Your message has been sent.
This article has been saved to your account.
Go to my account
This article has been emailed to your Kindle.
Send this article
This article by Matjaz B. Juric and Harish Gaur, co-authors of Oracle Fusion Middleware Patterns highlights how SOA can help IT align with key business processes. SOA reduces the semantic gap between IT and business by introducing a development model that aligns the IT development cycle with the business process lifecycle. This article introduces reader to organizational and technical aspects of SOA development. It then describes how Elektro Slovenija, Slovenia's state-owned power distribution company, transformed its procurement process using Oracle BPA and Oracle SOA Suite.
(For more resources on Oracle, see here.)
Business Process Management and SOA
One of the major benefits of a Service-Oriented Architecture is its ability to align IT with business processes. Business processes are important because they define the way business activities are performed. Business processes change as the company evolves and improves its operations. They also change in order to make the company more competitive.
Today, IT is an essential part of business operations. Companies are simply unable to do business without IT support. However, this places a high level of responsibility on IT. An important part of this responsibility is the ability of IT to react to changes in a quick and efficient manner. Ideally, IT must instantly respond to business process changes.
In most cases, however, IT is not flexible enough to adapt application architecture to the changes in business processes quickly. Software developers require time to modify application behavior. In the meantime, the company is stuck with old processes. In a highly competitive marketplace such delays are dangerous, and the threat is exacerbated by a reliance on traditional software development to make quick changes within an increasingly complex IT architecture.
The major problem with traditional approaches to software development is the huge semantic gap between IT and the process models. The traditional approach to software development has been focused on functionalities rather than on end-to-end support for business processes. It usually requires the definition of use cases, sequence diagrams, class diagrams, and other artifacts, which bring us to the actual code in a programming language such as Java, C#, C++, and so on. SOA reduces the semantic gap by introducing a development model that aligns the IT development cycle with the business process lifecycle. In SOA, business processes can be executed directly and integrated with existing applications through services.
To understand this better, let's look at the four phases of the SOA lifecycle:
- Process modeling: This is the phase in which process analysts work with process owners to analyze the business process and define the process model. They define the activity flow, information flow, roles, and business documents. They also define business policies and constraints, business rules, and performance measures. Performance measures are often called Key Performance Indicators (KPIs). Examples of KPIs include activity turnaround time, activity cost, and so on. Usually Business Process Modeling Notation (BPMN) is used in this phase.
- Process implementation: This is the phase in which developers work with process analysts to implement the business process, with the objective of providing end-to-end support for the process. In an SOA approach, the process implementation phase includes process implementation with the Business Process Execution Language (BPEL) and process decomposition to the services, implementation or reuse of services, and integration.
- Process execution and control: This is the actual execution phase, in which the process participants execute various activities of the process. In the end-to-end support for business processes, it is very important that IT drives the process and directs process participants to execute activities, and not vice versa, where the actual process drivers are employees. In SOA, processes execute on a process server. Process control is an important part of this phase, during which process supervisors or process managers control whether the process is executing optimally. If delays occur, exceptions arise, resources are unavailable, or other problems develop, process supervisors or managers can take corrective actions.
- Process monitoring and optimization: This is the phase in which process owners monitor the KPIs of the process using Business Activity Monitoring (BAM). Process analysts, process owners, process supervisors, and key users examine the process and analyze the KPIs while taking into account changing business conditions. They examine business issues and make optimizations to the business process.
The following figure shows how a process enters this cycle, and goes through the various stages:
Once optimizations have been identified and selected, the process returns to the modeling phase, where optimizations are applied. Then the process is re-implemented and the whole lifecycle is repeated. This is referred to as an iterative-incremental lifecycle, because the process is improved at each stage.
Organizational aspects of SOA development
SOA development, as described in the previous section, differs considerably from traditional development. SOA development is process-centric and keeps the modeler and the developer focused on the business process and on end-to-end support for the process, thereby efficiently reducing the gap between business and IT.
The success of the SOA development cycle relies on correct process modeling. Only when processes are modeled in detail can we develop end-to-end support that will work. Exceptional process fl ows also have to be considered. This can be a difficult task, one that is beyond the scope of the IT department (particularly when viewed from the traditional perspective).
To make process-centric SOA projects successful, some organizational changes are required. Business users with a good understanding of the process must be motivated to actively participate in the process modeling. Their active participation must not be taken for granted, lest they find other work "more useful," particularly if they do not see the added value of process modeling. Therefore, a concise explanation as to why process modeling makes sense can be a very valuable time investment.
A good strategy is to gain top management support. It makes enormous sense to explain two key factors to top management—first, why a process centric approach and end-to-end support for processes makes sense, and second, why the IT department cannot successfully complete the task without the participation of business users. Usually top management will understand the situation rather quickly and will instruct business users to participate.
Obviously, the proposed process-centric development approach must become an ongoing activity. This will require the formalization of certain organizational structures. Otherwise, it will be necessary to seek approval for each and every project. We have already seen that the proposed approach outgrows the organizational limits of the IT department. Many organizations establish a BPM/SOA Competency Center, which includes business users and all the other profiles required for SOA development. This also includes the process analyst, process implementation, service development, and presentation layer groups, as well as SOA governance.
Perhaps the greatest responsibility of SOA development is to orchestrate the aforementioned groups so that they work towards a common goal. This is the responsibility of the project manager, who must work in close connection with the governance group. Only in this way can SOA development be successful, both in the short term (developing end-to-end applications for business processes), and in the long term (developing a fl exible, agile IT architecture that is aligned with business needs).
Technology aspects of SOA development
SOA introduces technologies and languages that enable the SOA development approach. Particularly important is BPMN, which is used for business process modeling, and BPEL, which is used for business process execution.
BPMN is the key technology for process modeling. The process analyst group must have in-depth knowledge of BPMN and process modeling concepts. When modeling processes for SOA, they must be modeled in detail. Using SOA, we model business processes with the objective of implementing them in BPEL and executing them on the process server. Process models can be made executable only if all the relevant information is captured that is needed for the actual execution. We must identify individual activities that are atomic from the perspective of the execution. We must model exceptional scenarios too. Exceptional scenarios define how the process behaves when something goes wrong—and in the real world, business processes can and do go wrong. We must model how to react to exceptional situations and how to recover appropriately.
Next, we automate the process. This requires mapping of the BPMN process model into the executable representation in BPEL. This is the responsibility of the process implementation group. BPMN can be converted to BPEL almost automatically and vice versa, which guarantees that the process map is always in sync with the executable code. However, the executable BPEL process also has to be connected with the business services. Each process activity is connected with the corresponding business service. Business services are responsible for fulfilling the individual process activities.
SOA development is most efficient if you have a portfolio of business services that can be reused, and which includes lower-level and intermediate technical services. Business services can be developed from scratch, exposed from existing systems, or outsourced. This task is the responsibility of the service development group. In theory, it makes sense for the service development group to first develop all business services. Only then would the process implementation group start to compose those services into the process. However, in the real world this is often not the case, because you will probably not have the luxury of time to develop the services first and only then start the processes. And even if you do have enough time, it would be difficult to know which business services will be required by processes. Therefore, both groups usually work in parallel, which is a great challenge. It requires interaction between them and strict, concise supervision of the SOA governance group and the project manager; otherwise, the results of both groups (the process implementation group and the service development group) will be incompatible.
Once you have successfully implemented the process, it can be deployed on the process server. In addition to executing processes, a process server provides other valuable information, including a process audit trail, lists of successfully completed processes, and a list of terminated or failed processes. This information is helpful in controlling the process execution and in taking any necessary corrective measures. The services and processes communicate using the Enterprise Service Bus (ESB). The services and processes are registered in the UDDI-compliant service registry. Another part of the architecture is the rule engine, which serves as a central place for business rules. For processes with human tasks, user interaction is obviously important, and is connected to identity management.
The SOA platform also provides BAM. BAM helps to measure the key performance indicators of the process, and provides valuable data that can be used to optimize processes. The ultimate goal of each BAM user is to optimize process execution, to improve process efficiency, and to sense and react to important events.
BAM ensures that we start optimizing processes where it makes most sense. Traditionally, process optimization has been based on simulation results, or even worse, by guessing where bottlenecks might be. BAM, on the other hand, gives more reliable and accurate data, which leads to better decisions about where to start with optimizations. The following figure illustrates the SOA layers:
eBook Price: $26.99
Book Price: $44.99
(For more resources on Oracle, see here.)
Case study: Process modeling
So far, we discussed the theory. Now let's take a look at a case study of an end-to-end procurement process from Elektro Slovenija, Slovenia's state-owned power distribution company. The procurement process was implemented using a full set of Oracle tools—Oracle Business Process Analysis PA Suite for the modeling, SOA Suite (BPEL Process Manager, ESB, Rules Author, WS Manager, Application Server) with JDeveloper, and Service Registry for the implementation, along with Oracle BAM for the business activity monitoring. The interrelationship is shown in the following figure:
As a state-owned company, Elektro Slovenija must conform to strict regulations regarding procurement. The process starts with an order request form. First, a decision needs to be made as to whether the order will be collected with other similar orders for a joint purchase (for example, for office materials), or as an individual order. The order value infl uences the process as well. Orders smaller than €4,200 are the most simple and require that three offers are collected and that a purchase order is issued. For orders up to €12,000, a negotiation process takes place and a contract is issued. For larger orders, a special commission is created to carry out the ordering process, which differs depending on the type of order (product, service, or real estate). Several roles are involved in the process, including the order creator, the person responsible for the contract, the head of the procurement unit, and the commission for larger orders.
Modeling the process was the first challenge in the project. The company had already established an SOA Competency Center, and top management already had a good understanding of BPM and SOA. This simplified the situation, in that it was not very difficult to motivate business users to participate. In our experience, the group that models the process should include people in the following roles:
- Process owner, who will verify the process flow and make decisions about possible changes in the process.
- One or two process owner assistants with a solid understanding of the process. These individuals will do the actual modeling.
- Moderator, who will ask questions and lead the meeting.
- Process modeler, who is experienced in detailed SOA modeling.
The process in the BPA Suite has been modeled on six levels. It includes 24 sub-processes, and consists of 230 activities, of which more than 100 are human tasks. The process involves 25 different roles, implements more than 40 business rules, and defines seven key performance indicators. The following figure shows the BPA Suite application displaying the top-level process diagram:
It is worth mentioning that the BPA Suite has good support for processes with human tasks (such as our example process). In addition, BPA Publisher can be used to share the process definition with other interested parties in order to foster collaboration.
Once the process has been designed, BPA Suite can check the model for semantic validity in order to indentify parts of the process that may have been incorrectly modeled, as illustrated in the following screenshot:
Case study: Process implementation
Three parallel development activities were started in order to develop the composite application for end-to-end support. They are:
- Development of the BPEL executable process
- Development of business services
- Development of the presentation layer—the user interface
In this case, the same team of two developers developed the BPEL executable process and the business services. One of those developers was also the process modeler. This simplified the organizational aspects and reduced the communication overhead.
The following subsections briefly describe the development of the BPEL executable process and the business services. However, the user interface is not SOA-specific, so it will not be discussed.
Development of BPEL executable process
The BPEL executable process can be developed manually, or it can be automatically translated from the BPMN model. We will use the latter approach, because with automatic translation we ensure consistency between the process model and the executable model. This approach also reduces effort, as it does not require developing BPEL from scratch. Finally, automatic translation can be applied in both directions, from BPMN to BPEL and vice versa, as we will see later. To enable seamless translation, several guidelines should be followed by the BPMN design (see the Guidelines on BPMN to BPEL mapping section covered later in this article). BPMN to BPEL transformation is very complex, and the same BPMN construct can be mapped to BPEL in different ways.
If you follow the guidelines, the transformation from BPMN to BPEL (from BPA Suite to JDeveloper blueprint) is straightforward. While the technology is relatively new, it works well enough for production use on complex processes, such as this procurement process. Our experience with the transformation has been mostly positive. The following screenshot shows the JDeveloper BPEL Blueprint perspective.
The BPEL code has to be amended in JDeveloper. The most important task here is to connect the BPEL process with the actual business services. Please note that the WSDL interfaces of the business services can be used in the BPA Suite already. This means that we do not have to wait until the development phase (in JDeveloper, where it is obvious that we will use WSDL interfaces). This way we can make the process model conformant with business service interfaces in the design phase, which can simplify BPEL development. Such an approach, however, requires some additional skills from the process modelers.
In addition to connecting BPEL with services, other important activities of this phase include development of ESB mediations, registering services in the Service Registry, entering business rules into the Rules Author, deploying the process, and developing the BAM dashboard (which we will talk about later).
Development of business services
The procurement process had to be integrated with several existing applications, particularly the business information system applications, including accounting, general ledger, and inventory. Not all applications had service interfaces; therefore, some new interfaces had to be developed and business logic exposed through services. When exposing existing applications as services, it is crucial to have support from the original developers. Otherwise, service developers will waste a lot of time struggling through legacy code. In this case, existing applications have been Oracle Forms applications. The procurement process also deals with quite a few documents, including the order request, tender documentation, offers, a contract, purchase order, and several others. To manage electronic versions of the documents, an e-document content management system has been used. Although Oracle Universal Content Management would be the obvious choice, the company already had another content management system deployed, which had service interfaces. This made the task of integrating it quite straightforward. When developing business services, it is important to follow SOA patterns and, in particular, the loose-coupling principle. It is also important to develop reusable business services.
eBook Price: $26.99
Book Price: $44.99
(For more resources on Oracle, see here.)
BPMN to BPEL Round-tripping
An important part of SOA development, particularly in real-world projects, is the ability to round-trip changes between the BPMN model in BPA Suite and BPEL in the JDeveloper blueprint representation. There are two important aspects of round-tripping:
- How changes in the BPMN model can be propagated to BPEL without losing implementation changes already done in BPEL
- How changes done in BPEL can be propagated back to the BPMN model, to keep them both in sync
We have been pleasantly surprised by the maturity of Oracle tools. In both scenarios, the round-tripping experience has been positive:
- When updating the BPA process model, we have been able to propagate changes to the JDeveloper blueprint without losing previous implementation changes to the BPEL.
- When updating the BPEL in JDeveloper, we have been able to propagate the changes back to the BPA model, where the business people had the choice to accept or decline the changes. The following screenshots illustrate an example where a Save Order request activity has been added in BPEL (in JDeveloper) and the change has been propagated to the BPMN model in BPA Suite.
Round-tripping is very important for real-world development, as it is the key to iterative SOA development, which guarantees short development cycles and easy modifications to existing composite applications. Round-tripping also keeps the model (BPMN) and the executable code (BPEL) in sync. Our experience with Oracle tools revealed only very minor problems, such as fault handlers that did not synchronize properly between BPA and JDeveloper. In our opinion, the approach taken by Oracle, where the modeling and implementation tools are separate, is better than the approach that uses the same tool for both.
Guidelines on BPMN to BPEL mapping
Let's take another look at the BPMN to BPEL mapping. We learned that in BPA Suite not all BPMN constructs map equally well to BPEL. Therefore, a process modeler must be aware of the specifics related to the BPMN to BPEL mapping in order to get the most efficient model.
The basic rules for mapping are:
- All BPMN activities are mapped to BPEL scopes
- Start events are mapped to receive or pick activities, depending on the type of trigger
- End events are mapped to reply, invoke, throw, or other activities, depending on the type
- Gateways are transformed to different BPEL activities, such as pick, switch, or flow
- Business data is mapped to variables
- Subprocesses are mapped to invoke activities
- Each BPMN subprocess becomes a separate BPEL process
Particular care must be exercised when dealing with the cycles. BPMN supports arbitrary cycles, but BPEL does not. Therefore, we must convert all cycles to while loops (structured cycles). This, however, can change the process model considerably, at least from the visual perspective (the process behavior is unchanged if the appropriate conversion is performed). As a result, business people might have trouble understanding the converted model. The lack of support for arbitrary cycles can also be a problem if the process has many interleaved human tasks.
To avoid structured cycles in simpler scenarios, we can do some refactoring for decisions with multiple outputs. Such decisions should be decomposed into multiple decisions. For example, the following scenario does not map appropriately to BPEL:
Therefore, we should decompose the decision into two decisions as follows:
The activities in cycles, which repeat, are duplicated in the generated BPEL. This can be avoided by grouping the repeating activities and modeling them as subprocesses. Then, only the invoke activity for calling the subprocess will be repeated in the generated BPEL.
Exercise caution with the end events, which do not actually end the BPEL process, as you might expect. In BPMN decisions we can infl uence how the generated BPEL switch will be generated. If we do not define the default flow for a condition, an otherwise is generated within the BPEL switch activity. This can be useful, particularly for human tasks where the BPEL process should check for a variety of possible human task outcomes.
After successful development, the composite application is deployed to the process server. Oracle SOA Suite and BPEL Process Manager in particular provide adequate tools to control and manage the process execution. Particularly, the added fault policies in 10.1.3.4 are very useful in production use, as they allow system administrator intervention if a fault occurs in the process. The procurement process is a long-running process that includes several human tasks. So the process must not be terminated if a fault occurs. Fault policies support this and allow a separation of the system fault handling from the process implementation. WS Manager is a useful tool in the process execution phase. It simplifies supervision of the process and services, and allows usage monitoring and even SLA compliance control.
Processes that include human tasks also require an identity management system, with all the roles and users that participate in the process. In our case, we used Active Directory, which can be integrated with the SOA Suite. Alternatively, we could have used Oracle Identity Management.
Process monitoring using BAM and optimizations
Legislative changes in the past made several modifications necessary to the procurement process. In addition, the company's efforts to increase efficiency, which placed a high priority on the ability to systematically identify process bottlenecks, further increased the need for process modification.
To support this, we have implemented BAM support. This includes the definition of sensors to monitor the process execution and the development of a BAM dashboard. The following screenshot shows an example dashboard developed for the process:
BAM has proved particularly important for process owners, who are able to monitor the process execution in real time. In our experience, developing a BAM dashboard is quite simple, at least for monitoring simple KPIs.
BAM data is a useful starting point for process optimizations. So far, the procurement process is only in its first iteration, and has not yet been optimized. However, BAM data has already been used to identify possible optimization points. Even in its first iteration, the procurement process has demonstrated several benefits—the workload on the employees is reduced by 25% to 35%, as some process activities have been automated, and the visibility of the process is considerably improved. It is possible to track the execution of the process instances and to figure out which activity is occurring within a selected process instance. This reduces gap times, which leads to faster execution. In future iterations, more process steps will be automated, which will result in even higher benefits.
As a real-world example, the case study has proved the most important benefits of a process-centric SOA approach—better alignment between business and IT, faster development cycles, fewer errors, and most important, much faster development cycles, which guarantee considerable reduction in the time required to fulfill business requirements.
Related to better alignment between business and IT, the following important benefits of process-centric development also emerged:
- Better understanding of business requirements
- End-to-end business process support
- Process monitoring and execution control, which provides valuable business performance indicators
These benefits would have been very difficult to achieve without an SOA approach.
We also learned that the process-centric approach to SOA development is both a technical and an organizational challenge. It requires the setting up of competent groups for process modeling, process implementation, service development, and the development of the user interface. It also requires the setting up of necessary supervision, through SOA governance and project management. For smaller projects, the same small development group can take over several roles. Finally, SOA development requires new skills to be successful.
The benefits of the complete SOA process lifecycle, spanning modeling, implementation, execution, monitoring, and optimization, are numerous and well worth the necessary investment in the required knowledge and products. We believe that covering the full process lifecycle shows the real value of SOA, which will be even more obvious when changes, modifications, and optimizations are made to the process.
The main message of this case study is that it is possible to develop a complete end-to-end process for a complex real-world process. The process-centric approach to SOA development with full lifecycle support encompasses enormous opportunities for companies to improve and optimize not only their IT support but also their operational efficiency through process automation.
About the Author :
Harish Gaur has more than 13 years of experience in the enterprise software industry including 7+ years at Oracle. He is currently the Director of Product Management for Fusion Middleware at Oracle. In his current role, he works closely with strategic customers implementing SOA & BPM using Oracle Fusion Middleware. He is co-author of BPEL Cookbook (2007) and Fusion Middleware Patterns (Sept 2010)
Before Oracle, he worked as a Solution Specialist with Vitria Technology educating customers about the benefits of Business Process Management. Prior to that, he helped Fortune 500 companies architect scalable integration solutions using EAI tools like webMethods and CrossWorlds (now IBM).
Harish holds an engineering degree in Computer Science and is an MBA from Haas School of Business, UC Berkeley.
Matjaz B. Juric holds a Ph.D. in computer and information science. He is Full Professor at the university and head of the Cloud Computing and SOA Competence Centre. Matjaz is Java Champion and Oracle ACE Director. He has more than 15 years of work experience. He has authored/coauthored Business Process Driven SOA using BPMN and BPEL, Business Process Execution Language for Web Services (English and French editions), BPEL Cookbook: Best Practices for SOA-based integration and composite applications development (award for best SOA book in 2007 by SOA World Journal), SOA Approach to Integration, Professional J2EE EAI, Professional EJB, J2EE Design Patterns Applied, and .NET Serialization Handbook. He has published chapters in More Java Gems (Cambridge University Press) and in Technology Supporting Business Solutions (Nova Science Publishers). He has also published in journals and magazines, such as SOA World Journal, Web Services Journal, Java Developer's Journal, Java Report, Java World, eai Journal, theserverside.com, OTN, ACM journals, and presented at conferences such as OOPSLA, Java Development, XML Europe, OOW, SCI, and others. He is a reviewer, program committee member, and conference organizer. Matjaz has been involved in several large-scale projects. In cooperation with IBM Java Technology Centre, he worked on performance analysis and optimization of RMI-IIOP, integral part of the Java platform. Matjaz is also a member of the BPEL Advisory Board.