Habitual thinking - Patterns for IT disappointment and failure

Habitual thinking Patterns for IT disappointment and failureHenrik Wivel & Jeppe Cramon

Corporate growth slowed dueto lack of funding Berlingske Finans6 out of 10 public projectsgoing over time and budget Version2

How well is your company doing?• Are your IT projects delivered on time, on budget and with the right functionality?• Are your IT systems running smoothly and stable?• Does your system landscape contain more applications performing the same or similar tasks?• Do you Outsource / Offshore the right tasks (or are you doing the right tasks in-house)?

How well is your company doing?• Are your IT projects aligned with business needs?• Is the business actively involved in IT projects and investments?• Do you balance the entire organizations needs with the individual business needs in terms of architecture and infrastructure?

Does this seem familiar?

Each new project starts from scratch

PRODUCT VIEWWe need a combined Implement Siebel CRM in thecustomer view Call centerWe need to better Buy and install HP Qualitymanage our CenterrequirementsWe need a Service Build a solution using WebOrienteret Architecture services in Oracle Service Bus / SeeBeyond / ...

Git REST BlackBerry Oracle Service busDocumentum Ruby on Rails Workflow system WebLogic Cloud SharePoint JAVA MS SQL Server F# Oracle DB Layered Architecture SOA SubVersion Dart BizTalk WebSphere VB.NET C# Scala iOS .NET NoSQL Android Web Services Team GroovyPolicy Manager Foundation BPMN Portal Server Hg Flash XMLJavaScript Requirement Management tools Spring

Typical management thinking• We choose the tools and architecture that Gartner recommends• More resources on a project = The sooner we will be finished• 100 foreign developers are better than 10 local, even if the total price is the same

The Silver Bullet

All this leads to • High complexity and a fragmented system landscape • Strong need for product specialists who can not always participate across projects • Danger of hiring habitual thinkers rather than technical domain experts This creates the need for many resourceson projects and therefore result in high costs

Same procedure as last year?Same procedure as every year!!!

Because!!!• “We haven’t got time to look at new technologies”• “It requires more money and time”• “We have tried it before and failed”• “We realize we have challenges”• ”We _______________________________” (Insert an excuse)

Open for new ideas? Poul, you idiot, whats that!?You should only bring things we can eat!

If it takes 1 man 10 days to dig a telephone cable , how many men do I need if I want it done in 2 days? 5 men in Denmark 10 men in Indien. Half time and even half priceHow about using: Wireless network?

Do you still beat up your wife?

This is how we often ask• Where can I get 200 developers for my project?• Where can I get them cheapest?• How do I scale my technical platform to 200 developers?• How do I manage large teams over a long project cycle?

This is how we should ask• Why do I need 200 developers?• How would I do if I "only" had: – 30 developers – 3 months and not 3 years for the project• Do I need distributed teams?

What?How?Why?

Is the solution Offshoring? • 10 techinical domain experts in Denmark at $150 an hour = $1500 an hour • 100 developer in China/India at $30 an hour = $3000 an hourIt’s a bit like bying app on the Apple AppStore They only cost $1

Project Economy Productivity Productivity Administrative overhead Administrative overhead10 technical domain experts 100 developers

InspirationDesperation

SolutionsPattern for IT disappointment and failures

Here are the solutions! SCRUM XP LEAN Agile OutsourcingWhat was it exactly we were trying to solve? Getting closer to the business

Status Quo

We need a strong foundation for development 11% 7% Highly aligned ”Alignment Trap” ”IT enabled Growth” +13 +35 Source: Bain Analysis -14 -6Alignment 74% 8% ”Maintenance Zone” ”Well-Oiled IT” +0 +11 Less aligned -2 -15 Less effective Effciency Highly effective % of the 504 Combined yearly growth- respondents % difference compared to the overall averages IT spending rate over a 3 year period

A strong foundation is!• Simple architecture• Assignments and data owned by one system• Automation• Tests

NOT a Simple architecture Client Client Client Client Proces Service Proces Service Remote Facade Application Service Activity Activity Service Service Domain Domain Object Object Data Access Layer Data Data Data Data Service Service Service Service Data Storage Data Data Data Storage Storage Storage

This does’t help either

A big unified model is every architects pibe dream But as they say

ONE MODEL TO RULE THEM ALL ONE MODEL TO FIND THEM ONE MODEL TO BRING THEM ALL AND IN THE DARKNESS BIND THEM

Still too big a model Online Ordering System Product Pricing Description Unit Price Promotional Price Promotion End Date Stock Keeping Unit (SKU) Quantity On Hand (QOH) Location Code InventoryCustomer Price Quantity Ordered Sales

There’s always more than onemodel at play in any big project But when code based on multiple models is combined

… then the code becomes filled with errors, unreliable and difficult to understand Communication between team members becomes confusing. It is often unclear in what context a model should NOT be used!

Context is lacking

Smaller models and ”service reuse” Enterprise Pricing Service Product SKU Unit Price Promotional Price … Web Shop Product SKU Description Pricing Price Quantity OrderedCustomers … Inventory Service (SAP) Product SKU Description QOH Location Code … Inventory Sales

Now even better – with an ESB Enterprise Watch out! Pricing Service Its so easy to see a Product product as the SKU Unit Price solution to all your Promotional Price … problems! Web Shop Product SKU Description Pricing Price Quantity OrderedCustomers … Inventory Service (SAP) Product SKU Description QOH Location Code Enterprise … Inventory Service Bus Sales Before we had 1 problem. With the ESB we now have 2 problemes

Business focus is still lacking Processes and state changes are important components

A much better recipy Enterprise Pricing Service Product SKU New SKU Unit Price Promotional Price Event … Web Shop Product New SKU Price SKU Description New SKU Event Pricing Price Price Quantity Ordered EventCustomers … Inventory Service (SAP) Product New SKU SKU Description Event QOH Location Code … Inventory New SKU Message Bus Event Sales

What is a strong foundation?• Simple architecture• Assignments and data owned by one system• Automation• Tests

In brief…• Clean up the system landscape ...• Remove redundant systems• Remove systems that no longer have a reasonable cost-benefit• Modernize systems which can still be make a difference• Build new systems that can differentiate you from the rest• ... And do it based on Neil Nickolaisens Purpose Alignment Model

Neil Nickolaisen’s Purpose Alignment Model Invest High Partnership and Differentiate MarketDifferentiation Grade Who cares? Keep on a par with Low competitors Low High Criticality

What is a strong foundation?• Simple architecture• Assignments and data owned by one system• Automation• Tests

Automation• Continuous Integration – The code is automatically built and necessary tests are conducted for verification• Setting up environments – Server setup, firewalls, deployment• Integration testing• there is much more to get here ...

The solution in ETL

Electronic LandregistrationBackground Information on Electronic Landregistration for those who have not heard about it ...

ETL – Suggested Architecture Internal WebLogic Portal External Portal Portal Proces Service Proces Service IntegrationsOracle Service Bus Service Activity Activity Service Service Integrations Service Data Data Data Service Service Service Database

Suggested ETL Architecture• Advantages – Logically a reasonable decoupiling (Single Responsibility Principle) – Oracle makes good money on it• Disadvantages – Logical layers are turned into physical layer – High complexity – Difficult to find resources that can work with the OSB – Stability – Performance (both runtime and for developers) – Deployment

ETL – Simplified Architecture Internal Java applications External Portal PortalWebLogic Server Portal Facade Integrations Service Business Service Business Service Integrations Rich domain object Rich domain object Service Data Access Layer Database

Simplified ETL Architecture• Advantages – Physical and logical architecture are closer to each other – Low complexity – Stability – Easier to find resources that can code Java – Performance (both runtime and for developers) – Deployment• Disadvantages – The CV will not be boosted with Enterprise Service Bus – Oracle do not earn nearly as well ...

ETL - Automation Context• Extremely complex domain area• The rules are determined by Law (not logic)• Covering registrations there are several hundred years old• Complex logic required to automate law• Very short deadline for the third attempt to build ETL

Electronic Landregistration• Technical choices – Programming language: Java – Database: Oracle• First challenge – How do we integrate Java and Oracle database?

How it’s usually done SQLJava code

Means we go from this…

package dk.tigerteam.mdsd.demo.model.internal;@Entity@Table(name = "Customer") To this…public class Customer extends AbstractEntity { package dk.tigerteam.mdsd.demo.mode.internal; private static final long serialVersionUID = 2098912667L; @Entity @Basic @Table(name = "Booking") @Column(name = "name", nullable = false) public class Booking extends AbstractEntity { private String name; private static final long serialVersionUID = 170080605L; @OneToOne(cascade = { @Basic CascadeType.MERGE, CascadeType.PERSIST, CascadeType.REFRESH}, @Column(name = "comment", nullable = false) fetch = FetchType.LAZY) private String comment; @JoinColumn(name = "addressId") @NotNull @Basic private dk.tigerteam.mdsd.demo.model.internal.Address address; @Temporal(TemporalType.TIMESTAMP) @Column(name = "time", nullable = false) @OneToMany(cascade = { private java.util.Date time; CascadeType.MERGE, CascadeType.PERSIST, CascadeType.REFRESH}, targetEntity = Booking.class, mappedBy = "customer", @Basic fetch = FetchType.LAZY) @Column(name = "timeslot", nullable = false) private Set<Booking> bookingCollection = private int timeslot; new java.util.HashSet<Booking>(); @ManyToOne(cascade = { public String getName() { CascadeType.MERGE, CascadeType.PERSIST, CascadeType.REFRESH}, return name; fetch = FetchType.LAZY) } @JoinColumn(nullable = false, name = "customerId") private Customer customer; public void setName(String name) { this.name = name; public String getComment() { } return comment; … } @Entity … @Table(name = "Address") … public void setComment(String parameter) { public class Address extends AbstractEntity { … this.comment = parameter; private static final long serialVersionUID = 1697028161L; … } … @Basic … public java.util.Date getTime() { @Column(name = "street", nullable = false) … return time; private String street; … } … … @Basic … @Column(name = "zipCode", nullable = false)} … private String zipCode; … … @Basic … @Column(name = "city", nullable = false) … private String city; } public String getStreet() { return street; } public void setStreet(String parameter) { this.street = parameter; } … … … }

The line between modeling ogmuddling in hand written code is very thin

Can’t see the shoe for the toes? package dk.tigerteam.mddexample.model.customer; @javax.persistence.Entity public class Customer extends dk.tigerteam.mddexample.model.user.User { When all you wanted to private static final long serialVersionUID = 1328488396L; @javax.persistence.Lob @javax.persistence.Basic @javax.persistence.Column(name = "comment") private String comment; convey was this @javax.persistence.Embedded @javax.persistence.AttributeOverrides({@javax.persistence.AttributeOverride(name = "firstName",column = @javax.persistence.Column(name = "name_firstName") ) , @javax.persistence.AttributeOverride(name = "lastName",column = @javax.persistence.Column(name = "name_lastName") ) }) private dk.tigerteam.mddexample.model.customer.Name name; @javax.persistence.Embedded @javax.persistence.AttributeOverrides({@javax.persistence.AttributeOverride(name = "street", column = @javax.persistence.Column(name = "address_street") ) , @javax.persistence.AttributeOverride(name = "state",column = @javax.persistence.Column(name = "address_state") ) , @javax.persistence.AttributeOverride(name = "zipCode",column = @javax.persistence.Column(name = "address_zipCode") ) , @javax.persistence.AttributeOverride(name = "city",column = @javax.persistence.Column(name = "address_city") ) , @javax.persistence.AttributeOverride(name = "country",column = @javax.persistence.Column(name = "address_country") ) }) private dk.tigerteam.mddexample.model.customer.Address address; @javax.persistence.OneToMany(cascade = { javax.persistence.CascadeType.MERGE, javax.persistence.CascadeType.PERSIST, javax.persistence.CascadeType.REFRESH} , targetEntity = dk.tigerteam.mddexample.model.customer.Pet.class, mappedBy = "customer", fetch = javax.persistence.FetchType.LAZY) private java.util.Set<dk.tigerteam.mddexample.model.customer.Pet> petCollection = new java.util.HashSet<dk.tigerteam.mddexample.model.customer.Pet>(); @javax.persistence.OneToMany(cascade = { javax.persistence.CascadeType.MERGE, javax.persistence.CascadeType.PERSIST, javax.persistence.CascadeType.REFRESH} , fetch = javax.persistence.FetchType.LAZY) @javax.persistence.JoinTable(name = "Customer_invoice", joinColumns = @javax.persistence.JoinColumn(name = "CustomerId") , inverseJoinColumns = @javax.persistence.JoinColumn(name = "invoiceId") ) private java.util.Set<dk.tigerteam.mddexample.model.invoice.Invoice> invoiceCollection = new java.util.HashSet<dk.tigerteam.mddexample.model.invoice.Invoice>(); @javax.persistence.OneToMany(cascade = { javax.persistence.CascadeType.MERGE, javax.persistence.CascadeType.PERSIST, javax.persistence.CascadeType.REFRESH} , fetch = javax.persistence.FetchType.LAZY) @javax.persistence.JoinTable(name = "Customer_appointment", joinColumns = @javax.persistence.JoinColumn(name = "CustomerId") , inverseJoinColumns = @javax.persistence.JoinColumn(name = "appointmentId") ) private java.util.Set<dk.tigerteam.mddexample.model.customer.Appointment> appointmentCollection = new java.util.HashSet<dk.tigerteam.mddexample.model.customer.Appointment>(); public String getComment() { return comment; } public void setComment(String parameter) { this.comment = parameter; } public dk.tigerteam.mddexample.model.customer.Name getName() { return name; } public void setName(dk.tigerteam.mddexample.model.customer.Name parameter) { this.name = parameter; }

Hand held consistency…@Entity @Entitypublic class Customer { public class Pet { @OneToMany( @ManyToOne targetEntity = Pet.class, private Customer customer; mappedBy = "customer” ) public void setCustomer(Customer parameter) { new ManyToOneWrapper<Customer, Pet>(this) { private Set<Pet> petCollection = new HashSet<Pet>(); @Override protected void addManySideObjectToOneSideCollection(Customer oneSide, Pet manySide) {public Set<Pet> getPetCollection() { ((WrappedSet<Pet>) oneSide.getPetCollection()).getWrappedCollection().add(manySide); } return new OneToManySetWrapper<Customer, Pet>(this, petCollection) { @Override @Override protected void removeManySideObjectFromOneSideCollection(Customer oneSide, Pet manySide) { protected Customer getOneSideObjectInManySideObject(Pet manySideObject) { ((WrappedSet<Pet>) oneSide.getPetCollection()).getWrappedCollection().remove(manySide); return manySideObject.getCustomer(); } } @Override @Override protected Customer getOneSideObjectInManySideObject(Pet manySide) { protected void setOneSideObjectInManySideObject(Pet manySideObject, return manySide.customer; Customer oneSideObject) { } manySideObject.setCustomer(oneSideObject); } @Override }; protected void setOneSideObjectInManySideObject(Pet manySide,Customer oneSide) { } manySide.customer = oneSide;} } }.updateOneSideObject(parameter); } }

AutomationFrom sweatshops to automation 

At ETL we introduced this process UML class diagrams SQLJava codeHibernate Tests

Another possibility

Sounds hard, but it’s quite easy  Rule Language Meta Model  + Rule Grammar (using Xtext) Text Editor +Data Language Meta Model  Editor & IDE

Point of No Return, traditionallyCost ofRework Time Freeze V 1.0

Point of No Return, Model DrivenCost ofRework Time Freeze V 1.0

The end of writing tedious code by hand Model Generator Interesting code Frameworks (Written by hand) (Hibernate/JP Schematic code A, Entity Written by hand Framework) Libraries (f.eks. Java/.NET)

What do we get out of it?• Higher level of abstraction• Technical decisions can be postponed• "Point of No Return" can be postponed• Documentation is always update to date• Higher Quality and Uniformity• Refactoring is both faster and cheaper• Short development cycle

The real short versionWe can achieve the same with fewer resources We can achieve the same in less timeWe can achieve more with the the same resources and at the same time

Electronic Land registration Questions?http://tigerteam.dk @TigerTeamDK on Twitter

Habitual thinking - Patterns for IT disappointment and failure

by Jeppe Cramon on Jan 26, 2012

Accessibility

Categories

Tags

Upload Details

Usage Rights

1 Embed 1

Statistics

Habitual thinking - Patterns for IT disappointment and failure — Presentation Transcript