January 21, 2008
NRF Afterthoughts: Will the Desire to Implement SOA Finally Bring Everyone to the Standards Table?
By Bill Bittner, President, BWH Consulting
One of my favorite sayings is that an 80 percent solution fully implemented is better than a 100 percent solution that is ignored. For too long, companies have ignored standards because they thought there was something unique about their own requirements (the missing 20 percent) that eliminated the benefit of implementing the standard. The cost of this thinking has been the inability to interoperate across the supply chain and share data between stakeholders.
SOA (Service Oriented Architecture) is the standard that connects business software running on various computers so it is able to exchange data seamlessly. It promises to eliminate the technical hurdles to collaboration, but this will only emphasize the remaining gaps in standards and business processes that prevent full implementation. Until industry organizations embrace common data definitions and business processes, there will always be companies without the right data or trying to send data to nonexistent processes.
ARTS (The Association for Retail Technology Standards) has long been the “Retail Data Maven,” providing data models for the POS environment, store, and overall retail business. They have also developed standard RFPs that provide a starting point for retailers wanting to purchase new technology. Now they have standard XML messaging formats for the exchange of data between various business processes. And ARTS has just released updates to their RFP for workforce and task management.
VICS (Voluntary Interindustry Commerce Solutions) has always been the “Business Process Maven.” They were the first to advocate “Collaborative Planning and Forecasting” between manufacturers and distributors. Their business process model has expanded to cover strategy and planning, demand and supply management, execution, and analysis. Their trademark says it all, “Don’t wait to be great … Collaborate.” VICS has developed the CPFR training program for quick emersion into the details of collaboration. They are working with the University of Arkansas to test and document the realities of item level RFID tagging.
Discussion Questions: With the technical hurdles eliminated, will the business organizations be able to compromise enough to make the vision of a Service Oriented Architecture a reality? Will all the supply chain players finally realize that by accepting a compromise, everyone can achieve greater benefit?
[Author’s comment] My personal feeling is that both these efforts have been underutilized by the various stakeholders who should be demanding participation. Manufacturers, retailers and wholesalers need to get more involved so that their business organizations understand the benefits of collaboration and break down the walls in the old “We vs. Them” scenario. With the technical hurdles resolved, it is imperative that the business players understand the issues and can move the ball forward.
I have always believed that standards should not necessarily keep everyone marching in cadence, but at least keep us all going in the same direction. Both ARTS and VICS are working to make their definitions “extensible” so that specific partnership related exceptions can be supported but this still requires overall understanding. Maybe SOA and increased flexibility in the standards will make this the year that sees both ARTS and VICS blossom. Early adopters will certainly have the advantage.
BrainTrust
Recent Discussions
Discussion Questions
Poll
As a technology consultant, I see the challenges to standardization played out across all business sectors. Let’s face it: Going to standards is painful. Sometimes *very* painful. Some companies have invested extensive amounts of time and money in systems tweaked just for the way they do business.
I say to my customers, “You’re a manufacturer, not a software developer.” Or, “You’re a publisher, not a software developer.” The trouble with having custom systems is that you get into the software development game almost without knowing it. Imagine if you had developed a sales force automation system 7 years ago. Now you’d be trying to keep it in line with SalesForce.com. It doesn’t make sense.
The job of technology is to wring inefficiency out of the system. The benefits are huge. But companies have to have the short term will to go through the difficult path to standardization.
The biggest beneficiaries of SOA may well be the software vendors. All of RSRs research shows that retailers are tired of paying for integration costs.
If (as told at NRF) buses like IBM’s RIF can interact with SAP’s Netweaver, and if Oracle’s apps can play nicely with those of JDA, the vendors will be able to overcome the most significant internal retailer obstacle to buying software–those dreaded integration costs.
Several challenges continue to face the industry as a whole in the move to system collaboration. SOA clearly addresses one challenge. However, just looking at the retail side of the “standards table,” a complex web of systems has evolved to address business problems with technological solutions. They still work but may not be completely paid for or talk to each other. Just fixing these legacy anchors is huge.
As a reality check, the ability to link information systems and collaborate with suppliers doesn’t necessarily mean it will happen. Like it or not, this is still an adversarial relationship where business issues are concerned. As tech solutions extend their reach into the nests of business needs on both sides of the table, some strategies will need to remain at cross purposes between trading partners.
Collaboration between disparate systems of integrated solutions can certainly be enabled by SOA, but the motivation to move in that direction is extremely far-sighted. I’m not sure how many companies are in a position to invest in that crusade. Integrating their own systems looms much closer and seems more rewarding and safer.
Almost every retailer has a long to-do project development list. It’s the Iceberg of Unfulfilled Desire. The itty bitty top of the iceberg, visible above the water line, are the projects slated for this fiscal year. Below the water line, invisible to most folks, are the 10,000 improvements everyone wants that aren’t suggested because it’s discouraging to talk seriously about something that has less than a 1% chance of being put on the schedule.
And no one believes that anything scheduled for later than this fiscal year is a true commitment anyway. SOA only rises to the top of the list, the itty bitty piece above the water line, when there’s a huge immediate financial return clearly obvious even to folks only tangentially involved. Without that provable, clear, obvious ROI, Service Oriented Architecture is lost on the nonexistent list of unfulfilled desire, never scheduled seriously, never to be visible.
This same dilemma is facing the industry in the shopper vs. consumer segmentation area as well. Truly, if the industry is going to progress, the technology capabilities need to be used and all parties need to agree on sharing practices.
In an environment where trips are decreasing, spending is down and consumers are less satisfied with shopping experiences overall, those that are partnering with integrity and true visibility to data have had better results.
Practitioners who bridge the gaps between retailers and marketers are especially focused on bringing disparate data and insights together for the benefit of both parties. Personally, I long for the day when it won’t be such a struggle to get to answers and insights quicker, in a more seamless technology environment, to put forth solutions that impact the shopper, the retailer and the brand in more positive ways.
More Discussions
Has Same-Day Delivery Become an Expectation Across Retail?
Are expectations around retail delivery speed in flux?OpenAI Names the Infrastructure Standard for Agentic Commerce
Will OpenAI or Google (or another entity) set the gold standard for agentic commerce?Is Five Below Poised For Even Greater Growth?
Five Below is hitting serious growth numbers. Can this trend continue?
As a technology consultant, I see the challenges to standardization played out across all business sectors. Let’s face it: Going to standards is painful. Sometimes *very* painful. Some companies have invested extensive amounts of time and money in systems tweaked just for the way they do business.
I say to my customers, “You’re a manufacturer, not a software developer.” Or, “You’re a publisher, not a software developer.” The trouble with having custom systems is that you get into the software development game almost without knowing it. Imagine if you had developed a sales force automation system 7 years ago. Now you’d be trying to keep it in line with SalesForce.com. It doesn’t make sense.
The job of technology is to wring inefficiency out of the system. The benefits are huge. But companies have to have the short term will to go through the difficult path to standardization.
The biggest beneficiaries of SOA may well be the software vendors. All of RSRs research shows that retailers are tired of paying for integration costs.
If (as told at NRF) buses like IBM’s RIF can interact with SAP’s Netweaver, and if Oracle’s apps can play nicely with those of JDA, the vendors will be able to overcome the most significant internal retailer obstacle to buying software–those dreaded integration costs.
Several challenges continue to face the industry as a whole in the move to system collaboration. SOA clearly addresses one challenge. However, just looking at the retail side of the “standards table,” a complex web of systems has evolved to address business problems with technological solutions. They still work but may not be completely paid for or talk to each other. Just fixing these legacy anchors is huge.
As a reality check, the ability to link information systems and collaborate with suppliers doesn’t necessarily mean it will happen. Like it or not, this is still an adversarial relationship where business issues are concerned. As tech solutions extend their reach into the nests of business needs on both sides of the table, some strategies will need to remain at cross purposes between trading partners.
Collaboration between disparate systems of integrated solutions can certainly be enabled by SOA, but the motivation to move in that direction is extremely far-sighted. I’m not sure how many companies are in a position to invest in that crusade. Integrating their own systems looms much closer and seems more rewarding and safer.
Almost every retailer has a long to-do project development list. It’s the Iceberg of Unfulfilled Desire. The itty bitty top of the iceberg, visible above the water line, are the projects slated for this fiscal year. Below the water line, invisible to most folks, are the 10,000 improvements everyone wants that aren’t suggested because it’s discouraging to talk seriously about something that has less than a 1% chance of being put on the schedule.
And no one believes that anything scheduled for later than this fiscal year is a true commitment anyway. SOA only rises to the top of the list, the itty bitty piece above the water line, when there’s a huge immediate financial return clearly obvious even to folks only tangentially involved. Without that provable, clear, obvious ROI, Service Oriented Architecture is lost on the nonexistent list of unfulfilled desire, never scheduled seriously, never to be visible.
This same dilemma is facing the industry in the shopper vs. consumer segmentation area as well. Truly, if the industry is going to progress, the technology capabilities need to be used and all parties need to agree on sharing practices.
In an environment where trips are decreasing, spending is down and consumers are less satisfied with shopping experiences overall, those that are partnering with integrity and true visibility to data have had better results.
Practitioners who bridge the gaps between retailers and marketers are especially focused on bringing disparate data and insights together for the benefit of both parties. Personally, I long for the day when it won’t be such a struggle to get to answers and insights quicker, in a more seamless technology environment, to put forth solutions that impact the shopper, the retailer and the brand in more positive ways.