Comments on: What needs more agility – processes or decisions? http://jtonedm.com/2008/01/30/what-needs-more-agility-processes-or-decisions/ James Taylor on Everything Decision Management Thu, 09 Feb 2012 15:08:02 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.1 By: Kjell-Sverre Jerijærvi http://jtonedm.com/2008/01/30/what-needs-more-agility-processes-or-decisions/comment-page-1/#comment-5122 Kjell-Sverre Jerijærvi Thu, 31 Jan 2008 06:38:08 +0000 http://jtonedm.com/2008/01/30/what-needs-more-agility-processes-or-decisions/#comment-5122 Your refinement of my bulletpoint statement is good, we really do agree. I just see the decision service as conceptually being a part of the process, composition layer and the human task (workflow) layers, thus towards the top of my figure. I do not think Shy Cohen's taxonomy ment for activity services to be the cutpoint for decisions, rather the process services. In my opinion, the business capabilities delivered by a process stays relatively fixed, it is the flow of the process that changes most often and needs to be designed for agility. It is very important that the aspects of the system that needs agility most are the ones that need to be least expensive to change. My main argument for the cost of change being higher for the lower layers are based on data contract (resources in JJD terms) changes; the more subscribers/consumers a set of activity and entity services have, the more impact introducing a new version of the serivce contract will have. And I think most solutions will involve coded compositions at the resource service layers, while the composition and business process layers will be declaratively designed. Your refinement of my bulletpoint statement is good, we really do agree. I just see the decision service as conceptually being a part of the process, composition layer and the human task (workflow) layers, thus towards the top of my figure. I do not think Shy Cohen’s taxonomy ment for activity services to be the cutpoint for decisions, rather the process services.

In my opinion, the business capabilities delivered by a process stays relatively fixed, it is the flow of the process that changes most often and needs to be designed for agility. It is very important that the aspects of the system that needs agility most are the ones that need to be least expensive to change.

My main argument for the cost of change being higher for the lower layers are based on data contract (resources in JJD terms) changes; the more subscribers/consumers a set of activity and entity services have, the more impact introducing a new version of the serivce contract will have. And I think most solutions will involve coded compositions at the resource service layers, while the composition and business process layers will be declaratively designed.

]]>