Sadly enough, Enterprise Architecture has always been considered as a side IT Governance component and few big names were proposing services around products. Why? Simply because the IBM and HP like did not have any product offering…IBM always claimed that they were into Enterprise Architecture but they always tried to sell their Rational line of products without really understanding what is EA all about…. Probably when acquiring all Rational products, there would be a chance to do EA, but at what effort, what level of integration and also at what cost? Modelling processes with Websphere Business Modeler is still a techie activity and there were no indication that Business Analyst would be able to use such a tool. Very often business people were rather considering using Mega or Aris from IDS Sheer. HP also on its side was never per formant on IT Governance and acquired Peregrine and Mercury, for Service Management, Project and Portfolio Management. Enterprise Architecture has never been on their agenda, despite the fact they sponsor the Open Group. This may change…
In a recent post I was wondering why these companies did not take into consideration companies such as Telelogic, Casewise, IDS, Mega, Troux and others. My view was that in the next 12 months the market landscape would change and most EA companies would be acquired.
This has just been confirmed by IBM who acquired today Telelogic. Telelogic propose two components: DOORS and the ex-Popkin System Architect. Requirement is at the center of Enterprise Architecture and the Telerate offer was really appealing.
Now with IBM a few questions have to be raised:
- What’s going to happen with Requisite Pro and DOORS? These two products have similarities.
- What about Websphere Business Modeler and the System Architect process modelling tool? Same issue.
- How will Telerate integrate with the Tivoli CCMDB (Enterprise Architecture Artifacts and CIs). An Enterprise Architecture Repository should be maybe an instance of a CMDB.
- How will be integrated WSRR with the SOA modelling of Telerate?
- How will RUP for SOA /SOMA) fit the various EA framework supported by Telelogic?
Will IBM start to really propose professional services around Enterprise Architecture and support TOGAF as an open Framework among others?
Until now it has not been the strength of these well known companies to provide a consistent roadmap in terms of integration. As another example HP is doing a poor job in terms of integrating Mercury and Peregrine (the roadmap is absolutely unclear in terms of UCMDB.. and there are no indication how redundant service management functions between Mercury and Peregrine will be managed). Different contacts, different interpretation of the account managers…
Will IBM be able to better integrate their suite of modelling and architecting products? Will they be able to provide roadmaps, strategy and clear directions?
With this announcement there is a high chance that competitors such as CA, HP, Microsoft and others will soon start to consider Enterprise Architecture as a new source of income and a way to sell new products. Watch the space for acquisition! That story will be similar to the one related to the auto-discovery tools market and CMDB.
If most of the big names will soon have an EA offer in terms of products and service, this will launch a new wave of EA projects and will help standardization organization to better promote EA initiatives!
3 comments:
I think, we are in front of convergence of many previously separated technologies and tools. To deliver a good enterprise solutions we have to consider together BPM, SOA, BI, BR, EDA, EA, IT governance, etc. Many existing barriers have to be broken.
The best example is the modeling. At present, a BA models in a "modeling" tool (e.g. ARIS), the result is converted into BPEL editor for an IT person, the BPEL process is enriched and there is no way back. Obviously, it should be a common tool for the business, the BA and the IT.
Another "merging" on the horizon is managing all artefacts (process, services, roles, interfaces, rules, events, etc.) together, but existing "registry and repository" tools often consider only services.
I think, that only EA can handle properly all this complexity. EA is necessary, but not yet sufficient.
Thanks,
AS
Today, I had a presentation by the local IBM guys on their EA offering. After the many debates about the seperating line between a CMDB and an EA repoistory, I strongly believe that EA needs to converge into the CMDB. The CI's represent a high percentage of EA articfacts, and CMDB's are defeinitely capable to host EA requirements.
Malek,
may I suggest you read the whitepaper I wrote for the Open Group matching TOGAF and ITIL. It is clear these two worlds may merge..one day... Also I have written a couple of posts on the similarities..
Post a Comment