The relationship between the three-domain framework and the OASIS

Architecture

A Service Oriented Architecture (SOA) is an architectural paradigm that has exercised great impact on the implementation of information systems and has gained the attention of the business community. It adopts a service-based terminology (e.g. service is described as capability that can be used to solve another’s problem and a SOA-based system as the mechanism by which needs and capabilities are brought together), but the focus is on the technological domain and on computing services (i.e. web services) that provide business functionality.

The recent OASIS SOA Reference Architecture Foundations (2012) introduced several concepts that seek to bridge the area between IT and business. For instance, the concept of Service Ecosystem is used to describe an environment in which people –organized in ‘social structures’– conduct business operations with the use of SOA-based systems. Service implementations in SOA-based systems utilize computing capabilities to provide business solutions and bring real world effects.

We can find several similarities and analogies between the OASIS SOA Reference Architecture Foundations (RAF) and the proposed three-domain framework. First of all, the OASIS SOA-RAF has the goal to merge the technological and business concerns in the analysis and implementation of SOA-based systems, which coincides with the research objective of the three-domain framework to provide an integrated approach for the study of service systems that incorporates the technological, the business and the user’s concerns.

To achieve this goal the OASIS SOA-RAF introduced the concept of SOA Ecosystem that integrates the technology-centered SOA-based systems and the business-centered Social Structures. The proposed three-domain framework begins with a similar motivation, but it has a wider scope. As we mentioned in section 3.1, the link between technologies and business operations is already well-established in the information systems literature and, therefore, our objective would be to enlarge the focus in order to include in the study of service systems the aspects of service usage in the domain of the end user.

Another similarity is that SOA-based systems deliver services that bring real world effects; these services are used by Social Structures in order to meet their needs or find solutions to their problems. While there is some conceptual analogy between real world effects in SOA and service value in the

three-domain framework, as well as between social actors in Service Ecosystems and the digital user as the individual that uses digital services in the realm of their daily life practices, these concepts have certain differences. OASIS SOA-RAF emphasizes on Social Structures (i.e. “peer groups, communities of practice, associations, enterprises, corporations, government agencies, or entire nations”), rather than on individuals. People as natural entities are organized in Social Structures and they participate in SOA Ecosystems as ‘stakeholders’ of the SOA-based systems. Hence, the behavior of the individual is related to its specific role in a Social Structure and the particular ‘stake’ in the SOA-based system. On the contrary, in the three-domain framework we consider also the digital user as a human entity and the use of digital services he makes on the physical world.

The real world effect has a rather technical character in SOA and refers to changes in the conditions of the real (business or physical) world, but not to changes in the situation of the user and the value of service to the user. For example the OASIS SOA-RAF describes the real world effect produced in two cases as “the book order has been placed” and “more light is available in the room”. However, the service value for the customer in the case of the book order would be related to the use of the book, either to read it and receive cognitive value, or to offer it as a gift and receive emotional or social value; or in the case of turning the lights on, the service value for the user would derive from the tasks he can perform now (e.g. reading).

In sum, SOA-based systems refer to computing operations for the implementation and delivery of computing services. The focus is on the technology domain and the development of business solutions. The OASIS SOA-RAF enlarges the focus and enriches the conceptual domain with business-related concepts that cover both the Technology Domain and the Business Domain and refer also to the provision of service. The OASIS SOA-RAF provides, hence, some conceptual foundations and guidelines how to bridge the IT and the business concerns. The proposed three-domain framework, on the other hand, regards the end-to-end service interactions that begin from the Technological Domain for the implementation of services, continue to the Business Domain for the delivery of services and end at the User Domain for the consumption of service and the creation of service value. The relationship between the OASIS SOA-RAF and the three-domain framework is depicted in figure 3.3.

Figure 3.3: Relationship between the OASIS SOA-RAF and the

three-domain framework

In figure 3.3 we present also a potential extension of the OASIS SOA-RAF in order to include the concerns of the digital user, next to the IT and the business concerns. The proposed extension would enable the end-to-end analysis of service systems and would support the analysis of service usage and service value. In parallel, in OASIS SOA-RAF the possibility for the analysis of service value remains at the level of the value proposition of the technology and the business providers and the potential value carried by the technological functionality and the business offering, respectively (see figure 3.2). However, the service users may make different evaluations of the value propositions, or may adopt different use patterns than the proposed ones. The focus on the functions at the Technology Domain and the Business Domain and the related value propositions causes myopia in the study of service systems: the providers deliver technological solutions and services, but they do not know how they are used by the digital users – and as a result they do not care about it. On the contrary, the inclusion of the User Domain and the user’s concerns in the analysis of service systems would enable better understanding of the use of technologies and services and better approximation of their value, as well as the evaluation of the potential and the future prospects of current and emerging technologies.

The inclusion of information about the use of technologies in real life and business practices is a significant criterion for the evaluation of the potential and the future prospects of technologies. As an example, Gartner’s Hype Cycle methodology evaluates the maturity and adoption of technologies and applications and how they are potentially relevant to solving real business problems and exploiting new opportunities. It is obvious in this methodology that the evaluation in the initial phases (‘technology trigger’ and ‘peak of inflated expectations’) are based on the value proposition and the value potential of the new technologies, as there is no extended usage and experience yet, while in the later stages (‘slope of enlightenment’ and ‘plateau of productivity’) or decline

(‘trough of disillusionment’) the use of the new technologies in practice reveal their true capabilities and confirm the expected value potential.