Guest
Welcome login
TIBCOmmunity > Blogs > BPM Blog > 2008 > September > 08
Home   Members Communities

BPM Blog

BPM Blog

Dabbler
6

The eternal argument - BPM vs SOA

Posted by Mala Ramakrishnan Sep 8, 2008 7:42:31 PM

I was covering the BPM space for a while before I moved on to manage the SOA stack here at TIBCO. The repeat question I get asked from both sides of the fence is: what is the difference between BPM and SOA? It’s an interesting question with a myriad responses and I choose to start my series of blog posts here on this community, on BPM, on this particular topic.

 

BPM and SOA are two sides of the same coin, as one of my colleagues pointed out to me, in my early days at TIBCO. Another more concrete response – if 80% of your process is people centric and 20% systems centric, you are looking at BPM vs the other way for SOA. I’ve heard this one too – it’s all about the user, a more business centric user trying to define a process at the business layer needs BPM vs a technology-deep user defining a process at the systemsy layer, who needs SOA. I like this last one best: BPM is about extracting high level turnkey business processes and managing them as though they were assets in your organization, while SOA is about rewiring the IT plumbing in your infrastructure for efficiency and reuse; You need those business process assets to leverage your IT plumbing and you want your IT plumbing to always align with business process requirements.

 

While all these responses hold truth in them, the more I’ve worked in both spaces and closely followed them, I realize that the lines are blurry which is why people ask this repeat question. And when you think about it, a user wants to talk about finding a solution to the problem he has on hand, rather than be bombarded with three letter acronyms such as BPM and SOA. Vendors such as TIBCO are in a unique position where we have eons of experience in both areas that can leverage across product offerings so we cater to exactly this: provide the solution rather than a piece of technology that should be very carefully mapped to the problem.


Another point that is imperative: for the most successful SOA implementations, BPM and awareness of business processes is critical. Only then can you quantify and measure metrics against the business as well as design for the business, rather than just tweak and churn against technology for efficiency. If you read Paul Brown’s book on: Succeeding with SOA (highly recommend), he touches on this all through, where he talks about realizing business value through architectural design.

 

And the counter, at every point that a business process leverages the underlying infrastructure, a good design will allow it to reach out to an SOA implementation so there is always a loose coupling between BPM and SOA; rather than to hard coded systems interfaces to your business process. This loose coupling between BPM and SOA will allow one layer to change independent of the other. When you re-provision your IT infrastructure, you don't want to bring down your business processes, do you?

 

It’s important for BPM and SOA offerings to work well together – the BPM offering should be able to call out to the SOA services and orchestrations at design time with a few clicks of the mouse and work seamlessly at run time. And an SOA process should be able to call out to BPM centric processes without extensive work or rewiring. The best designs are from experience in both areas. My take, stick to your expertise be it SOA or BPM but learn extensively on the other area and attend conferences in both areas so you know what's happeninig on the other side of the fence before you sit down to design your architecture.

 

The takeaway is that BPM and SOA are interdependent and for good reasons, the best implementations leverage the strengths of both while keeping them decoupled.

 

In my next blog post, let’s look at what end to end business process management is all about before we dive off into the world of process modeling. Business process modeling is my favorite area where I’m hoping to explore with this audience, efficient process design using Business Studio. You can take a quick peak at Business Studio by visiting our developer center: Business Studio Developer Center

Comments

Click to view Anand Lonkar's profile
Dabbler
Posted by Anand Lonkar

I agree here on the part that the BPM is the face what Business user will see and SOA is the plumbing behind it. The main issue here is which comes first? Do you design your services according to the process or have layers of services built on the data and have the Business processes pick and choose from the available services?

Whats your take on that?

Click to view Mala Ramakrishnan's profile
Dabbler
Posted by Mala Ramakrishnan in response to: Anand Lonkar

We have seen successful implementations come from both ends of the spectrum - where an existing BPM user incorporates SOA after a few years of operation and the other way. In a lot of cases, people seem to learn the hard way of realising the need for one after seeing the benefits of the other. However, ideally the organization should be considering both SOA and BPM in parallel and look at the big picture before designing their services and processes, this can help avoid additional costs of rewiring at a later point in time.

Click to view Anand Lonkar's profile
Dabbler
Posted by Anand Lonkar in response to: Mala Ramakrishnan

You are correct in pointing out that there needs to ba a big picture in designing the services. While both these ways have their pros and cons, there is a fundamental difference in both these ways.

 

You can have atomic services built on the data and run into a risk of getting too many levels of services before a business process can pick up from there.

 

Other way round, you build thick services and run a disk of putting too much logic into the service and making in non reusable, rendering SOA useless.

Click to view Sid Sanyal's profile
Dabbler
Posted by Sid Sanyal

All my comments here are based on my experience as a TIBCO customer architecting and implementing BPM solutions.

 

It was only after the release of ActiveMatrix that I acknowledged TIBCO as a SOA vendor. Prior to that TIBCO was primarily an EAI vendor, no matter how hard people to try to convey the message of BusinessWorks as an ESB.

 

It is only now that BW has been rechristened as ActiveMatrix BW and engineered to work as a Service Engine within ActiveMatrix framework, can I say that TIBCO is also a SOA vendor.

 

Regarding BPM, the process execution side of things has been taken care of.

However, the Process Modelling, BAM, Round-trip visbility/engineering/control, Case Management and Process Collaboration capabilities are seriously out of the top league in terms of simplicity and functionality.

It would be foolish to believe that Business Studio can be used by business users for process modelling. It will always be a technical tool compared to other options such as Lombardi and ARIS.

 

The entire product set is highly complex and cobbles products that are sold independently.

For example, the iProcess Insight product is based on BusinessFactor, which is an entirely different product set sold independently.

I have a long list of shortcomings in the TIBCO BPM suite that I would like to keep to myself while we wait and see TIBCO's evolution from an infrastructure vendor to a business vendor (when they claim to be leaders in the BPM space).

 

I believe that TIBCO is the #1 vendor when it comes to EAI, SOA (partially) and CEP. However in the BPM world, TIBCO needs to do a lot more to impress.

 

Click to view mark.bloomfield@sciamus.co.uk's profile
Dabbler
Posted by mark.bloomfield@sciamus.co.uk in response to: Sid Sanyal

I don't believe you should compare the ARIS toolset with Business Studio. In my mind the two products serve different purposes and goals. For example on a small BPM project ARIS would be overkill but in large corporate change management projects you would use ARIS to handle the high level detatil but at the end of the day you still would still need to use a tool like Business Studio to provide the execution model. This is probably why TIBCO included an ARIS import tool as part of the product.

 

Also I believe it is a good idea that the products are sold seperately. For example you mention the BAM product, well it may be that a customer doesn't require BAM as part of the project or Analytics as they already have analytics in the orgranization. Why pay for product components you wouldn't use? Also it makes the architecture more flexible to swap out components. For example you can use the iProcess BAM feed (IAPJMS) to send messages to CEP engines or onto your ESB and then deal with those BAM events as your project requires them. For example use BW to feed into your existing MIS infrastructure.

 

In my mind iProcess has been evolving with the correct strategy since the days of Staffware and is already a serious competitor with the other leading vendors in the BPM market.

Click to view Chris Lawrence's profile
Dabbler
Posted by Chris Lawrence

I go along with a lot of Mala's original post.

 

BPM & SOA are entirely compatible, or at least they should be. If the S in SOA is an IT service, then services are pieces of componentised functionality which a business process needs in order to achieve its objective.

 

A conceptual problem can arise however if the S refers to 'business service'. 'Business process' and 'business service' can then compete for the privilege of describing the business at a logical level.

 

Personally I find 'business service' a confusing concept. It either seems to boil down to 'business process' anyway, or it is something less definitive but which organisational areas like to think of themselves as providing. 'Business process' seems to me to be a far more robust concept architecturally. Hence my opening remark.

 

I expand on this relationship in a paper entitled 'Business Process Architecture and Business Transformation' published in the WfMC's '2008 BPM & Workflow Handbook' & also available from www.makeworkmakesense.com.