Top 10 SOA Pitfalls: #1 – Ignoring culture when introducing SOA

23 Jun, 2008

Last week Viktor Grgic explained Unclear ownership / Project based funding. This week we’ll continue with #1 – Ignoring culture when introducing SOA.
SOA is an approach. The culture aspect of introducing a SOA is important, but it seems that companies want to invest in tools and not in people. In order of making this SOA to work they force their employees into this new way of thinking/acting. Often this leads to resistance which undermines the SOA goals. In this part we will look into ignoring culture when introducing SOA.

First of all: what is a culture? An organizational culture compromises the attitudes, experiences, beliefs and values of an organization. Hofstede identified five dimensions in his study :

  • Small vs Large Power distance; degree of equality/inequality between people.
  • Uncertainty avoidance; the level of acceptance for uncertainty and risks.
  • Individualism vs collectivism; the contrast between individual or collective achievement and interpersonal relationships.
  • Masculinity vs femininity; is your organization based on male or female values.
  • Long vs short term orientation; contrast between relation values orientation.

When introducing a SOA some of these dimensions are likely to change in order to improve the performance of an organization. But wait a minute, a cultural change? It was just an architectural style! Culture is certainly relevant for SOA. For instance, when you look at ownership the first dimension can change. The ownership shifts from IT to the business. When you look at the second dimension, a SOA introduces an uncertainty, because people are confronted with a new way of thinking/acting. In the third dimension the way of working together (business and IT) changes.
Ivory tower
The way SOA is introduced in companies varies, but often SOA introduction is technology driven. From an ivory tower this new way of thinking is figured out and dumped into the organization (see also missing skills). Sometimes with a few practical guidelines, which are often very abstract. The guidelines are misunderstood by the business and IT people which makes it more complex. The main problem here is that the SOA vision is not shared between business, IT and CxOs, (and ivory tower). You can document guidelines, but this does not imply that involved people share the same ideas.
In companies the adequate awareness is not filtered down to an enterprise level. Adoption of SOA might become a roadblock. The awareness starts with the concept of SOA. What is a SOA? In most cases people think they know what a SOA is, but have a different vision on the topic. Even people who do know what a SOA is, have different views on SOA. Therefore it is important to have the same vision at enterprise level.
Although SOA should not be used to change a culture, the introduction will probably change some cultural dimensions. Resistance to these changes needs to be handled with care. The success of the SOA depends on the acceptance of the SOA, reducing/removing of resistance is crucial to increase acceptance
The best way to introduce a SOA is to follow the following steps:

  1. Make the SOA vision a shared vision. Only a shared vision could lead to a successful SOA implementation. Without this first step a SOA is doomed.
  2. Define a strategy of how to change. What is your strategy of changing to a SOA. Included cultural aspects and awareness.
  3. Define clear tasks, roles and responsibilities.

When using these steps the acceptance of a SOA will increase.
The cultural aspect is often forgotten when introducing a SOA. People that introduce a SOA, often change a culture without knowing. When you are not aware of this, this might lead to an adoption roadblock. Be careful with a large cultural change. Start small, think big.
Next week Vincent Partington and Gero Vermaas will wrap up the SOA pitfall series.

Newest Most Voted
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
13 years ago

Great post Viktor!
Indeed organisational culture is a very important aspect when introducing SOA. “Managing” change is the largest part of all the effort to not only introducing, but realising a service oriented architecture and – mindset and real life implementations.
Awareness, readiness (resistance) for change are not solely SOA related. You better not ‘sell’ a SOA to unreceptive audience.
May i state that your reference to Geert Hofstede’s theory is not correct. Geert makes distinctions between countries/societies. Not between organisations.
As for the Netherlands:
Individuality rankes at 80, which ties with Canada as the fourth highest worldwide ranking, behind the US (91), Australia (90), and the UK(89). The high Individualism ranking for the Netherlands is indicative of a society with more individualistic attitudes and relatively loose bonds with others. The population is more self-reliant and looks out for themselves and their close family members. This individuality is integral in the daily lives of the population and must be considered when traveling and doing business in a country. Privacy is considered the cultural norm and attempts at personal ingratiating is unacceptable.
You can see a the interdependency with the notion of “ivory tower”. Dutch people don’t like other people tell them what to do! They have individual pride and want respect for that.
The second highest Hofstede Dimension for the Netherlands is uncertainty avoidance at 53, compared to a world average of 64. A moderate score may indicate a cultural tendancy to minimize or reduce the level of uncertainty within the population by enacting rules, laws, policies, and regulations to cover most any and all situations or circumstances.
The lowest Hofstede Dimension for the Netherlands is masculinity at 14. This relatively low index value may be indicative of a low level of differentiation and discrimination between genders. So, in NL females are treated more equally to males in all aspects of society in comparioson whit other countries. Although i think it represents a more openly nurturing society and our famous ‘poldermodel’ 😉
You must understand that it is not the difference between men or women [female values are almost at the same level in every part of the world(!)] but between the levels of masculinity between (men in) countries or societies.
Actually, looking at the rankings for the Netherlands, compare to other countries, you may expect a full blown 🙂 SOA in very near future.
When you want to compare organisations, perhaps you better refer to Henry Mintzberg.
If you want to incoporate issues of change management you could refere to R. Chin en K.D. Benne.
I am curious about the wrap up of the SOA pitfall series.


[…] Traduction libre du billet “Top 10 SOA Pitfalls: #1 – Ignoring culture when introducing SOA” publié par Viktor […]


[…] June 29, 2008 The Top 10 SOA Pitfalls countdown hit #1 last week with Rik de Groot’s post on “Ignoring culture when introducing SOA”, time for a […]

13 years ago

Excuse me Rik!
I made a mistake because i replied, mentioning Viktor’s name instead of yours. @->- We e-mailed about this and I asked you if you could tell the website administrator to change this.
But that isn’t possible.
So now I think it’s fair to say sorry publicly.
Keep up the good work

Explore related posts