Showing posts with label transformation. Show all posts
Showing posts with label transformation. Show all posts

Friday, October 29, 2021

Interaction and Impedance

In the early 1990s, I was on a research and development project called the Enterprise Computing Project, within an area that was then known as Open Distributed Processing (ODP) and subsequently evolved into Service Oriented Architecture (SOA). One of the concepts we introduced was that of Interaction Distance. This was explained in a couple of papers that Ian Macdonald and I wrote in 1994-5, and mentioned briefly in my 2001 book.

Interaction distance is not measured primarily in terms of physical distance, but in terms of such dimensions as cost, risk, speed and convenience. It is related to notions of commodity and availability.

Goods that are available to us enrich our lives and, if they are technologically available, they do so without imposing burdens on us. Something is available in this sense if it has been rendered instantaneous, ubiquitous, safe, and easy. Borgmann p 41

In our time, things are not even regarded as objects, because their only important quality has become their readiness for use. Today all things are being swept together into a vast network in which their only meaning lies in their being available to serve some end that will itself also be directed towards getting everything under control. Levitt

One of the key principles of ODP was distribution transparency - you can consume a service without knowing where anything is located. The service interface provides convenient access to something that might be physically located anywhere. Or even something that doesn't have a fixed existence, but is assembled dynamically from multiple sources to satisfy your request.

As we noted at the time, this affects the relational economy in several ways. It may introduce new intermediary roles into the ecosystem, or alternatively it may allow some previously dominant intermediaries to be bypassed. Meanwhile, new value-adding services may become viable. Over the past twenty years there have been various standardization initiatives of this kind, often prefixed by the word Open. For example, Open Banking.

The example we used in our 1995 paper was video on demand (VoD). At that time there were three main methods for watching films: cinema, scheduled television or cable broadcast, and video rental. Video rental generally involved borrowing (and then rewinding and returning) VHS cassettes. DVDs were not introduced until 1996, and Netflix was founded in 1997.

Our analysis of VoD identified a delivery subsystem and a control subsystem, and sketched how these roles might be taken by some kind of collaboration between existing players (cable companies, phone companies). We also noted the organizational and commercial difficulties of implementing such a collaboration. As we now know, in the VoD case these difficulties were bypassed by the emergence of streaming services that were able to combine control and delivery into a single platform, and the technical configuration we outlined now looks horribly complicated, but the organizational and commercial issues are still relevant for other potential collaborative innovations.

And our analysis of interaction distance in relation to this example is still valid. In particular, we showed how VoD (in whatever technological form this might take) could significantly reduce the interaction distance between the film distributor and the consumer.

People often talk about digital transformation, and want to use this label for all kinds of random innovations. As I see it, the digital transformation in the video industry was largely on the production side. While the switch from VHS to DVD brought some minor benefits for the consumer, the real difference for the consumer came from the switch from rental to streaming, reducing interaction distance and bringing availability closer in space and time to the consumer. So I think a more meaningful label for this kind of innovation is service transformation.



Albert Borgmann, Technology and the Character of Contemporary Life (University of Chicago Press, 1984)

William Levitt's introduction to Heiddegger, The Question Concerning Technology

Christian Licoppe, ‘Connected’ Presence: The Emergence of a New Repertoire for Managing Social Relationships in a Changing Communication Technoscape (Environment and Planning D Society and Space, February 2004)

Ian G Macdonald and Richard Veryard, Modelling Business Relationships in a Non-Centralised Systems Environment. In A. Sölvberg et al. (eds.) Information Systems Development for Decentralized Organizations (Springer 1995)

Richard Veryard, Information Coordination (Prentice-Hall 1994) 

Richard Veryard, The Future of Distributed Services (December 2000)

Richard Veryard, Component-Based Business: Plug and Play (Springer 2001)

Richard Veryard and Ian G. Macdonald, EMM/ODP: A Methodology for Federated and Distributed Systems, in Verrijn-Stuart, A.A., and Olle, T.W. (eds) Methods and Associated Tools for the Information Systems Life Cycle (IFIP Transactions North-Holland 1994)

Wikipedia: ODP Reference Model

Wednesday, January 23, 2013

Managing Business Transformation

Just putting together the material for my new workshop next week.

This is the third day of my Business Architecture series. The first two days cover the six business architecture viewpoints. The idea is that people can tale these separately or together.

Day One - Modelling Business Operations 
Exploring process quality issues using the Activity Viewpoint, Knowledge (Information) Viewpoint and Motivation (Purpose) Viewpoint.

Day Two – Modelling Business Organization 
Exploring business relationships and strategy, using the Capability Viewpoint, Responsibility (Organizational) Viewpoint and Cybernetic Viewpoint.

Day Three – Managing Business Transformation 
Process guidelines and roadmap for business architects to analyse and manage structural change in large complex organizations.


Thursday, December 29, 2005

Power to the Edge

Power to the edge is about changing the way individuals, organizations, and systems relate to one another and work.
  • empowerment of individuals at the edge of an organization
  • adoption of an edge organization, with greatly enhanced peer-to-peer interactions.
  • moving senior personnel into roles that place them at the edge
Power to the edge is being presented in the military domain as the correct response to increased uncertainty, volatility, and complexity. Clearly these factors also apply to civilian enterprises, both commercial and public sector.

Military use of the term comes from a book by David S. Alberts and Richard E. Hayes, of the US Department of Defense Command and Control Research Program (DoD CCRP). See also presentation material by Dr Margaret Myers.

Groove (acquired by Microsoft in March 2005) always liked this concept – see blogs by Ray Ozzie and Michael Helfrich. See also blogs by Doug Simpson and Nathan Wallace.

Philip Boxer and I wrote a couple of articles for the Microsoft Architecture Journal on the implications for Service Oriented Architecture. Philip and Carole Eigen also applied the concept to the psychoanalytic study of organizations.

I found a weblog rant here to the effect that Power to the Edge is all about speeding up information flow, just another name for Reengineering. In my view, this is a fundamental misunderstanding. Obviously Power to the Edge may call for improved flow of information: quality and complexity as well as quantity and speed. But Power to the Edge is not the improved flow itself but what it enables – which is a fundamental transformation in the geometry of the organization away from a hierarchical command-and-control structure. And such structures are still as common in civilian/commercial organizations as in the military, if not more so.



David S. Alberts and Richard E. Hayes, Power to the Edge: Command … Control … in the Information Age (CCRP June 2003) PDF version available online (1.7 MB).

Philip Boxer, Taking power to the edge by empowering the edge role (Asymmetric Leadership, 24 January 2006)

Philip Boxer and Carole Eigen, Taking power to the edge of the organisation: re-forming role as praxis (ISPSO Symposium, Baltimore, June 2005) (abstract) (presentation) (paper)

Philip Boxer and Richard Veryard, Taking Governance to the Edge (Microsoft Architecture Journal 6, August 2006)

Margaret Myers, Power to the Edge Through Net Centricity – Transformation of the Global Information Grid (CHIPS July-September 2002) Slides (pdf).

John Stenbit, Moving Power to the Edge (CHIPS July-September 2003)

Richard Veryard and Philip Boxer, Metropolis and SOA Governance: Towards the Agile Metropolis (Microsoft Architecture Journal 5, July 2005)

Wikipedia: Power to the Edge

Cross-posted to AsymmetricLeadership blog

See also Demise of the Super Star (August 2004), Governance at the Edge (August 2004) Microsoft and Groove (March 2005), Developing Data Strategy (December 2019)

Updated 7 December 2019