Technical Articles
Intelligent Integration Landscape Operating Model in 2021 – Part 2
INTRODUCTION
This blog is a continuation of of my earlier blog Intelligent Integration Landscape Operating Model in 2021 – Part 1 , where I discuss solution ideas on how we can resolve the top 7 customer challenges faced by the organizations.
This blog focuses on how we can build the intelligent integration landscape logical and MVP architecture for the solution ideas discussed in Part 1.
Logical Architecture
The below diagram shows the to-be state of the logical architecture for implementing the Intelligent Integration Service Monitoring framework.
MVP Architecture
As we are well known in industry for delivering SAP projects using agile methodologies, we followed the same approach for building our prototype. We have configured fancy SAC reports that will help the customers to resolve problem/change incidents quickly. We are also planning to incorporate UI for scenario based automated testing of the interfaces using CPI clean cycle developed by Valentin Ivanov .
Using MVP Architecture, we will be able to provide the following SAC reports for customers who bought SAP CPEA/SAC license.
I like to hear your feedback on any other ideas that will help us to make the life of support team better and easier! Kostas Poulios ,Head of Integration at Centrica was one of our innovation first customer in the past who inspired us to build this prototype.
Centrica runs 800+ interfaces on SAP PO. In such complex landscapes, it is not very easy for support team to drive business value and meet SLA’s without embedding innovation into the landscape.
INTELLIGENT METRICS
We think below metrics will help support team to reduce TCO and increase SLA Efficiency of the integration operational landscape and unlock the areas of digital innovation.
Vadim Klimov Daniel Graversen Michal Krawczyk Shabarish V Nair Bhavesh Kantilal ..love to hear your thoughts on how we can make this better for all customers.
| Metric Name | Description | Configurable Filters | Support Level | SAC Story Category |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Interfaces by Business Process | This story provides a bird’s view of integration landscape by business process and ability to drill down the interfaces by business criticality and specific system. It helps business and IT teams to assess the impacts of modernizing the integration landscapes and impact assess the CR’s quickly in future and ensures that redundant interfaces are not built in the projects. | Business Criticality, Sender System, Receiver System Name | L1 | Interface Metadata |
| Interfaces by Country | This story provides a bird’s view of integration landscape by country and ability to drill down the interfaces by business process, criticality and specific system. It helps business and IT teams to assess the impacts of modernizing the integration landscapes in future. It helps business and IT teams to assess the impacts of modernizing the integration landscapes and impact assess the CR’s quickly in future and ensures that redundant interfaces are not built in the projects. | Business Process, Business Criticality System, Receiver System Name, | L1 | Interface Metadata |
| Interfaces by Client or Business Unit | This story provides a bird’s view of integration landscape by Client or Business Unit and ability to drill down the interfaces by business process criticality and specific system. It helps business and IT teams to assess the impacts of modernizing the integration landscapes in future. It helps business and IT teams to assess the impacts of modernizing the integration landscapes and impact assess the CR’s quickly in future and ensures that redundant interfaces are not built in the projects. | Business Process, Business Criticality System, Receiver System Name, | L1 | Interface Metadata |
| Sentimental Analysis | This story provides the customer sentimental analysis of the integration landscape by business process and ability to drill down the sentimental analysis of the interfaces by system, country and business criticality. | Business Process, Country, Business Criticality System, Receiver System Name, | L1 | Interface Metadata |
| Exceptions by Business Process | This story provides a view of the different types of errors by business process and ability to drill down error messages by business criticality and specific system and interface ID for a given time period. The support analyst will be able to then refer interface documentation and error resolution manual to resolve the errors quickly. | Business Criticality, Sender System, Receiver System Name, Time Period | L2 | Exceptions |
| Exceptions by Country | This story provides a view of the different types of errors by country and ability to drill down error messages by business process, criticality and specific system and interface ID for a given time period. The support analyst will be able to then refer interface documentation and error resolution manual to resolve the errors quickly. | Business Process Business Criticality, Sender System, Receiver System Name, Time Period | L2 | Exceptions |
| Exceptions by Client or Business Unit | This story provides a view of the different types of errors by Client or Business Unit and ability to drill down error messages by business process, criticality and specific system and interface ID for a given time period. The support analyst will be able to then refer interface documentation and error resolution manual to resolve the errors quickly. | Business Process, Business Criticality System, Receiver System Name, Time Period | L2 | Exceptions |
| Total Exceptions | This story provides the total number of exceptions that occurred for a given time period . | Business Process, Country, Business Criticality System, Receiver System Name, Time Period | L2 | Exceptions |
| Top 10 interfaces with high volume of message failures for a given time period | This story provides the top 10 interfaces with high volume of message failures for a month and ability to drill down for a given time period, business process, business unit or client, country, business criticality, system. | Business Process, Country, Business Criticality System, Receiver System Name, Time Period | L2 | Exceptions |
| Total Message Volume | This story provides the total message volumes for a month and ability to drill down for a given time period, business process, business unit or client, country, business criticality, system. | Business Process, Country, Business Criticality System, Receiver System Name, Time Period | L3 | Performance |
| Top 5 High Volume Interfaces | This story provides the top 5 high volume interfaces for a month and ability to drill down for a given time period, business process, business unit or client, country, business criticality, system. | Business Process, Country, Business Criticality System, Receiver System Name, Time Period | L3 | Performance |
| Interface processing times | This story provides the minimum, maximum, average processing time for each interface for a month and ability to drill down for a given time period. | Time Period | L3 | Performance |
| Top 5 slow performing interfaces | This story provides the top 5 slow performing interfaces for a month and ability to drill down for a for a given time period, business process, business unit or client, country, business criticality, system. | Business Process, Country, Business Criticality System, Receiver System Name, Time Period | L3 | Performance |
Hi Sravya,
As always a lot of interesting information in the two blog posts.
I guess if you had the metadata/processing data it would be pretty simple to set up to create the different reports view of the data.
I would expect there to be much more report that they could be able to create themself on the fly.
I do like the concept of being able to go back in time and see if you are getting more or fewer errors. Though I would expect that you continues to try to correct all the errors.
You can either have a country as an iflow metadata or as a custom header attribute, depending on how the setup can be performed.
I think we at Figaf will be able to provide some of the data regarding your change history had log which CR is affected by an interacace. And then some part of the testing.
Great info Sravya 🙂 Thank you for the blog series 🙂
BR,
Michal Krawczyk