Functionalities and Services

[SergeThorn]

Hello,

A Software Technology deliver Technical Functionalities.

In the documentation we read

• A technical functionality is the ability to deliver a technical information, which is required by a technical artifact in order to function. This technical functionality is generally required within a technical process handled by the technical artifact.

Then we have the Technical Service Catalog

In the documentation we read

• The Technical Service Catalog provides a central source of information on the technical services delivered by the service provider organization. It contains a customer-facing view of the Technical services in use, how they are intended to be used, the process they enable, and the levels and quality of service the customer can expect from each service. The Technical Service Catalog provides the list of reference IT functionalities and their recommended implementation.

Therefore I would be expecting to find a metaclass: Technical Service but that’s not the case…

In the documentation we also read for

• Technical Service Catalog Item
  • A Technical Service Catalog Item defines which technical functionality is part of the catalog and which technical artifacts are fulfilling the technical functionality.

Usually, a Technical Functionality is realised by a Technical Service in most EA methodologies and I am wondering why that is not the case in HOPEX. The Technical Service Catalog contains Technical Functionalities and not Technical Services, which is for me a bit confusing especially if you build a Technical Reference Model, which is supposed to define Technical Services.

If we consider the Business level, we define Functionalities. Functionalities are firstly linked to Business Capabilities and fulfilled by Applications. Applications then have IT Services.

The diagram below (in French) is showing that an Application has Functionalities and Functionalities are delivered by Application Services (To be noted that for unknown reasons in the French version it is Application Services and in the English it is IT Services….pretty confusing….).

I believe that is correct that generally speaking, Functionalities deliver Services, whatever the architecture domain it is…

So why….are Technical Functionalities not delivering Technical Services…

Does this makes sense?

Kind regards

[varkonyib]

There is also an issue with the so called Information Service Catalog.

Information catalogs have a different naming then the other service catalogs. However, the information concept belongs logically to the applications category.

The term "Information Service" is misleading, since it is actually about the fulfillment of functions in the applications domain and has nothing to do directly with information and data modeling.

The Information Service Catalog (ISCAT) provides a central source of information on the Information services delivered by the service provider organization. It contains a customer-facing view of the Information services in use, how they are intended to be used, the process they enable, and the levels and quality of service the customer can expect from each service.
The IS Service Catalog provides the list of reference functionalities and their recommended implementation.

The ISCAT is composed by Information Service Catalog Items.

An "Information Service Catalog Item" (ISCATI) defines which functionality is part of the catalog and which application artifacts are fulfilling the functionality.

[varkonyib]

Actually, a catalog is listing functionality fulfillments. See the example below:

example

A "Hardware Service Catalog Item" (HSCI) defines which hardware functionality is part of the catalog and which hardware artifacts are fulfilling the hardware functionality.

A "Hardware Service Catalog Item" (HSCI) is not directly associated with the Hardware Service Catalog but rather through in Instance type of object called Owned Technical Catalog Item. The same Hardware Service Catalog Item can be added to multiple catalogs or even multiple times to the same catalog (even if it is meaningless).

[varkonyib]

HOPEX has an abstract concept of assets. Catalogs are grouping for this perspective. You could also group into Portfolios, but those should have a definite lifetime and more intended for analyzing decision alternatives. Catalogs do not have this timing and decision aspects, so they should reflect your current assets inventory.
There is also a difference between Service Catalogs and Asset Catalogs.

[varkonyib]

I have a different definition coming from the TeleManagement Forum.
Services are a set of closely bundled functions, where these functions are not really meaningful standalone.
An application is a bundle of services that are somewhat related, so they are delivered as a package.

There is a TMF Application Framework that you could have a look at.

In HOPEX there is a lot terminology issues.
For example, technology is equivalent in their opinion to software, that is very strange. I have to model a lot hardware and embedded systems, and this causes a lot of confusion.

All these problems might be rooted in the focus on internal IT only. If you need to model your products, solutions, and services to external organizations, then you need a lot of customizations...

[BenAvdicevic]

@SergeThorn  Great thread.

Recall my question about "What are HOPEX Service Catalogs" from last year:

https://community.mega.com/t5/HOPEX-Forum/What-are-HOPEX-service-catalogs-exactly/m-p/29144/highligh...

I find this feature is not clear either from MEGA  Training materials,  product documentation, blogs or videos they post.

There is just no clarity how the service catalogs should be used.