Continued ...
My blogs continue at:
http://www.kaleemaziz.com/ipw-web/b2/index.php

My new home is http://KaleemAziz.com.

- Kaleem Aziz.

SOA real life issues.
I thought the following article would have done well to list on there the #1 concern of "security", moreso because SOA with Web Services was mentioned.
http://www.ebizq.net/hot_topics/soa/features/3142.html

This simplification, I believe, twisted the actual situation a bit:
However, the widespread adoption of SOA had previously been constrained by lack of agreement over interface standards. Web services finally solve that problem.

There is much that can plague and torment Web Services. So, everything that happened with CORBA is possible with Web Services adoption. Only our need/effort to understand (that we don't want to repeat it) will eventually solve this problem.

Here's an interesting article that came in timely on the matter of security:
http://www.csoonline.com/read/110103/shop.html

An interesting article on analyzing SOA:
http://www.bijonline.com/PDF/Oct03Lublinsky.pdf
(Source: http://www.bijonline.com/Article.asp?ArticleID=790&DepartmentID=9)

I was touched by the person's motive, in his own small way. Not that I believe it will help a lot, but we need more people, those that are high up enough to make a difference, to do something about such things.
http://www.eeaasr.com/EEAASR%20Index.htm

- Kaleem Aziz.

Dimensions of ethics.
This article on ethics made an interesting reading.
http://nanotech-now.com/Chris-Phoenix/diverse-ethics.htm

The fact that the author tried to state ethics itself appeared revolutionary to me. It seems not many can state (or measure) their ethics, but yet they just use it to judge others. If only ethics are stated well (by the government, by the industry and by the moderators), some of the problems of our world (in government, industry and computing) wouldn't be as messy as they are today.

"Guardian - Maintain the Status Quo" and "Information - Spread Innovation plus Commercial - Improve the Status Quo" are opposites to progress/change. To be able to state "All forms of change/progress cannot be good. No change/progress is bad -- what is good is regulated change/progress." is not easy most times -- and that's where ethics are in dispute most of the time.

Combating in the name of ethics often is called politics. I think "politics" is people involved trying to assert their needs. Often times, one's need is other's greed, and vice versa -- therefore, the bad connotation to the word "politics".

- Kaleem Aziz.

Business Process Coordination.
Business Process Management, Transaction, Coordination, Workflow, Orchestration and Choreography have been transforming itself rapidly. And as is common, there's a lot of noise (I need access to some of those HBR and Forrester research!).

Anyways, besides research level clarity, we also need to value defining what's hype noise and what's technology solution. You may read some of these specifications and acronyms, and may think BPEL4WS is something that refers to rocket science level complexity of solving enterprise disconnect! But trust me, even if these technology acronymns are scary, the specifications are overwhelming and the texts are jargon laden; the underlying concept is simple if you understand the "need". It's the "need" that drives these technologies, not the "question" that used to drive Neo and Trinity in the Matrix. :-)

Here's some fantastic resources that were forwarded on my mailing lists (thanks to those who sent this stuff). Here's me wondering why HBR/Forrester doesn't allow such free "sharing" unless you are separated of ~$800; but then let's just "focus":

BPEL4WS introduced:
http://www.sys-con.com/webservices/articleprint.cfm?id=622

WS-Transaction explained:
http://www.sys-con.com/webservices/articleprint.cfm?id=561
http://www.sys-con.com/webservices/articleprint.cfm?id=587

WS-Coordination:
http://www.sys-con.com/webservices/articleprint.cfm?id=542

Some very interesting specifications here:
http://www.arjuna.com/standards/ws-caf/index.html

Workflow patterns (which are important technology answers, but remember they are not a product solution):
http://tmitwww.tm.tue.nl/research/patterns/

- Kaleem Aziz.

International Perspectives on Economics.
I guess they vary a lot? ;-) The following is a good representation of money/economy is seen in several countries, and hilarious too:

TRADITIONAL ECONOMICS
You have two cows.
You sell one and buy a bull.
Your herd multiplies and the economy grows.
You retire on the income.

CHINESE ECONOMICS
You have two cows.
You have 300 people milking them.
You claim full employment, high bovine
productivity and arrest anyone
reporting the actual numbers.

INDIAN ECONOMICS
You have two cows.
You worship them.

PAKISTAN ECONOMICS
You don't have any cows.
You claim that the Indian cows belong to you.
You ask the US for financial aid,
China for military aid,
Britain for warplanes,
Italy for machines,
Germany for technology,
France for submarines,
Switzerland for loans,
Russia for drugs and
Japan for equipment.
You buy the cows with all this and claim of
exploitation by the world.

AMERICAN ECONOMICS
You have two cows.
You sell one and force the other to produce the
milk of four cows.
You profess surprise when the cow drops dead.
You put the blame on some nation with cows &
naturally that nation will be a danger to mankind.
You wage a war to save the world and grab the cows.

FRENCH ECONOMICS
You have two cows.
You go on strike because you want three cows.

GERMAN ECONOMICS
You have two cows.
You reengineer them so that they live for 100 years,
eat once a month and milk themselves.

BRITISH ECONOMICS
You have two cows.
They are both mad.

ITALIAN ECONOMICS
You have two cows.
You don't know where they are.
You break for lunch.

SWISS ECONOMICS
You have 5000 cows, none of which belong to you.
You charge others for storing them.

JAPANESE ECONOMICS
You have two cows.
You redesign them so that they are one-tenth the
size of an ordinary cow and produce twenty times the milk.
You then create cute cartoon cow images called Cowkimon
and market them world wide.

RUSSIAN ECONOMICS
You have two cows.
You count them and learn you have five cows.
You count them again and learn you have 42 cows.
You count them again and learn you have 17 cows.
You give up counting and open another bottle of vodka.

The following were comments on Ecademy in response to my post:
MALAYSIAN ECONOMICS
You have two cows.
You slaughter one for Hari Raya Puasa and
the other for Hari Raya Haji. Just before that, both
the cows were wandering along the PLUS Highways.

POP MUSIC Economics
You have sheep
You dress them as cows, teach them to behave like cows, teach them to moo like cows
You milk the public.

AFRICAN ECONOMICS
You have two cows
The west lends you a lot of money to buy new cows
Promising to buy the milk
They also lend money to your neighbour to buy cows
Price of milk drops, you can not sell enough milk to pay debt.
So you decide to make butter to sell to the west which is more profitable.
To protect jobs and profits in the west they apply 300% import tax!
The west lends you more money to buy pigs and off we go again.

Then there's this extremely funny comparison between how differently we see our international problems:

If a worldwide survey was conducted by the UN on the question of:

Would you please give your honest opinion about solutions to the food shortage in the rest of the world?"

The survey result would be:

? Africa: They didn't know what "food" meant.

? Eastern Europe: They didn't know what "honest" meant.

? Western Europe: They didn't know what "shortage" meant.

? China: They didn't know what "opinion" meant.

? Middle East: They didn't know what "solution" meant.

? South America: They didn't know what "please" meant.

? USA: They didn't know what "the rest of the world" meant.

- Kaleem Aziz.

Room better for productivity than cubicles?
I can't quantify it, but having a room instead of a cubicle will help in a peaceful work environment. I for one would have light music playing in the room while I work! :-)

Anyways, I had said at the end of the post of "Web Services maturity at IBM > Microsoft > Sun > HP." the following:

"On a lighter note, while I interviewed for Microsoft and since I've been in IBM as well I noticed one common thing. They did not have cubicles (or cubes), but rooms with doors for each employee (and this pattern repeated consistently in several buildings). Sun, Oracle, and Cisco have cubicles. So here's a theory/report, the companies that don't have cubicles are going to be ahead in Web Services arena ... :^)"

Here's some proof I must have been more right than humorous: ;-)

David Letterman's Top 10 Drawbacks to Working in a Cubicle

10. Being told to "think outside the box" when you're in a freakin' box all day long.
09. Not being able to check e-mail attachments without turning around to see who's behind you.
08. Cubicle walls do not offer much protection from any kind of gun fire.
07. That nagging feeling that if you press the right button, you'll get a piece of cheese.
06. Lack of roof rafters for the noose.
05. The walls are too close together for the hammock to work right.
04. 23 power cords - 1 outlet.
03. Prison cells are not only bigger, they also have beds.
02. The carpet has been there since 1976 and shows more signs of life than your coworkers.

And the number 1 drawback to working in a cubicle is...
01. You can't walk out and slam the door when you quit.

Even if we account such that building depreciates in accounting (instead of appreciating in reality), I think giving your employees rooms gives them lesser noise, more privacy, more luxury, more self-confidence and more creativity. Remind this to me again when we are in an uptime! ;-)

- Kaleem Aziz.

MOUSE.
You think you use your mouse?

Look again:
More than intended time spent online
Other responsibilities neglected
Unsuccessful attempts to cut down
Significant relationship discord because of use
Excessive thoughts or anxiety when not online.

WARNING: Your computer is using you!!! :)

- Kaleem Aziz.

Can you wait?
Do you have the patience to wait and think? Do you have the self-regulation to slow yourself down, take a step back, and then, only start after you've re-evaluated your situation?

Do you really wait?
If you said "Ya, I do." not to come out not-good-enough, and because you think you've done that before once or twice, I want you to show yourself where you've written down such a thing. If you were stuck, did you pick up a piece of paper and write your plan out? If you haven't then you don't have the "proof" to yourself that you do "wait".

This is the "waiting game" of life. I believe those who master this waiting game succeed unprecedentedly, and those who don't understand it, don't ever figure out what's wrong with them. So to explain what's the waiting game, let's play a simple example.

Secret of the waiting game:
I suggest you to calculate 3243 x 653 without using a calculator or writing. And, then find the result of 8923412 + 343212 + 34234 + 3424222 as well without using a calculator or writing. What's the point? I figure we cannot do the above computations in a reasonable amount of time without a "tool" (either calculator, computer or paper). How the heck can we correct our priorities without working them out in some written form, and consciously then thinking about sorting it? My point exactly, you need paper and pen to strategize your priorities too! If you've been living life moment to moment, without playing the waiting game, you've probably accumulated a lot of problems of your own making.

Having said that waiting game requires you to use a tool to sort out your life, there are a few more things to go. Between work-work-work life and fun-fun-fun life, we get moments that we often either laze away in a hammock or play still like a statue in front of a TV or involve in brainless gossip or hail brain-dead followership or engage in repetitive chores or the never-ending worship of a God you never saw. We need to use some of this time to do our "step-back and think" trick. If you've thought long-term enough, trying sorting it out even longer, to see if it is prudent.

"Waiting game strategy = Preparing long-term."

Charlatan businesses think short-term:
Many businesses that I see are aiming short term by making a quick buck or two, or just because they want something in life. This is a very short-sighted view. You should do business because you are creating something many-many other people want! If you really want to succeed, you must plan your long-term strategy well.

Case I:
Let me give you an example. How do you think your favorite sports star wins? It is not how he plays alone that makes him popular, it is what he does in his "waiting game" of life that makes him successful. Besides preparation of playing the game, he has to take out time to figure how his competitors are trying to undo his advantage or use his weakness -- for without it, he is not worth the competition!

Case II:
As yet another example, it is said that those who find men that wait are lucky. It is said that men that wait are the best lovers. Why? It is because men that wait have understood the game of love, because they are prepared, because they know their goals are long-term (like marriage, love, etc., but not merely sex/lust) and they are serious about the factors involved that can potentially make their relationship complex. In essence, they've used their waiting time productively to do their homework of sorting out their emotions, thoughts and priorities. So they tend to stay away from multiple-dating, they go steady and give out signs that they are confident about how they would handle the next stage (even if they are competing against another guy to have her like him!).

Case III:
Let's take the example of how a soldier fights. You think the soldier has unlimited bullets and is always involved in running and fighting? No, he has only limited capability to carry guns of his choice. If he carries too much, he cannot run. If he carries too little, he will run out of ammo too quickly. If he doesn't wait for the enemy the correct amount of time, and doesn't get the time to set his sights or bayonet, he is dead meat. If he fires too early, he causes his side to lose. Experienced soldiers know -- it is the "waiting game" that is more important than the "fighting game".

Long term planners try to win the war, not the battles:
So, if your life is a struggle, your priorities may be to blame. You may be working too hard in "fighting" to secure your position, but you can do better when you use any breaks you get to "time your fight" better.

Pick the right battles in life, plan for them in time, prepare for them with passion, wait for the right time in life and deploy the best you can when you get the opportunity. If you couldn't do your best, use a paper and pen as to how you were defeated or why you didn't meet expectations.

Try again, life is big!

- Kaleem Aziz.

Cult-ure: Norms of following the crowd.
Culture often becomes "cult" like. Therefore the title "cult"-ure.

There are several proofs that show how people following norms without questioning them never end up validating their beliefs themselves. Here's a quick story about following the crowd:

Once upon a time, clock was a fairly new invention to measure time, and wrist watches were not yet invented. This story is about a town during those times.

There was only one clocksmith in the town. The town was surrounded by a fort and the fields were outside the fort. The workers in the farm worked 8 hours a day and came back to the fort for the evening, day after day.

How did they know what time it was? Every hour a cannon at the fort would fire as many times as the hour it was (i.e., 8 times to denote 8 O'clock).

A traveller once came to the town. Noticing the clocksmith's shop he asked him what time it was. The clocksmith pointed him to the clock with large dial that hung in front of his shop. Noting the time, the traveller walked off; but then turned around to ask the clocksmith if his clock was accurate. The clocksmith replied, "It is very accurate. It is on the dot with the cannon fire that marks the time for the town!"

This was great news, as well as puzzling to the traveller. He wondered how some clock could be so accurate with another clock? (Remember, these are old days when they didn't have precision clocks!) So he walked up to the soldiers manning the cannon that marks time. He asked them how they knew when to fire the cannons.

The soldiers said, "It's simple, we just look into the clock below at the clocksmith's shop."

This is why followers of followers/crowd are often times chasing a mirage, while none of them knows the real way or the actual facts. They believe in things because (1) it has been like that for as far as they can see, (2) they haven't travelled to know any better, (3) "it is like that because it has to be like that" is a good enough explanation, (4) changing it will put them into disarray and (5) it works for them.

- Kaleem Aziz.

Case method at HBS.
Essentially is the same as my professor advises me -- to understand the lessons by being in the real (business) world, not in the book world.
http://www.hbs.edu/mba/experience/learn/thelearningmodel/thecasemethod.html

- Kaleem Aziz.