Software as a Service (SAAS) as It Pertains to Enterprise Architecture - Essay Example

? Software as a Service Larry Stewart MSCC 630 - Enterprise Architecture August 14, 13/25 The project was not delivered as defined. Principles –unsatisfactory, see notes, 2 Current state – unsatisfactory, see notes, 2 Future state – unsatisfactory, see notes, 2 Transition projects – unsatisfactory, see notes, 2 Technology definition – excellent, 5 You may redo the paper to improve your grade. Bob T’s paper is a model that you can use. If you choose to redo the paper, please submit it by Saturday, August 20. Abstract Software as a Service is becoming a fundamental element of enterprise architectures across enterprises and businesses. This paper provides a brief justification for using the SaaS model in enterprise architecture. A brief discussion of the SaaS model is provided. The main SaaS principles are discussed. The paper evaluates the key business drivers of SaaS implementation and distinguishes between the current and future state of all domains affected by SaaS. Keywords: Software as a Service (SaaS), information technologies (IT), enterprise architecture (EA) Executive summary The concept and notion of architecture date back to the prehistoric times. Originating in the design and architecture domains, the concept has been invariably associated with the principles of structure, symmetry, functionality, and harmony. Rapid advances in technology during the 20th century gave an impetus to the development of new, enterprise architectures; the latter remain the most complex, challenging but nonetheless desirable elements of productive business functioning. The Software as a Service (SaaS) model marks a new stage in the evolution of enterprise architecture and paves the way for the smooth integration of various EA frameworks with the principal business operations and functions. In contemporary business environments, the choice of SaaS is justified by the need to consolidate IT applications and models and reduce the costs of IT management at all levels of organizational performance. It is through SaaS deployment that organizations can easily achieve the desired future state of technologies where computing is integrally linked to communication, and seamless integration of technological efforts into end user-centered frameworks precipitates the creation and sustained usability of cost-efficient and flexible IT models. Software as a Service: A Brief Introduction Understanding the SaaS model is important for understanding its place and role in enterprise architectures (EA). “SaaS is software deployed as a hosted service and accessed over the Internet” (Carraro & Chong, 2006). Actually, it is due to the rapid expansion and accessibility of the Internet that SaaS is gradually becoming a fundamental ingredient of many enterprise architectures. Thousands of end-user organizations move to adopt SaaS frameworks and applications, in order to automate front and back-office business operations, enhance accessibility of data, and guarantee security of information (SaaS, 2011). The Software as a Service model is: Loosely coupled services and components – that SaaS avoids tight coupling characteristic of earlier models means that the framework has a potential to reduce the costs of maintenance and integration. Configuration over programming – the SaaS framework depends on smaller components, which are coupled and shared to create business solutions based on minimal codes. Agnostic to databases – the choice of relevant databases is usually left to the needs of the SaaS provider. Agnostic to topologies – most enterprise architectures and computing topologies constantly involve, but the use of SaaS guarantees applicability, seamless integration, and deployment of various SaaS elements in any topology. GUI agnostic – enterprises using the SaaS frameworks have the free choice of GUI technologies, including performance and firewall issues, and makes it easier to integrate and design loosely coupled architecture elements, including Flex user interfaces. Agnostic to data sources – the SaaS framework does not really care where different data sources are located, making it easier and less costly to adapt existing applications to the needs of the future state. Agnostic to data schemas – likewise, SaaS can operate as a meta model grounded on a Tenant to Tenant principles, within which every single business tenant runs a data schema slightly different from the standard one (Oliver, 2005). EA Principles In today’s organizations, the direction of business and technological development is guided by the development of model-driven IT systems. Simply put, organizations rely on smaller components in the design and deployment of various, flexible models of data management. Enterprise architectures exemplify an effective element of model-driven development in organizations (Bommel et al, 2006). The main principles governing the use of EA models usually come in the form of an informal statement and usually imply that “users have access to the data necessary to perform their duties; therefore, data is shared across enterprise functions and organizations” (Bommel et al, 2006, p. 1139). In this sense, the use of EA frameworks is justified by their data sharedness capabilities and abundant technological change capabilities. Cost-efficient and self-supporting, EA operate as an integral part of other organizational IT systems and guarantee flexibility needed to adjust the organization and its systems to the needs of the future state. Other principles justifying the choice of EA frameworks include comprehensibility, robustness, completeness, stability, consistency, and flexibility. Principle: comprehensibility Statement: decisions regarding EA frameworks will be based on the degree to which these frameworks are comprehensible. Rationale: All decisions pertaining to the choice of the needed EA framework will be taken, based on the assumption that these EA frameworks guarantee comprehensibility and can be successfully integrated with the existing EA systems. Implications: The choice of EA frameworks must be based on the evaluation of EA framework comprehensibility; Comprehensibility must benefit the entire organization; Comprehensibility should not be guaranteed for the sake of other benefits, like cost-reduction; therefore, only frameworks that are comprehensive and do not reduce the organization’s efficiency should be used. Principle: robustness Statement: decisions regarding the choice of EA frameworks will be based on the evaluation of each system’s robustness. Rationale: Only EA frameworks that contribute to consistent decision-making with no damage to the organization’s effectiveness will be implemented. Implications: The choice of EA frameworks must be based on the degree to which these frameworks fit in and meet the criteria of the existing decision-making processes; EA frameworks to be implemented must require minimum changes to the existing systems and models. Only frameworks that govern the data in its entirety and reduce process ambiguity in controversial situations will be used. Robustness is just another principle selecting the SaaS: the use of the SaaS model allows for taking quality IT decisions and enhances enforceability of IT policies and organizational standards (Bommel et al, 2006). The SaaS model supports and contributes to the development of consistent decision-making processes (Bommel et al, 2006). SaaS is a framework used to design Enterprise Architectures, which govern technologies and data in their entirety and are applicable in every controversial situation (Bommel et al, 2006). The SaaS model is consistent with the demands of technological development in today’s organizations. The tenets incorporated into the SaaS frameworks are equally stable and flexible to adjust to organizational changes at various degrees of magnitude (Bommel et al, 2006). Principle: location and applicability Statement: EA frameworks must operate on service-agreement principles, to reduce operating costs and provide opportunities for regularly updating the desired software. Rationale: EA models and frameworks must not add to the burden of operating costs in organizations but must provide opportunities for low-cost updates. Implications: Usage-based transaction models impose little to no costs on users Service-agreement frameworks provide opportunities to regularly update the desired framework. Business Drivers behind the Use of the SaaS Model IT personnel consolidation When considering the pros and cons of adapting the Software as a Service model, several business drivers become particularly important. First, the need to attract, retain, and consolidate talented IT personnel is becoming urgent (Stern, 2011). In this context, organizations mainly seek to optimize IT personnel, to balance scarce financial resources with sufficient skills and knowledge of IT processes. SaaS is driven by reduced IT personnel costs: that is, the SaaS models need fewer technical personnel to maintain the application (Stern, 2011). The SaaS vendor is primarily responsible for managing and maintaining the SaaS system (Stern, 2011). As organizations strive to achieve leaner organizational structures and optimize their workforce processes, SaaS provides them with better opportunities to manage their staff decisions more effectively. More importantly, the SaaS model makes it possible to use new, additional applications without hiring new personnel (Stern, 2011). Certainly, how to manage and maintain SaaS applications varies across organizations, but it is clear that the SaaS framework holds a promise to enhance cost-efficiency of various business operations and can thus be used as an important element of enterprise architecture. IT consolidation IT consolidation is the second most important business driver of the SaaS framework (Stern, 2011). The fact is in that contemporary organizations run a variety of systems and operate through a complex network of processes and functions, which also require that employees invoke a wide range of applications during the day (Vizard, 2011). Not only do employees require extensive technical skills to cope with these applications, but the multitude of applications from different vendors and with different user interfaces make the task of effective IT management virtually unachievable (Vizard, 2011). The SaaS framework and cloud computing provide ample opportunities for IT consolidation. Actually, consolidation of information technologies has become the distinctive feature of today’s business reality. The U.S. economy and the rest of the world find themselves in the midst of the so-called dot-com crash (Hundley, 2008). Organizations and enterprise architectures are no exception: the call for IT consolidation reflects a common tendency of reduced IT venture capital, depression in new IT goods market, and the integration of the most successful IT companies and their products (Hundley, 2008). Businesses are driven by the need to consolidate their IT applications, in order to keep their IT footprint robust, complete, and consistent (Stern, 2011). The SaaS framework minimizes the need to purchase additional equipment and allows for saving money and physical space while integrating new, additional IT applications (Stern, 2011). Cost-efficiency Finally, cost-efficiency and reduced IT expenses drive the adoption of SaaS as an essential element of the enterprise architecture. That SaaS does not require excessive costs to be deployed and maintained is one of its key benefits (Stern, 2011). Cost-savings in the SaaS framework are generated from a number of ingredients, which include but are not limited to “no servers, no server costs”, no software licenses, low maintenance fees and additional data space (Stern, 2011). SaaS as part of the enterprise architecture does not consume as much electricity as other, similar systems and applications (Stern, 2011). The SaaS does not require excessive consultant fees and helps to optimize IT personnel costs (Stern, 2011). However, SaaS alone cannot guarantee effective change, unless organizations support the implementation of SaaS models by complex and consistent organizational redesign initiatives. As organizations strive to adopt the SaaS vision to reduce their costs, their emphasis on cost reduction must be essentially long-term. That is, the development and deployment of SaaS systems and their integration with the existing models must result in long-term positive changes. This is why all SaaS deployment attempts are to be accompanied by parallel organizational change processes and strategies, to facilitate and justify subsequent data transfers between multiple legacy-based systems and networks. Current State of Domains Affected by EA All decisions to implement new enterprise architecture and its separate elements are preceded by uncertainty (Synverse Solution Team, 2009). Vague understanding of tasks and priorities is natural and anticipated, given that all technology transformation initiatives are aimed at eliminating this uncertainty and clearing up organizations’ understanding of their IT functions. Organizations’ readiness to implement enterprise architectures and SaaS frameworks presents a serious challenge. “Organizations must be prepared to not only change technologically but adjust their core competencies, training methods and processes” (Synverse Solution Team, 2009). This is why organizational change and redesign are believed to be crucial to the success of EA deployment. In its current state, EA frameworks affect most, if not all, domains of technological and organizational performance, including security and cost-effectiveness. Despite the fact that the organization is ready to adopt a new technological vision, the latter is also needed to transform this readiness into actual improvements. In its current state, the organization has the level of security, robustness, multi-tenancy infrastructure, scalability, and interactive user interface needed to secure successful implementation of EA (Ekarta, n.d.). Nonetheless, operating and business expenses, the lack of IT consolidation, and changeability of the organization’s future needs urge for the implementation of a new model as part of the organization’s enterprise architecture. Why Improvement Is Needed Today’s business and market conjuncture changes future needs of businesses, making them virtually unpredictable. Conventional IT frameworks and systems fail to meet the demand for flexibility and changeability in business environments. Many organizations realize that future business activity requirements may be entirely different from what is required today (Stern, 2011). In this situation, only few organizations can address the challenge in a cost-effective and efficient manner. Contemporary organizations do not always have resources and capabilities sufficient to manage these changes effectively. Given its benefits and effects on costs and efficiency, the choice of SaaS as part of the enterprise architecture is fully justified. It is through SaaS that the organization can successfully meet its future needs and adjust to the changeable conditions of IT performance. The organization’s readiness to deploy SaaS applications is difficult to underestimate. SaaS looks like the best technological alternative to conventional, on-premise applications, as the organization is working hard to achieve the desired future state. The SaaS model profoundly alters organizations’ cost-benefit landscape. In other words, the model always results in significant operating, business, and capital savings. The SaaS model removes the “middle man’ from the existing technology infrastructure, reducing monthly fees paid for conventional software solutions (Pacileo, 2009). SaaS reduces the amount of IT operations costs and leads to significant business operations savings (Pacileo, 2009). As of today, the organization’s enterprise architecture lacks this “cost-efficiency” angle. The applications and software products currently in use do not provide built-in functionality and are dispersed across numerous vendors, making it extremely difficult to meet the predetermined budget constraints. The staffing costs are considerable, since many IT functions and operations are duplicated. The lack of integration and automation incurs additional costs on businesses. SaaS will reduce expenses by (1) eliminating abundance in software applications; (2) consolidating IT applications; and (3) raising employee productivity. Integrating SaaS with the Existing Enterprise Architecture to Achieve the Desired Future State No SaaS implementation is possible without an architecture strategy. The latter is essentially about setting a road map for the development of necessary technology frameworks and infrastructures and envisioning SaaS applications’ future (Walker, 2007). Any application, whatever its purpose, always has a definite lifecycle, and the transition state is where transition architectures and applications are used to meet the demands of the future state. Certainly, the future state of technologies and enterprise architectures must be defined in clear terms, and SaaS is no exception. Simultaneously, no matter what architecture enterprises choose to launch, they must realize that the future state is never static and must meet present day needs in the future (Walker, 2007). Fig. 1. IT strategy life cycle (Walker, 2007). Future state The future state of the enterprise architecture in question differs greatly from all other types of traditional applications and architectures. It is based on the assumption that next-generation architectures will function through a dynamic network of changeable, moving tenants, with no baseline or clear concept but excessively dependent on communication, interactions, and communication between and within organizations (Hutchinson, Ward & Castilon, 2009). Future applications will increase in business and financial value and fit perfectly well in newly developed enterprise ecosystems (Velev, 2010). While new services will speed up and facilitate the integration of EA solutions with the rest of enterprise architecture elements, integration by itself will center on service-based interactions (Velev, 2010). End-user clients will become extremely differentiated and diverse; consequentially, EA frameworks and products will be less tied to the standard operating systems (Velev, 2010). Customer collaboration will become a crucial component of business and product management, whereas mature services will increase in popularity (Velev, 2010). As a result, the desired future state can be defined as: A multi-tenant enterprise architecture, which is dynamic by nature and easily adjustable to changeable organizational environments. Communication and interactions create the basis for developing and deploying new elements of the EA. Cloud computing serves the major element in the creation of new applications. The EA meets the demands of diverse clients and can be easily re-arranged while switching to a different operating system. Transition Plan The SaaS frameworks’ location on the licensing, location, and management continua supports the decision to choose SaaS as an essential element of the Enterprise Architecture. According to Carraro and Chong (2006), SaaS models and applications function as a usage-based transaction model, which do not impose any front costs on the end users but bill them only for the amount of transactions initiated and used (Carraro & Chong, 2006). In terms of location, most SaaS applications work from the host’s location, with just a few installed within the organization’s IT environment (Carraro & Chong, 2006). In between hosts install a so-called “black box”, which links organizations’ applications to those of the vendor. The black box is installed and deployed within the organization’s IT environment and makes it easier to regularly update the database (Carraro & Chong, 2006). Eventually, SaaS applications are governed via service-agreement frameworks: vendors (or hosts) manage and regularly update SaaS, with most SaaS management processes opaque for end users (Carraro & Chong, 2006). In light of this information, the SaaS framework can readily become an important element of the Enterprise Architecture, given its applicability, flexibility, robustness, consistency, and adaptability to the future state needs. Apart from the fact that the SaaS model is flexible and consistent, the main business drivers within the organization suggest that the SaaS framework is the most appropriate and cost-effective choice. Implementing SaaS applications does not happen overnight. In the transition stage of SaaS deployment, only a transition architecture or solution can help to move the organization onto a new level of professional and technological performance. Switching to SaaS is like a huge chasm, but many organizations simply lack strategies to meet the challenge (Goth, 2008). Here, IBM Cloud Service Provider Platform could become that very transition architecture to support the implementation of SaaS applications. The choice of the IBM Cloud Service Provider Platform is justified by the fact that this solution is complete and consistent. It allows for managing cloud services and applications with the help of an integrated and scalable management solution (IBM, 2011). This is one of the most effective ways to lower the costs of integration and implementation and a basis for creating new enterprise architecture patterns (IBM, 2011). From now on, when the vision of the future state has been set and the transition architecture has been defined, it is through IT optimization, changes in IT governance, and subsequent changes in organizational structure. In brief, in its future state, the enterprise architecture will (a) become more closely aligned with business and organizational values; and (b) acquire better technological and technical flexibility. IT optimization presupposes passing a long way from stand-alone systems and applications to the state where technologies are integrated into complex SaaS frameworks and share one and the same infrastructure model (Oracle, 2010). IT optimization will replace the local view of the enterprise architecture with an enterprise, digitized view of the enterprise architecture. This can happen through portfolio rationalization, when current applications are migrated to reside on a new, SaaS technological framework (Oracle, 2010). Fig. 2. IT Optimization (Oracle, 2010). In terms of IT governance, Portfolio Management systems and principles will lead the organization to the desired state of its enterprise architecture and SaaS implementation. However, before that happens, the organization will have to answer several important questions, namely, whether all transformational elements have been identified and what activities must take place before, during, and after the desired future state is achieved. Simply put, the organization will have to identify and choose the best SaaS vendor, create a staff of IT professionals with skills and knowledge to run the SaaS framework, develop and evaluate the system of SaaS requirements, acquire technologies and operational capabilities to make the implementation possible, and assess employee and client satisfaction with the new enterprise architecture, once the SaaS framework is deployed. All these activities and decisions will enable the organization to address the current IT challenges, including excessive costs and duplication of operations and business processes within the existing enterprise architecture. Yet, even as the SaaS system is implemented and used, future changes will be required, to adjust to the changing conditions of business and technological performance. SaaS will have to be regularly updated, as the future state is never static and must address today’s needs (Walker, 2007). Conclusion The Software as a Service (SaaS) model marks a new stage in the evolution of enterprise architecture and paves the way for the smooth integration of various EA frameworks with the principal operations and functions of business entities. In contemporary business environments, the choice of SaaS is justified by the need to consolidate IT applications and models and reduce the costs of IT management at all levels of organizational performance. The choice of SaaS is justified by its data shared-ness capabilities and abundant technological change capabilities. Cost-efficient and self-supporting, SaaS operates as an integral part of other organizational IT systems and guarantee flexibility needed to adjust the organization and its systems to the needs of the future state. Other principles justifying the choice of the SaaS model include comprehensibility, robustness, completeness, stability, consistency, and flexibility. Cost-efficiency and reduced IT expenses drive the adoption of SaaS as an essential element of the enterprise architecture. That SaaS does not require excessive costs to be deployed and maintained is one of its key benefits. In its future state, the enterprise architecture will (a) become more closely aligned with business and organizational values; and (b) acquire better technological and technical flexibility. IT optimization will replace the local view of the enterprise architecture with an enterprise, digitized view of the enterprise architecture. Portfolio Management systems and principles will lead the organization to the desired state of its enterprise architecture and SaaS implementation. All these activities and decisions will enable the organization to address the current IT challenges, including excessive costs and duplication of operations and business processes within the existing enterprise architecture. Yet, even as the SaaS system is implemented and used, future changes will be required, to adjust to the changing conditions of business and technological performance. SaaS will have to be regularly updated, as the future state is never static and must address today’s needs. References Bommel, P., Hoppenbrouwers, S.J., Proper, E. & Weide, T.P. (2006). Giving meaning to enterprise architectures: Architecture principles with ORM and ORC. In R. Meersman, Z. Tari & P. Herrero, OTM Workshops, LNCS, 1138-1147. Carraro, G. & Chong, F. (2006). Software as a Service (SaaS): An enterprise perspective. MSDN Microsoft. Retrieved from http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/aa905332.aspx Ekarta. (2010). Re-engineering applications for SaaS enablement. Ekarta. Goth, G. (2008). Software-as-a-Service: The spark that will change software engineering? IEEE Distributed Systems Online, 9(7), 1541-43. Hundley, R.O. (2003). The global course of the information revolution: Recurring themes and regional variations. Rand Corporation. Hutchinson, C., Ward, J. & Castilon, K. (2009). Navigating the next-generation application architecture. IT Pro, March-April, 18-23. IBM. (2011). IBM Cloud Service Provider Platform. IBM. Retrieved from http://www.ibm.com/smarterplanet/us/en/communication_technology/nextsteps/solution/P933256J94131O62.html Oliver, M. (2005). Building the architecture for SaaS. Cloudbook Profile. Retrieved from http://www.cloudbook.net/resources/pdf/building-the-architecture-for-saas.pdf Oracle. (2010). Achieving the cloud computing vision. An Oracle White Paper in Enterprise Architecture. Pacileo, T. (2009). The SaaS effect. The Board Room Advisors, LLC. Synverse Solution Team. (2009). Enabling enterprise to SaaS: From conceptualization to implementation. Synverse Solution Team. Stern, S. (2011). The business drivers of Software as a Service (SaaS): key issues for public sector executives. Stern Consulting. Velev, D.G. (2010). Current and future state of the SaaS business models. Economic Alternatives, 1, 44-51. Vizard, M. (2011). Consolidation of SaaS platforms in the cloud begins. IT Business Edge. Retrieved from http://www.itbusinessedge.com/cm/blogs/vizard/consolidation-of-saas-platforms-in-the-cloud-begins/?cs=47999 Walker, M. (2007). Integration of enterprise architecture and application portfolio management. MSDN Microsoft. Retrieved from http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/bb896054.aspx Read More