According to a Forrester research report from 2006, 44% of smaller companies (fewer than 1,000 employees), said that deploying Service Oriented Architecture is a high or critical priority. Among SOAs more natural constituency, big companies (40,000 or more staffers), a hefty 67% reported they would be using SOA by the end of 2006.
But as SOAs inevitability grows, a question is still asked skeptically by cost-conscious IT managers: What is the return on investment for SOA?
However, this isnt the most effective question to ask, says Forrester analyst Randy Heffner. As he wrote in his report about how businesses pay for SOA, Any attempt to assign a specific ROI to SOA should be viewed with heavy skepticism.
On its surface, that statement sounds like corporate heresy. Not assign an ROI? What element of the enterprise budget escapes the all-important ROI discussion?
But Service Oriented Architecture needs to be viewed in a larger context. Because you should not be selling SOA. You should be selling the solutions that youre building, Heffner tells Datamation.
Nuts and Bolts vs. a Complete Machine
SOA is, in essence, the approach, the platform, the process. It cant necessarily be cost justified as would, say, a new piece of machinery.
In the same way that the cost of nuts and bolts are not assigned a specific percentage of a new car's value, SOA cannot be looked at as a precisely separate element.
When you try and say, Overall, industry wide, whats the general ROI of SOA? Its like saying, whats the ROI of nuts and bolts? Heffner says.
I can tell you the ROI of a car, but the pieces and parts of it? Because SOA is the approach, not the solution, cost justifying it in the context of a quarterly budget is tough and perhaps even counter-effective.
In some sense, there are ways you look at SOA and its just best practices. Should you have good strong design for your system? Well, yes. Just like I want good strong design for my car.
Not that SOA doesnt contribute to the bottom line. There are myriad ways it can do so. As Heffner notes, SOA can enable your company to access major new markets; it can help create better customer loyalty; and it may reduce application maintenance costs. The possible benefits are vast.
But, again, many of these benefits do not have a specific dollar value because they are part of larger processes. What part of the fatter bottom line is due to SOA, and what part is due to, for instance, the new product launch that SOA made easier?
A Tale of Two CIOs
There continues to be significant misunderstanding of the value of SOA in the enterprise. Short term but critical factors like budget and deadlines can push companies away from the more involved planning needed to begin deploying SOA.
For instance, Heffner points to two very different attitudes voiced by two CIOs at a recent Forrester conference. One executive, the CIO of Humana, had grasped the larger value of SOA and come to terms with its related expenses. When asked about SOA, he said, Its just the cost of doing business. But the other CIO, who apparently had yet to explore SOA, said, Yeah, thats like the latest in the reuse thing, right, like objects and components?
His comment, Heffner says, showed a complete lack of understanding of the strategic use of SOA, about how it can add business value. Its this narrow attitude that steers some companies away from adopting Service Oriented Architecture.
If you dont understand some of the value, and think of it as a way to achieve reuse and drive down a few categories of IT costs, then you may think its better just to do something else, he says.
People can be short-sighted and shoot themselves in the foot all the time.