As I pack up to join my colleagues Gian Trotta, Joe McKendrick and Dennis Byron tomorrow at the InfoWorld SOA Executive Forum (where I will be blogging live), a word crossed my desk that is going to thrill the likes of Linthicum (check out his podcasting from the show here) and McKendrick, not to mention Brenda Michelson, the Macehiter Ward-Dutton guys and Ronan Bradley alike.
In a world where absolutely everyone is trying to develop a service-oriented architecture, a methodology that bases the development of IT architecture on the actual business problem you're trying to solve (or, the service you are trying to provide), it appears that current architectures that exist in some places are somewhat averse to this.
That's right. You heard it here first, gentlemen. Service-Averse Architecture®.*
A service-averse architecture is:
An architecture that is built without having first consulted the people who will use it.
An architecture that is unreliable or does not deliver on its promise.
An architecture that is so secure and complex that it discourages people from using it comfortably.
An architecture that is so insecure that its data is compromised, corrupted, lost or stolen.
An architecture that, in short, is averse to the services it is expected to provide.
I bet Tony Baer will have a field day with this. How about a feature on this, Tony?
Sounds like Service Averse Architecture is a SOA Success Anti-Pattern. How's that for loading up on terminology? :)