise executable model

• 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
Main architecting principles

• 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
Relationships between artefacts

Different deployment ZONEs
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
computing
ORANGE ZONE - within
enterprise private cloud
BLUE ZONE -
outside enterprise
and service-
provider-managed
private cloud

Profiling services - example

Decision taking - example

How EA, BPM, SOA and ECM work together

Recommandé

Recommandé

Contenu connexe

Tendances

Tendances (20)

En vedette

En vedette (8)

Similaire à How EA, BPM, SOA and ECM work together

Similaire à How EA, BPM, SOA and ECM work together (20)

Plus de Alexander SAMARIN

Plus de Alexander SAMARIN (20)

Dernier

Dernier (20)

How EA, BPM, SOA and ECM work together