In this IEEE article, Richard Welke, Rudy Hirschheim and Andrew Schwarz discuss a SOA maturity model that can be used to achieve organizational objectives, by accounting for the different motivations for SOA adoption by stakeholders like IT administrators, business managers, and enterprise leaders.
This article presents a framework of SOA Governance processes, a maturity model, linked to the processes and a description of how architects should be involved in these processes. The authors provided some practical guidelines on how architects can lead or provide support at the various processes of the lifecycle and maturity levels.
This article shows how recommended contract versioning design policies relate to a SOA Maturity Model. The goal is to provide a roadmap for achieving the full feature set of versioning and composability as part of SOA Governance.
With debates on comparing and contrasting REST with WS-* or SOA having died down, the debate moves on to have to measure how RESTful a system may be, or how "mature" it is. One approach that is referred to many times is the Richardson Maturity Model. However, there is disagreement within the community as to whether or not this model is the right approach to use.
While Scott Ambler, Ross Pettit and others continue to pursue the creation of a maturity model for agile, David Starr has looked at how and why an organization might want to measure things like: agility, craftsmanship, and organizational success. He found craftsmanship relatively easy to measure, while agility was the most difficult to measure in a useful way.
Scott Ambler, who once wrote 'Has Hell Frozen Over? An Agile Maturity Model?', has started writing about something that he is calling the Agile Process Maturity Model. The discussion around Scott's model has uncovered another model by the same name, and renewed the debate over the usefulness of a maturity model for agile.
The Software Engineering Institute (SEI) recently published a paper entitled "Evaluating and Improving Architectural Competence", which looks at using four models of human behaviour to help assess and improve software architecture competence.
With Software as a Service (SaaS) becoming more and more mainstream, the architecture behind the offering is getting more discussion. Dharmesh Shah wrote about the economics of the SaaS architecture maturity model.
Periodically an Agile Maturity Model or a Framework for Agile Adoption shows up on the radar. There are also several consulting companies performing Agile 'readiness assessments' as a precursor to helping their clients 'become' Agile. Are these indications of an unfulfilled need in the community?
