Software Solutions Experience: Confusing and Complicated or To the Point? Part 2

In “Software Solutions Experience: Confusing and Complicated or To the Point? Part 1”, I listed some of the reasons why software solutions can be confusing and complicated. It is important to categorize software for the purpose of this discussion. These software categories will help one to make decisions regarding my proposed solutions.

In my experience, software solutions are categorized as follows:

·??????? Core

·??????? Operational

·??????? Complementary

·??????? Reporting and analytics

·??????? Database

Below is a short description of what is included in these categories:

·??????? Core software solutions include ERP, HR & Payroll and any other ISV solution that is standard fully integrated with these systems.

·??????? Operational systems are commercially off the shelf (COTS) products that are mostly a software to machine integration. Examples are scanners, fuel management systems, fruit sizers and the likes.

·??????? Complementary systems are those systems are operational of nature, to either close gaps in core and operational software or to collect data for the benefit of reporting and analytics. Some if these systems can also be commercially off the shelf (COTS), or custom developed. In many cases these systems are industry specific e.g. agriculture, construction, retail and the likes. Examples of these systems in the agriculture sector, which is my point of references are scouting, QC, chemical applications, factory efficiencies, orchard census and the likes.

·??????? Reporting and analytics are standard built-in system reporting e.g. ERP reports, as well as analysis reports. Especially analysis reports bring data to the masses, to be able analyze and make decisions.

·??????? Database is the data storage component of any software solution. It is also where reporting and analytics will get the data from to report on what is needed

The most important principle looking at these system categories is the interoperability, where needed. In some cases, especially in the case of complementary systems, data is recorded for reporting only. According to TOGAF ? standards, the definition of interoperability is "the ability to share information and services". Defining the degree to which the information and services are to be shared is a very useful architectural requirement, especially in a complex organization and/or extended enterprise.

From a systems perspective, it is useful to consider the following with the regards to interoperability according to the TOGAF? standard:

·??????? Presentation Integration/Interoperability is where a common look-and-feel approach through a common portal-like solution guides the user to the underlying functionality of the set of systems

·??????? Information Integration/Interoperability is where the corporate information is seamlessly shared between the various corporate applications to achieve, for example, a common set of client information Normally this is based upon a commonly accepted corporate ontology and shared services for the structure, quality, access, and security/privacy for the information.

·??????? Application Integration/Interoperability is where the corporate functionality is integrated and shareable so that the applications are not duplicated (e.g., one change of address service/component; not one for every application) and are seamlessly linked together through functionality such as workflow This impacts the business and infrastructure applications and is very closely linked to corporate business process unification/interoperability.

·??????? Technical Integration/Interoperability includes common methods and shared services for the communication, storage, processing, and access to data primarily in the application platform and communications infrastructure domains

All of this comes down to the following:

·??????? End users and system support staff work on systems that look at feel the same. This already give users comfort that they find it easy, and the commonality makes it less confusing (Presentation)

·??????? Master data is maintained in a single place, which means once of the systems is the custodian of a piece of data. Although additional data per system can be added relevant to the system, a single point of maintenance must exist. Imagin in the case of an agriculture software solution, the orchard master must be created in each system. This will be a disaster because there will never be standardized naming conventions and missing data. (Information)

·??????? Transactional or information data recording in one of the solutions e.g. chemical applications that is built as a complementary system, must seamlessly integrates back to the ERP to update stock movements, which will post financial entries. (Application)

·??????? Imagine we build a chemical application solution in Microsoft PowerApps, and we build a scouting solution in Flutter, and an orchard census application in C+/Sharp. This will drive users and support staff crazy. It is important to select a single platform to build and roll-out e.g. complementary software solutions. (Technical).

The four points above will reduce the confusion and contribute to have many solutions to the points. All boils down to ease of use, and commonality.