Posted by Denis Koelewijn in the early morning: July 15th, 2010
This is the eight post in a series of blog posts discussing Lean Architecture principles. Each post discusses one principle. Applying these principles results in an architecture (process) that is better connected to the business, better able to deal with change and more cohesive. The eight principle we discuss is called “Focus on the value stream“. (more…)
Posted by Gero Vermaas in the early evening: June 21st, 2010
This is the seventh post in a series of blog posts discussing Lean Architecture principles. Each post discusses one principle. Applying these principles results in an architecture (process) that is better connected to the business, better able to deal with change and more cohesive. The seventh principle we discuss is called “Architecture Initiated by Business Goals“. (more…)
Posted by Sander van den Berg around lunchtime: June 11th, 2010
This is the sixth post in a series of blog posts discussing Lean Architecture principles. Each post discusses one principle. Applying these principles results in an architecture (process) that is better connected to the business, better able to deal with change and more cohesive. The sixth principle we discuss applies to the process of architecting and is called “Iterative Architecture Development”.
Posted by Denis Koelewijn at around evening time: June 2nd, 2010
This is the fifth post in a series of blog posts discussing Lean Architecture principles. Each post discusses one principle. Applying these principles results in an architecture (process) that is better connected to the business, better able to deal with change and more cohesive. The fifth principle is called “Just in time, just enough“. The essence of this principle is that only architectural work is done that is necessary and possible at that very moment.
(more…)
Posted by Gero Vermaas in the early morning: May 27th, 2010
This is the forth post in a series of blog posts discussing Lean Architecture principles. Each post discusses one principle. Applying these principles results in an architecture (process) that is better connected to the business, better able to deal with change and more cohesive. The forth principle is call “All hands on deck early on” (initially coined by James O. Coplien). The essence of this principle is that all stakeholders of a project are involved at the start of the project.
Posted by Sander van den Berg in the early evening: May 20th, 2010
This is the third post in a series of blog posts discussing Lean Architecture principles. Each post discusses one principle. Applying these principles results in an architecture (process) that is better connected to the business, better able to deal with change and more cohesive.
The second principle we discuss applies to an important faces of architecting and is called “Think Big, Act Small“. (more…)
Posted by Denis Koelewijn just before lunchtime: May 13th, 2010
This is the second of a series of blog posts discussing Lean Architecture principles. Each post will discuss one principle and applying these principles will result in an architecture (process) that is better connected to the business, better able to deal with change and more cohesive. Last week we discussed the first principle Always involved. In this blog entry we discuss the second principle that applies to the architect role and the architectural artifacts and is called “Travel Light“. Travel light should be taken literally, how much does the architect have to carry around running from stakeholder to stakeholder? How much material does he need to explain the business needs to the development team, what does he need to explain the vision of the product to the business, to involve operations early on, etc., etc. ?
Posted by Gero Vermaas in the early morning: April 28th, 2010
This is the second of a series of blog posts discussing Lean Architecture principles. Each post will discuss one principle and applying these principles will result in an architecture (process) that is better connected to the business, better able to deal with change and more cohesive. The first principle that we discuss applies to the architect role and is called “Always Involved“. The architect role is not limited to one project phase or even one project, a good architect takes a much broader perspective. The Lean Architect constantly communicates with all stakeholders (from business till operations), plays an active role in running projects, and ensures that lessons learned in projects are known and where applicable used in other projects.
Posted by Gerard Janssen terribly early in the morning: April 23rd, 2010
In our work with clients we often have discussions about the function of architecture and the role of architects. These discussion are largely due to fact that architecture does not visibly contribute to organizational goals and is perceived as a nuisance for projects. Many discussions originate from a lack of understanding of the role and place of architects in the organization. We have defined three goals of the architecture function in IT organizations: The Three C’s of Architecture. These are: Connection, Cohesion and Changeability. Taking these as the prime principles of architecture provides focus on what to do and how to position architecture in the organization.
(more…)
Posted by Viktor Grgic mid-afternoon: October 5th, 2009
Many have assumption that IT / software architecture is a thing of logic. So, there are many discussions about ESB and that we should not have those. The fact is that in large companies, we do not often do architecture – we do politecture. The politics drive the architecture. It’s not the way it should be, but that’s the way it is.
Let’s do one more shot…why do we need ESB? This time from politecture perspective:
Preventing a mess
It allows for a greater degree of control on delivered solutions. Before you even think about creating another quick and dirty integration solution; there is that annoying ESB compliancy making sure that integration mess created with each new technology is at least visible.
Disruptive Innovation
An alternative like REST is a “disruptive innovation” and does not fit in the line of old mindsets (CORBA, RMI, EJB, SOAP, WS-*,…). ESB fits in this line. Of course, it is a matter of time before something like REST wins from ESB’s.
Legacy
Quite often the cleanest solution is to change or replace the legacy in case of integration problems. So you still don’t need an ESB. But the real problem is who is going to let you change that legacy that has not been changed and (barely) working in production for a long time.