Retorno de la inversión de la metodología informática soa

The ROI of SOA
Based on Traditional Component Reuse
By Jeffrey Poulin, Ph.D. and Alan Himler, MBA

THE ROI OF SOA 

The ROI of SOA Relative to Traditional Component Reuse Initial Quantified ROI on SOA Initiatives

The rationale of this white paper is to present the costs and savings of Service Oriented Architectures (SOAs) compared to traditional component-based software development.SOAs are quickly becoming a significant influence in the mainstream of all industries. Although numerous sources expound on the technical advantages of SOAs as well as listing praises for their intuitive and qualitative benefits, until now no one has provided reliable and quantifiable results from SOA implementations currently in production. To seek out answers, LogicLibrary surveyed “early-adopter”Logidex™ clients who are implementing large-scale SOAs. Their responses show significant cost savings over the “traditional” non-SOA approach to reuse as follows:

1. Building components for an SOA requires only ~20% additional investment over development for one-time “How much money use, compared to the ~50% additional investment will I really save?” required to build traditional reusablecomponents. 2. After an initial learning curve, the development costs for “What is the ROI?” reusing an SOA service are about ~½ of the costs required for traditional component-based development and integration, which represents a ~90% total savings over development from scratch. 3. The level of reuse in a typical SOA application increased to 25% from an average of only 10% in a traditionalcomponent-based application, which drives significant cost savings on future SOA projects.

This paper answers the questions that executives ask before investing in a new technology:

©2006 LogicLibrary, Inc.

2

THE ROI OF SOA 

In short, after a small investment in SOA organization, process, and tools, SOAs cost 20% less to implement and save 50% more with each reuse than traditionalcomponent-based development. In addition to consistently observed (but hard-to-quantify) increases in quality and productivity, the level of reuse in SOA development averaged 2.5 times more than non-SOA development, leading to measurable development cost reductions in the surveyed organizations. The ROI of “Traditional” Reuse To understand and compare the business advantages of an SOA to traditional softwaredevelopment, we start with a quick review of the reuse investments required and the benefits returned prior to the introduction of SOAs. First, reuse is not “free.” Setting up the people, training, processes, tools, and components that fit into that architecture requires an initial investment and commitment from the development organization. We call this investment the “Relative Cost of Writingfor Reuse (RCWR).” Based on data collected over the past 15 years, this investment is approximately 1.5 times (meaning 50% more) cost over building software for one-time use.1 Second, reusing components has benefits both during development and support (“maintenance”). As with RCWR, data shows that the “Relative Cost of Reuse (RCR)” during development is only 20% of the cost of development withoutreuse; i.e., traditional reuse provides an 80% development savings.1 The maintenance savings over the life of the reused product can be estimated in several ways, such
©2006 LogicLibrary, Inc. 3

THE ROI OF SOA 

as by calculating the historical cost to fix an expected number of errors in deployed software. The sum of these two benefits is the total cost avoidance of reusing software.

TheROI of Reuse with SOAs – Breaking Down the Survey Results This survey seeks to quantify how the established “Relative Costs” of reuse change with the adoption of SOAs. To do this, we surveyed LogicLibrary clients who are in various stages of deploying large-scale SOA implementations. Although the number of respondents does not make the results statistically significant, the data begins to form a...