Kevin Francis:: Yes, but... - All Comments

Great post

MarkRight — Tue, 27 Oct 2009 13:53:19 GMT

Cool blog you got here. It would be great to read something more concerning that matter.

re: Career Development for Architects

Adam Long — Mon, 06 Apr 2009 00:36:42 GMT

Thanks for the presentation which stimulated some interesting debate amongst my developers and architects.

Also congratulations on being awarded a Microsoft VP for the 5th year running.

Bookmarks Tagged Banking

Bookmarks Tagged Banking — Sun, 30 Dec 2007 21:25:43 GMT

Pingback from Bookmarks Tagged Banking

Software Architecture » Blog Archive » Well, here we are then….

Software Architecture » Blog Archive » Well, here we are then…. — Mon, 17 Dec 2007 11:01:36 GMT

Pingback from Software Architecture » Blog Archive » Well, here we are then….

Software Architecture » Blog Archive » My Architecture Journal article is available

Mon, 17 Dec 2007 08:29:19 GMT

Pingback from Software Architecture » Blog Archive » My Architecture Journal article is available

Software Architecture » Blog Archive » I liked it so much I joined the comittee….

Mon, 17 Dec 2007 08:29:19 GMT

Pingback from Software Architecture » Blog Archive » I liked it so much I joined the comittee….

Software Architecture » Blog Archive » User Interface Selection Principles

Software Architecture » Blog Archive » User Interface Selection Principles — Mon, 17 Dec 2007 08:29:18 GMT

Pingback from Software Architecture » Blog Archive » User Interface Selection Principles

re: Buy vs Build

Nick Malik — Wed, 11 Jul 2007 16:54:25 GMT

Hello Kevin, Love your work. Great AJ Article.

Wanted to add something to this (older) posting based on what Microsoft is doing internally in our own Enterprise Architecture department.

First off, the principle we use is not buy, reuse, build. It is reuse, buy, build.

Why reuse first? Because:

(a) if a package exists that performs a need, it is cheaper to improve it to meet two needs than to buy a new package. "Cheaper" includes the full cost of ownership, not just the cost of development and deployment.

(b) if a business stream is using a package that fills a need, they have already gone through the training and transition to using it, so the business roles and process changes are well understood. The adopting team can learn them from the team in place. This reduces complexity substantially and eliminates a major source of customer complaints when a new system is introduced.

(c) Every business stream believes that their data is unique and special. It isn't. Data requirements are nearly always the same from business stream to business stream. However, they are usually quite different from what comes in a COTS package. Therefore, the cost to migrate from COTS to a single implementation is high, but the cost to extend that implementation to other business streams is far less. It is equity. Use it.

Of course, because we are Microsoft, we have our own variation on the principle: Reuse, Dogfood, Buy, Build. Gotta have dogfood (using our own products) in there. We are, after all, Microsoft.

re: I liked it so much I joined the comittee....

mark k — Thu, 01 Jun 2006 11:13:27 GMT

Looks great, where will the conference be?

re: I liked it so much I joined the comittee....

Anna Liu — Tue, 23 May 2006 07:34:46 GMT

way to go Kevin!