Comments on Software Architecture: Service Design Principles And Governance

Interesting response and thank you for the thoroug...

2008-03-25T22:28:00.000-04:00

Interesting response and thank you for the thorough time it obviously took. I'll take the bait on the tactical v. strategic development with this angle. In the transmission example, the operator "identified" you as a prospect, "sold" you on the transaction, and "executed successfully."

How often do we live that model ourselves? Todays post by Jeff Atwood demonstrates, cynicallly, the model.

http://www.codinghorror.com/blog/archives/001082.html

My comment on a software developer being a "tactical" party to a transaction was probably (definitely) a poor choice of words. Most software engineers / developers that I have ever met have a strong hunger for business knowledge probably because they, more than most, understand the lack of value in building a feature that doesn't make the market release. I think unfortunately though large organization infrastructure and overhead combine to limit curiousity beyond the specific feature. I don't often see a project where the entire team is lead to a shared vision of something great in its entirety, not just the sum of its features.

I agree with what I presume to be your point that we should try harder.

Thanks for the comments, Bill. This is definitely ...

2008-03-21T22:48:00.000-04:00

Thanks for the comments, Bill. This is definitely worth some further discussion. Here's the way I look at it.

Let's think about it from two perspectives. First, from the stand point of innovation, it's important to take into account "diffusion of innovation" research that helps us to understand "how, why, and at what rate new ideas and technology spread through cultures" (Wikipedia). Research indicates that adoption of new ideas or opportunities typically follow a common life cycle from awareness through interest, evaluation, trial, and finally into adoption. If we look at processes that encourage successful innovation, it's important to apply energy that deliberately drives through these stages of the life cycle. From that standpoint, we see the importance of maximizing awareness.

Shifting the perspective to that of change management, it's been my consistent experience that meaningful change comes only when there is a healthy blend of "top-down" and "bottom-up" or "grass roots" support. Change management theory teaches us the importance of creating within the change system a level of energy and enthusiasm that can counter the often overwhelming forces that operate against change. The grass roots enthusiasm is one means of creating that sort of energy, especially when the support comes from a broad and diverse population. When combined with the "top-down" support, this type of enthusiasm creates a sort of "fly wheel" effect and generates momentum that can overcome the inertia of immobility.

So, "diffusion of innovation" encourages us to maximize awareness, and "change management" suggests the importance of broad and diverse grass roots enthusiasm. Taken together, it's clear that we need to approach change differently - especially when we're talking about cultural change. It's essential that we engender the broadest possible conversation. Of course, that conversation must take place among various disciplines and at various levels. Encouraging the development community to embrace an increased understanding of good design principles is just one small part of the puzzle.

There's another angle I'd like to touch on briefly. You asked, "does communicating the 'future' to a tactical audience yield optimal success?" If I understand correctly, we're labeling the development community as tactical operators. Given modern business demands to deliver ever increasing levels of business agility, I'd like to hold this group of "thought workers" to a higher standard and expect us all to contribute by maximizing our strategic contribution. After all, what we do now is precisely what creates the future.

Thoughts?

I get the value of road showing SOA principles and...

2008-03-21T20:52:00.000-04:00

I get the value of road showing SOA principles and practices to a mass developer audience, but is that really the target to hit? Seems to me the value of SOA isn't as much the "now" as the "future." Does communicating the "future" to a tactical audience yield optimal success?