E-government reference model
-
Upload
alexander-samarin -
Category
Technology
-
view
488 -
download
0
description
Transcript of E-government reference model
E-government reference model
Alexander SAMARIN
Global e-Government Forum 2014
7-8 October, 2014, Astana, Kazakhstan
http://www.unpan.org/GeGF/2014
E-government reference model v3 2
• A digital enterprise architect– from a programmer to a systems architect – creator of systems that work without me– broad experience: company, canton, country, continent
• I believe that many improvements in operational excellence and strategy execution are achievable relatively easy
• HOW I do what I do– architecting synergy between strategies, technologies, tools and
good practices for the client’s unique situation, and knowledge transfer
• WHAT is the result of my work for clients– less routine work, less stress, higher performance, higher security,
less risk, higher predictability of results, better operations, less duplication and liberation of business potentials
© A. Samarin 2014
About me
E-government reference model v3 3
• Context
• E-government reference model
• Views
© A. Samarin 2014
Agenda
E-government reference model v3 4
• E-government is the use of Information and Communication Technologies (ICTs) to improve the activities of public sector organisations
• E-governance is the use of ICTs to improve the manner in which power is exercised in the management of the affairs of a nation, and its relations with other nations
• E-government is a sociotechnical system of systems
• Relationships between socio and technical elements should lead to the emergence of productivity and wellbeing
• A system is a set of interacting or interdependent components forming an integrated whole
© A. Samarin 2014
Introduction
E-government reference model v3 5
• Unlimited life-cycle (unpredictable and incremental evolution)
• Socio-technical system
• Collaborative system
• Industrialised system
• Ability for rapid innovation is important
• Variety of services (several hundred governmental services are listed in the Swiss e-government catalogue)
• High level of security for personal data
© A. Samarin 2014
Complexity of e-government
E-government reference model v3 6
• Digital eats physical: Everything becomes digital: products, information, content, documents, records, processes, money, rights, communications.
• Fast eats slow: As digital is intangible thus news tools and new execution speed immediately.
• Group eats single: It is mandatory to collaborate to address modern complex problems.
• Big eats small: Digital things are at new scale.
• With this new speed and scale, there is no time for human intervention and errors in routine operations and at interfaces
© A. Samarin 2014
Digital age (1)
E-government reference model v3 7
• Transparency is increasing with bad and good consequences
• In addition to being
– cheaper, faster, better
• it is mandatory to become
– cleaner
– greener
– more agile
– more synergetic (i.e. IoT)
– more comprehensive
© A. Samarin 2014
Digital age (2)
E-government reference model v3 8
• In systems architecting the focus is changing
– FROM the thing (strategy, policy, service, rule, application, process, etc.)
– TO how the thing changes
– SUBJECT how things change together
• To avoid “house of cards” effect
• To enable innovations
– “in the digital age innovation depends on process automation”
© A. Samarin 2014
Digital age (3)
E-government reference model v3 9
• Context
• E-government reference model
• Views
© A. Samarin 2014
Agenda
E-government reference model v3 10
• Many governmental entities deliver the same services, albeit in a different manner
• Many potential similarities
• Realisation of the e-government need a systemic approach
© A. Samarin 2014
WHY e-Gov reference model (1)
Technical architecture
Dataarchitecture
Application architecture
Business architecture
Communal 100 % 100 % 100 % 100 %
Provincial 100 % 100 % 100 % 80 %
Ministerial 90 % 100 % 60-80 % 70 %
National 90 % 100 % 70 % 50 %
E-government reference model v3 11
• There is a way to combine diversity and uniformity
• The problem of combining them is also known in the business as “shared services”
• Example - Business units (BUs) have different levels of computerisation
– a standard solution from the IT department is not always good for everyone
© A. Samarin 2014
WHY e-Gov reference model (2)
BU1 BU2 BU3
Standardsolution
Level of computerisation
IT department
E-government reference model v3 12© A. Samarin 2014
WHY e-Gov reference model (3)
BU1 BU2 BU3
Level of computerisation
A CBB BAC
1) Standardsolution is based on processes and shared services
2) Each BU is moving to a similar architecture
IT department
E-government reference model v3 13
• Considers together all implementations and architects the ability to reproduce results
– ready-to-use solutions, tools, patterns and architectures
– offers the best possible services for each citizen
– becomes the centre of societal transformation
– seamlessly incorporates innovations
– implementable at your pace
– secure by design© A. Samarin 2014
WHY e-Gov reference model (4)
E-government reference model v3 14
• Apply the power of Enterprise Architecture (EA)
– commonly-agreed model
– platform-based implementation
– enterprise-as-a-system-of-processes
– modernisation of legacy applications
• Bring EA group into an e-Gov programme
• EA group as a seed for an e-Gov competence centre
© A. Samarin 2014
HOW does e-Gov reference model work
E-government reference model v3 15
• Architect is a person who translates a customer’s requirements into a viable plan and guides others in its execution
• Enterprise Architecture (EA) is the process of translating business vision and strategy into effective enterprise change by creating, communicating, and improving the key requirements, principles, and models that describe the enterprise's future state and enable its evolution and transformation.
© A. Samarin 2014
EA explained (1)
E-government reference model v3 16
• EA is the right “tool” to address the challenge of diversity & uniformity because EA is a systemic coordinator of people, processes, products and projects in 4 dimensions:
– Business zones span – organisational unit, segment, enterprise, supply chain, municipality, governorate, ministry, country, region, continent, etc.
– Architectural domains span – business, data, application, security, information, technology, etc.
– Time span – solution life-cycle, technology life-cycle, tool life-cycle, project life-cycle, enterprise life-cycle, etc.
– Sector span – detecting and re-using common patterns (good business practices) in unique processes from different sectors
© A. Samarin 2014
EA explained (2)
E-government reference model v3 17© A. Samarin 2014
EA views: projects, solutions, capabilities and platforms
E-government reference model v3 18© A. Samarin 2014
EA views: time-span
E-government reference model v3 19© A. Samarin 2014
EA views: business zones vs time span
E-government reference model v3 20© A. Samarin 2014
EA views: architectural domains vs business zones
E-government reference model v3 21© A. Samarin 2014
EA group in an e-Gov program organigram
Steering Committee
PMO EA group Budget
Administrative coordination Technical coordination Financial control
Degree of involvement
Time
External team
Localteam
Initiation phase Projects-based phase Maintenance phase
E-government reference model v3 22
• Chief Architect
• Governance group
– review board
– quality assurance
– budget
– librarian
• Solution group
– solution architects
– business analysts
• PMO group
– project leaders
© A. Samarin 2014
EA group structure by main roles
• Domain group
– business architects
– application architects
– information architects
– security architects
– infrastructure architects
• Vertical group
– healthcare
– smart-cities
– tourism
– …
E-government reference model v3 23
• Potential structure of the e-Gov competence centre
– EA group
– Communication group
– Application Development group
– Operations group
– Knowledge Management group
– Education services
– Training services
© A. Samarin 2014
EA group as a seed for ane-Gov competence centre
E-government reference model v3 24© A. Samarin 2014
EA - Many stakeholder (participants)
• Citizens• Local businesses• Global businesses• Government authorities• Local government stakeholders• National regulatory agencies• Political parties• Local NGOs• External NGOs• Funding bodies• Public service providers• IT vendors• Architects• Project managers
E-government reference model v3 25© A. Samarin 2014
Matrix between stakeholders and views
An example
E-government reference model v3 26
• Partner – governmental entity interaction view
• Partner view
• Evolution of implementation view
• The governmental entities integration view
• Platform-based implementation view– Platform-based approach– Platform-based implementation practices– Project management practices– Implementation governance view– Architecture-based procurement view
© A. Samarin 2014
WHAT RM - many views (1)
E-government reference model v3 27
• Enterprise as a system of processes• Enhancing information security by the use of processes• Enterprise Risk Management reference model• Records management as an BPM application• Multi-layered implementation model• Agile solution delivery practices• Microservices• Various technologies around the implementation model• Modernisation of applications to become process-centric• Moving services to clouds
© A. Samarin 2014
WHAT RM - many views (2)
E-government reference model v3 28
• Context
• E-government reference model
• Views
© A. Samarin 2014
Agenda
E-government reference model v3 29
• Partner and governmental-entity interaction view
• Partner view
• Evolution of implementation view
• The governmental entities integration view
• Paperless or digital work view
• Platform-based implementation view– Platform-based approach– Platform-based implementation practices– Project management practices– Implementation governance view– Architecture-based procurement view
© A. Samarin 2014
VIEWS (1)
E-government reference model v3 30
Four communication patterns for exchanges between a partner and the
government
Government
2. Patrner-declaration
1. Government-announce
4. Partner-demand
Spread in time
3. Government-demand
Spread in time
Partners (citizen, business, and other organisations)
1. Government-announcement, e.g. broadcasting changes in a law2. Partner-declaration, e.g. communicating a change of the partner’s address3. Government-demand, e.g. inviting to pay taxes4. Partner-demand, e.g. requesting a certificate (fishing license)
© A. Samarin 2014
E-government reference model v3 31
A partner-initiated-demand may required several exchanges between the
partner and the government
Government
Time© A. Samarin 2014
1 2 3 4
E-government reference model v3 32
The partner may need to deal with some ministries
Government
Ministry A Ministry B Ministry C
Time
Methodologies:+ data modelling+ electronic document exchange
Tools:+ standard data schemas+ electronic signature
• data flow (black dashed lines)
© A. Samarin 2014
E-government reference model v3 33
Process
+ + + +
E-gov coordinates partner’s interactions with the government
Government
• control flow (black solid lines)
• data flow (black dashed lines)
Ministry A Ministry B Ministry C
Time
1 2 3 4
Methodologies:• data modelling• electronic document
(ED) exchange+ BPM discipline+ process modelling
Technologies:• standard data schemas• electronic signature+ BPM suite
1
2 3
4
5
6
7
8
© A. Samarin 2014
E-government reference model v3 34
Process --
E-gov unifies the communication between the partner and the ministries
Government
Ministry B
Time
1
2
3
45
2
2a 2cx
2b
• control flow (black solid lines)
• data flow (black dashed lines)
Methodologies:• data modelling• electronic document
(ED) exchange+ BPM discipline+ process modelling
Technologies:• standard data schemas• electronic signature+ BPM suite
© A. Samarin 2014
… …
E-government reference model v3 35
Process
+ + + +
E-gov provides a social collaborative extranet for partners
Government
Ministry A Ministry B Ministry C
Time
Methodologies:• data modelling• ED exchange• BPM discipline• process modelling+ ED management+ records management+ collaboration+ social
Technologies:• standard data schemas• electronic signature• BPM suite+ ECM
Social collaborative extranet
• control flow (black solid lines)
• data flow (black dashed lines)
© A. Samarin 2014
E-government reference model v3 36
• Partner – governmental entity interaction view
• Partner view
• Evolution of implementation view
• The governmental entities integration view
• Platform-based implementation view– Platform-based approach– Platform-based implementation practices– Project management practices– Implementation governance view– Architecture-based procurement view
© A. Samarin 2014
VIEWS (1)
E-government reference model v3 37
Partner’s view
© A. Samarin 2014
E-government reference model v3 38
• Partner – governmental entity interaction view
• Partner view
• Evolution of implementation view
• The governmental entities integration view
• Platform-based implementation view– Platform-based approach– Platform-based implementation practices– Project management practices– Implementation governance view– Architecture-based procurement view
© A. Samarin 2014
VIEWS (1)
E-government reference model v3
Partners
Existing application
Coordination and integration backbone
e-Government
© A. Samarin 2014 39
E-gov application architecture view
Social collaborative extranet
e-gov service
Existing application
Existing application
Government
Technologies:• BPM suite• SOA orientation• ECM
e-gov service
e-gov service
E-government reference model v3
Partners
Existing application
© A. Samarin 2014 40
E-gov traditional application architecture
Portal
Existing application
Existing application
Government
Appl
icati
on
Appl
icati
on
Appl
icati
on
E-government reference model v3
Partners
Existing application
Coordination and integration backbone
e-Government
© A. Samarin 2014 41
E-gov introductory application architecture
Social collaborative extranet
e-gov service
Existing application
Existing application
Government
e-gov service
e-gov service
E-government reference model v3
Partners
Existing application
Coordination and integration backbone
e-Government
© A. Samarin 2014 42
E-gov transitional application architecture
Social collaborative extranet
e-gov service
Existing application
Government
e-gov service
e-gov service
Coordination backbone
Service Service
Existing application
E-government reference model v3
Partners
Coordination and integration backbone
e-Government
© A. Samarin 2014 43
E-gov target application architecture
Social collaborative extranet
e-gov service
e-gov service
e-gov service
ServiceService Service
E-government reference model v3
Partners
Coordination and integration backbone
E-social system
© A. Samarin 2014 44
E-social system application architecture
Social collaborative extranet
Public service
Private service
Professionalservice
Social service
Voluntary service
E-government reference model v3 45© A. Samarin 2014
Steps of evolution in application architecture
Introductory architecture
Target architecture
E-Social system architecture
Portal-centric architecture
Transitional architecture
E-government reference model v3 46
• Partner – governmental entity interaction view
• Partner view
• Evolution of implementation view
• The governmental entities integration view
• Platform-based implementation view– Platform-based approach– Platform-based implementation practices– Project management practices– Implementation governance view– Architecture-based procurement view
© A. Samarin 2014
VIEWS (1)
E-government reference model v3 47© A. Samarin 2014
Integration process instead of N-to-N connectivity
E-government reference model v3 48
• Business (processing) envelope
• Delivery (addressing) envelope
• Transportation (routing) envelope
© A. Samarin 2014
Use of many security envelopes
E-government reference model v3 49
• Partner – governmental entity interaction view
• Partner view
• Evolution of implementation view
• The governmental entities integration view
• Platform-based implementation view– Platform-based approach– Platform-based implementation practices– Project management practices– Implementation governance view– Architecture-based procurement view
© A. Samarin 2014
VIEWS (1)
E-government reference model v3 50© A. Samarin 2014
Platform-based architecture (1)
• Business concern: How to deliver many similar applications for various highly-diverse clients; define everything up-front is not possible (typical BPM or ECM project)
• Logic
– Developing individual applications will bring a lot of duplications
– The provisioning of solutions should be carried out incrementally with the pace of the target client
– Consider a platform
1. must standardise and simplify core elements of future enterprise-wide system
2. for any elements outside the platform, new opportunities should be explored using agile principles
E-government reference model v3 51
• Principles
– The platform frees up resource to focus on new opportunities
– Successful agile innovations are rapidly scaled up when incorporated into the platform
– An agile approach requires coordination at a system level
– To minimise duplication of effort in solving the same problems, there needs to be system-wide transparency of agile initiatives
– Existing elements of the platform also need periodic challenge
© A. Samarin 2014
Platform-based architecture (2)
A2A1
A3Platform
S2…S
1S3
Functionality
Delivery by solutions Delivery by applications
Scope
E-government reference model v3 52
• There are two primary types of activity.
– On-going and centralised platform evolution
– Rapid implementation of solutions as mini-projects
• Platform evolution is carried out by an inter-organisational-units coordination committee
• The roles within mini-projects
– A stakeholder
– The team lead for administrative coordination
– The product owner for functional coordination
– The solution architect for technical coordination
– The team member
© A. Samarin 2014
Overall platform governance
E-government reference model v3 53© A. Samarin 2014
Advantages of the corporate ECM platform
Dev env 1 Dev env 2
Development environment 3Generic web-
development platforms
DEVELOPMENT
Functionality
Basic features of a common ECM platform
Advanced features of a common ECM platform
Company-specific features
Process-centric integration
• Current development cost & time for a collaborative application
– Cost: 40 – 200 K $
– Time: 0,5 – 2 years
• Corporate platform program cost & time
– Cost: 600 K $
– Time: 1 year
• Expected development cost & time for a collaborative application within the corporate platform
– Cost: 20 - 60 K $
– Time: 1 - 3 months
© A. Samarin 2014 E-government reference model v3 54
Financial estimations
N apps.
$$
N≈8
Without common platform
With common platform
E-government reference model v3 55© A. Samarin 2014
Solutions vs components
E-government reference model v3 56
• Partner – governmental entity interaction view
• Partner view
• Evolution of implementation view
• The governmental entities integration view
• Platform-based implementation view– Platform-based approach– Platform-based implementation practices– Project management practices– Implementation governance view– Architecture-based procurement view
© A. Samarin 2014
VIEWS (1)
E-government reference model v3 57
• Entities are permitted to advance at different paces in their ascent to the top of the “ladder”.
© A. Samarin 2014
Ladder of maturity meta-pattern
E-government reference model v3 58
• The platform is designed to be tools-independent by standardizing data, information, interfaces and coordination between various capabilities.
© A. Samarin 2014
Component-oriented design
E-government reference model v3 59
• Partner – governmental entity interaction view
• Partner view
• Evolution of implementation view
• The governmental entities integration view
• Platform-based implementation view– Platform-based approach– Platform-based implementation practices– Project management practices– Implementation governance view– Architecture-based procurement view
© A. Samarin 2014
VIEWS (1)
E-government reference model v3 60
• It combines decomposition with agile implementation of “architected” components
© A. Samarin 2014
Architecture-based agile project management
E-government reference model v3 61
• Partner – governmental entity interaction view
• Partner view
• Evolution of implementation view
• The governmental entities integration view
• Platform-based implementation view– Platform-based approach– Platform-based implementation practices– Project management practices– Implementation governance view– Architecture-based procurement view
© A. Samarin 2014
VIEWS (1)
E-government reference model v3 62© A. Samarin 2014
Structural dependencies between various artefacts
E-government reference model v3 63
Business initiatives (business-specific demand)
Business capabilities(business-generic demand)
IT capabilities (IT-generic supply)
Roadmap programmes(from AS-IS to TO-BE)
Business demand IT supply
Business strategicobjectives
Governance
Maturity improvement Requested maturity Business priority
1
2
3
2
2->5
2->4
1->3
1->4
2->4
1->3
2->5
2->4
3->4
4
4
5
3
1
2
3
4
4
1
1
2
3
2
2
4
4
5
3
3->4
1->4
3->5
3->4
2->4
IT tools(IT-specific supply)
3
Programme priority
5
4
3
4
4
Dynamic relationships between various artefacts
© A. Samarin 2014
Manage business by processes
Manage processes BPM suite
E-government reference model v3 64
• Implications
– A formal way to discover points of the most leverage
– The decision-making process is explicit and transparent
– A strategy adjustment and validation becomes a routine on-going activity during its implementation (like functioning of the GPS navigator)
© A. Samarin 2014
Implications and example
E-government reference model v3 65
• Partner – governmental entity interaction view
• Partner view
• Evolution of implementation view
• The governmental entities integration view
• Platform-based implementation view– Platform-based approach– Platform-based implementation practices– Project management practices– Implementation governance view– Architecture-based procurement view
© A. Samarin 2014
VIEWS (1)
E-government reference model v3 66
• Separation of duties
• Architecture group: selection of IT
• Procurement group: acquisition of such IT components (licensees, installation, training, documentation, operations, etc.)
• Of course, the architecture group must make the selection logic as explicit as possible.
© A. Samarin 2014
Architecture-based procurement
E-government reference model v3 67
• Enterprise as a system of processes• Enhancing information security by the use of processes• Enterprise Risk Management reference model• Records management as an BPM application• Multi-layered implementation model• Agile solution delivery practices• Microservices• Various technologies around the implementation model• Modernisation of applications to become process-centric• Moving services to clouds
© A. Samarin 2014
VIEWS (2)
E-government reference model v3 68
• In the context of enterprise functioning, business activities must be coordinated
• Coordination maybe strong (e.g. as in the army) or weak (e.g. as in an amateurs football team)
• Coordination maybe implicit or explicit
• Coordination maybe declarative (laws) and imperative (orders)
• Based on coordination, let us think about “levels of cohesion” 1. process patterns (coordination within processes)2. processes3. cluster of processes (coordination between processes)4. system of processes (coordination between clusters of processes)
© A. Samarin 2014
Enterprise as a system of processes
E-government reference model v3 69
• Business case: typical “claim processing” process – claim, repair, control, invoicing, and assurance to pay
© A. Samarin 2014
Process fragments – patterns
SI
PAR
SI
IPS
Click for animation
© A. Samarin 2014 E-government reference model v3 70
SI animated diagram
Click for animation
E-government reference model v3 71
• Simple event-based (which looks like a state machine)
© A. Samarin 2014
Coordination between processes (1)
E-government reference model v3 72© A. Samarin 2014
Coordination between processes (2)
1. state-machine
2. synchronous invocation
3. asynchronous invocation
4. fire and forget
5. parallel processes
6. co-processes (pattern SI)
E-government reference model v3 73
• CLOPs are usually formed with functional processes which are implemented a particular business function, e.g. Field Services
• And a “halo” of extra processes
1. monitoring
2. operating
3. governance
© A. Samarin 2014
CLuster Of Processes (CLOP)
E-government reference model v3 74© A. Samarin 2014
Enabler group, supporting group and customer group of clusters
E-government reference model v3 75© A. Samarin 2014
Implicit coordination between CLOPs (1)
E-government reference model v3 76© A. Samarin 2014
Implicit coordination between CLOPs (2)
E-government reference model v3 77© A. Samarin 2014
Implicit coordination between CLOPs (3)
E-government reference model v3 78
• Business Object (BO) lify-cycle as a process
© A. Samarin 2014
Make coordination between CLOPs explicit (1)
E-government reference model v3 79
• Add enterprise-wide event dispatcher
© A. Samarin 2014
Make coordination between CLOPs explicit (2)
E-government reference model v3 80© A. Samarin 2014
Make coordination between CLOPs explicit (3)
E-government reference model v3 81© A. Samarin 2014
Functional view at a system of processes (1)
E-government reference model v3 82© A. Samarin 2014
Functional view at a system of processes (2)
E-government reference model v3 83© A. Samarin 2014
Functional view at a system of processes (3)
E-government reference model v3 84
• Enterprise as a system of processes• Enhancing information security by the use of processes• Enterprise Risk Management reference model• Records management as an BPM application• Multi-layered implementation model• Agile solution delivery practices• Microservices• Various technologies around the implementation model• Modernisation of applications to become process-centric• Moving services to clouds
© A. Samarin 2014
VIEWS (2)
E-government reference model v3 85© A. Samarin 2014
Dynamic provision of the access
E-government reference model v3 86© A. Samarin 2014
Extra relationships between activities
Mandatory: different actors because of the separation of duties
Potentially: different actors because of performance impact – avoid assigning mechanical (low-qualified “red”) activities and added-value (“green”) activities to the same actors
E-government reference model v3 87
• There are security-related relationships between activities
• Example– “Activitiy_B” relates to Activity_A as “Validating the work”
– These activities may be in different processes
– No actors must be assigned to both “Role_1” and “Role_2”
© A. Samarin 2014
Extra relationships between activities (3)
Activity_A
Activity_B
Carry out the work
Carry out the work Validating the work
Role_1
Role_2
E-government reference model v3 88
• Doing the work
– To which ROLES the work can be delegated
– To which ROLES the work can be send for review
• Assuring the work
– other ACTIVITIES to audit (1st, 2nd and 3rd party auditing)
– other ACTIVITIES to evaluate the risk (before the work is started)
– other ACTIVITIES to evaluate the risk (after the work is completed)
• Validating the work
– Other ACTIVITIES to check the output (errors and fraud prevention)
• Some ACTIVITIES must be carried out by the same actor, some ACTIVITIES must not
© A. Samarin 2014
BPM and information security: Extra relationships between activities
(4)
E-government reference model v3 89
• Enterprise as a system of processes• Enhancing information security by the use of processes• Enterprise Risk Management reference model• Records management as an BPM application• Multi-layered implementation model• Agile solution delivery practices• Microservices• Various technologies around the implementation model• Modernisation of applications to become process-centric• Moving services to clouds
© A. Samarin 2014
VIEWS (2)
E-government reference model v3 90
• Normal activities are enriched by “check-points”
© A. Samarin 2014
Embed risk management into functional processes
E-government reference model v3 91© A. Samarin 2014
ERM reference model
E-government reference model v3 92
• Common functional capabilities• Enterprise as a system of processes• Enhancing information security by the use of processes• Enterprise Risk Management reference model• Records management as an BPM application• Multi-layered implementation model• Agile solution delivery practices• Microservices• Various technologies around the implementation model• Modernisation of applications to become process-centric• Moving services to clouds
© A. Samarin 2014
VIEWS (2)
E-government reference model v3 93
• Symptoms of becoming legacy
– ad-hoc integration
– difficult incorporation of new technologies
– old programming techniques
– expensive maintenance
– heavy releases and upgrades
– availability of industrial products for previously unique functionality (e.g. event management)
– some functionality is a commodity right now (e.g. BPM and BRM)
– just slow to evolve
• What is the root cause?
– Emergent/historical grow and not architected evolution© A. Samarin 2014
Typical problems with legacy software
E-government reference model v3 94
• Implement end-to-end processes with the maximum reuse of existing IT applications and infrastructure
• Agile (with the pace of business) provisioning of business solutions
• From disparate IT applications to a coherent business execution platform which will “liberate” people for business innovations
• Business evolution to drive technical transformation
• BUT Application as a unit of deployment is too big
© A. Samarin 2014
The goal of modernisation
E-government reference model v3 95
• Step-by-step technical transformation by:
1. Disassemble into services
2. Add, if necessary, more services
3. Assemble via processes
• Combine various tactics: assemble, rent, buy, build, outsource, standardised, re-engineered
• Incremental improvements and refactoring within a well-defined big picture
• Intermix business evolution and technical transformation
• Keep the users happy and feel secure
© A. Samarin 2014
How to carry out the modernisation
E-government reference model v3 96© A. Samarin 2014
Monolithic applications are decomposed into interconnected services
Monolith application
GUI screen 2GUI screen 1 GUI screen 3
Business logic
BO1 persistence BO2 persistence
Business logic service
Interactive service 1
Interactive service 2
Interactive service 3
Coordination
BO1persistence service
BO2persistence service
Assembled solution
GUI screen 2GUI screen 1 GUI screen 3
Business logic
BO1 persistence BO2 persistence
E-government reference model v3 97
• Only the flow of data is traceable
• Flow of control is explicit, becausethe primary importance is the result of working together, but not individual exchanges(think about football)
© A. Samarin 2014
How to coordinate?
E-government reference model v3 98
• By processes
• By events (EPN)
• By rules, work-load, etc.
© A. Samarin 2014
Several coordination techniques may be used together
E-government reference model v3 99© A. Samarin 2014
Transformation from typical inter-application data flows to end-to-end
coordination of services
E-government reference model v3 100
• To externalise the flow of control from existing monolith applications
© A. Samarin 2014
Using events
E-government reference model v3 101
• The danger of “DOUble Master” (DOUM) anti-pattern – particular data (actually a business object) are modified via application or process but not either
• Few techniques
– lock-down the data manipulation interface in the application (a screen) and provide a similar functionality in the process
– dynamic provisioning of the access to a screen for a staff member who is carrying out a related activity (see next slide)
– decomposition of a screen into separate functions, e.g. Create (out-of-process), Update (within-process) and Delete (separate-process)
– combination of previous ones
© A. Samarin 2014
Co-existence of a legacy application and a process solution
E-government reference model v3 102
• Business processes make bigger services from smaller services
• The relationship between services and processes is “recursive”
– All processes are services
– Some operations of a service can be implemented as a process
– A process includes servicesin its implementation
© A. Samarin 2014
Process-centric solutionsAssemble via processes (1)
E-government reference model v3 103
• Who (roles) is doing What (business objects), When (coordination of activities), Why (business rules), How (business activities) and with Which Results (performance indicators)
• Make these relationships explicit and executable
What you model is what you execute
“The map is the app”
© A. Samarin 2014
Process-centric solutionsAssemble via processes (2)
104© A. Samarin 2014 E-government reference model v3
Process-centric solutionsMulti-layer implementation model (1)
105© A. Samarin 2014 E-government reference model v3
Process-centric solutionsMulti-layer implementation model (2)
B C
A
A - SharePoint
B – in-house development
C – SAP ECC6
106© A. Samarin 2014 E-government reference model v3
Process-centric solutionsMulti-layer implementation model (3)
SAP BW/BI, etc.
NetWeaver PI, SolMan, etc.
NetWeaver BPM, etc.NetWeaver BRM, Java, ECC6, etc.
XSD, Java, .Net
SQL Server, Oracle, etc.
E-government reference model v3 107© A. Samarin 2014
Multi-layer implementation model and other technologies
E-government reference model v3 108
• Healthcare
© A. Samarin 2014
ANNEX
E-government reference model v3 109
NEEDS
RESULTS
Enrich Knowledge
Improve Operations
acquisition channels for external data/information/ knowledge
disseminationchannels of internal data/information/ knowledge
Methods, practices, laws, international regulations, etc.
Knowledge for Healthcare
Processes & Services
… … …
DiagnosticPreliminary
analysis Treatment Recovery
PartnerPartnerPartnerPartnerPartners
Coordination
© A. Samarin 2014
Healthcare reference model (1)
E-government reference model v3 110
Healthcare Platform
acquisition channels
disseminationchannels
Specialised Apps.
Specialised Apps.
Specialised Apps.
Web access
Mobile access
PatientCRM
Web acces
s
Mobile access
DoctorCRM
Access
EDI
Enrichment
RBACKnowledge Mgmt. Procedures
BPMECM
StorageECM
Coordination
BPMsBI
PartnerPartnerPartnerPartnerPartners
Healthcare reference model (2)
© A. Samarin 2014
E-government reference model v3 111
Healthcare reference model (3)Modern Healthcare System (MHS)
Hospitals Clinics
MHS
Virtual Doctor’s Offices
MHS
MHS
MHS
Insurance Social
PatientsMHS WEB & Cloud
MHS
Labs
© A. Samarin 2014
E-government reference model v3 112
• All smart-cites deliver the same services, albeit in a different manner
• Realisation of smart-city potentials would benefit from a holistic approach
• BSI standard PAS 181:2014
© A. Samarin 2014
ANNEX Smart-city implementation reference model
E-government reference model v3 113
• Let us use the power of modern technologies to enable and drive societal transformation
© A. Samarin 2014
Conclusion
E-government reference model v3 114
• QUESTIONS?
• EKSALANSI website: http://www.eksalansi.org
• Blog http://improving-bpm-systems.blogspot.com
• LinkedIn: http://www.linkedin.com/in/alexandersamarin
• E-mail: [email protected]
• Twitter: @samarin
• Mobile: +41 76 573 40 61
• Book: www.samarin.biz/book
Thanks
© A. Samarin 2014