+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
- QUOTE OF THE ISSUE -

"The purpose of business is to create and keep a customer."

- Peter F. Drucker
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

2. Focus: A Quick Primer on EAI
Enterprise Application Integration (EAI) can mean many things.

Integrating various applications can be as simple--and "low-tech"--as direct
interfaces between systems in your organization. For example, you may create
an interface feed between your Lawson payroll system and an external tax preparation service, or your "home-grown" billing system and the Lawson Accounts Receivable system.

Interfaces can be accomplished in a variety of ways, including database-to-database triggers, COBOL extracts, etc. Direct interfaces are typically characterized by two primary attributes: 1) direction (inbound or outbound, or two-way), and 2) their timeliness, i.e. batch (hourly, daily, monthly, etc.) or real-time (directly integrated).

Moving to the other end of the integration spectrum are "integration hubs", which
truly "integrate" your organization's systems and operations, and present a unified
view of them.

For example, a company may have any number of customer-related systems (e.g., customer relationship management (CRM), call center, accounts receivable, billing, etc.) An Account Executive or a Billing Analyst should see these disparate customer systems as one--via one user interface--which sits atop an integration hub that synchronizes and "orchestrates" the flow of information between the systems.

EAI hubs are comprised of four key components:

- Orchestration: The engine that is responsible for making it all work; akin
to the "routers" in a network, the "orchestration" engine is the heart of the hub, and knows which transformations and adapters are required for each and every transaction or request performed in the hub, and knowing which is the appropriate transport to use to handle the request.

- Transformation: Responsible for translation of the system-specific data into a common format. In other words, the call center application and the A/R system have specific formats for the customer data. The "Transformation" engine is responsible for "Transforming" this data from the various adapters into a usable and common format.

- Adapters: Components that pass data between the Transformation engine and the various disparate systems for updating and retrieval.

- Transport: Think of this as the "email" of EAI. The transport engine is
responsible for the guaranteed delivery of data to/from the hub to/from the various adapters.

As you probably know, there is no "out-of-the-box" EAI implementation (you may have enjoyed the current IBM commercials, touting the fictitious "Universal Business Adapter"!)

And, there is no one integration hub that can be used with Lawson.

The Lawson Business Component Integrater (BCI) goes a long way to fulfilling the
requirements of an EAI hub, but lacks both a reliable transport engine (typically,
clients use either FTP, or IBM MQSeries messaging) and a true orchestrator. It does come bundled with the appropriate Lawson adapters, and Mercator for the transformation engine.

Another popular solution is Microsoft's BizTalk Server, which meets most of the EAI
requirements. However, BizTalk lacks knowledge of Lawson, and therefore requires
custom-developed COM components to "talk" to the various Lawson systems, and fulfill the adapter and transformation requirements.

+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Truly interesting diversion: Take an on-line IQ test,
as well as other cool and useful personality and career
tests and self-improvement tools:
http://www.emode.com/tests/uiq/
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

3. Meeting Your Needs

This is the fourth issue of the LawsonGuru Letter, and I want to ensure it's meeting

your needs. So, I'm asking you to reply back to this issue with answers to these

questions:

 

- Is it too technical, or not technical enough? Would you rather see more

technical issues covered? More functional ones? Or, is the balance just right?

 

- Are there too many topics, and not enough detail? Would you rather have more

in-depth focus on just one topic?

 

- Do you read the whole issue? Are there parts you skip? If so, why?

 

- Would you receive it in HTML (Web) format with pretty pictures and fonts?

 

- Are the tips & tricks useful? Have you put any of them to use? Do you

have some to share?

 

- Do you enjoy the "between-article" blips, like the quotes and survey results?

 

- Is the "Worthwhile Reading" section useful? Do you check out these other

articles, or do you just think it's a waste of space?

 

- Is monthly too frequent?

 

Lots of questions, but I really want some answers. I write this newsletter and send

it to you every month-for free-and I want it to be something you look forward to reading, in its entirety. If there are pieces that don't interest you, tell me. Perhaps it sounds corny, but I want the LawsonGuru Letter to be an integral part of your Lawson life!

 

Send me your thoughts to mailto:comments@lawsonguru.com. I'll keep them confidential, and really, really, REALLY want to hear from each and every one of you!

+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Worthwhile Reading:

Can American Keep Flying? How American Airlines
is using IT to respond to tough times.
CIO, November 1, 2002
http://www.cio.com/archive/110102/flying.html

I.T. Architecture: Heart Of The Matter
InformationWeek, November 8, 2002
http://www.informationweek.com/story/IWK20021108S0004

Enterprise Software Upgrades: Less Pain, More Gain
CIO, November 15, 2002
http://www.cio.com/archive/111502/gain.html

What Works: Building a Strong Finance Team
CFO, November 2002
http://www.cfo.com/article/1,5309,8021||M|426,00.html

To Bill or Not to Bill? Ways to integrate e-billing
software with other financial and procurement systems.
CIO, November 1, 2002
http://www.cio.com/archive/110102/bill.html
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

4. Reader feedback

I truly want this newsletter to be an engaging dialogue, and want this section to

become more of an "op-ed" section, with more reader commentary. In conjunction

with that idea, I'm also debating setting up an interactive forum/message/collaboration site as an adjunct to this newsletter. Is that of interest to you? Would you support this idea if it had a nominal monthly fee? How much would you pay?

 

In the meantime, please continue to send your comments to

mailto:comments@lawsonguru.com.  Please let me know if you'd like your name

withheld or not.

 

Here's some recent comments I have received:

 

Regarding the question: "Was Lawson better off as a private company?"

"From a customer standpoint, I've seen absolutely no difference between Lawson being public or private. Still the same old song and dance around poor customer service. Still constantly reorganizing. Still sloppy product development. Still mediocre bolt on products (like SEA).

No really new ideas."

Regarding the "Go, No Go Decision":

 

"This is closely related to what we refer to in the functional world as the "Pay Now or Pay Later" effect. This is the tenet of project management that says that if you have 4000 lines on the project plan and you only accomplish 3000 before your go-live event, the remaining 1000 do not go away. Instead, they mushroom in the post-live environment, always at a cost far greater than they would have if they were accomplished during the implementation."

"As consultants, we see this all the time. Personally, I would like to see a return to good old-fashioned methodology that insisted on parallel tests and pilot site testing before rolling out to the entire enterprise. These steps were deleted from most methodologies during the Y2K crunch when getting live and moving on was the mandate. However, do we still need to adhere to the Y2K methodology of the 1990's, or should we be looking to advance our approaches to meet the goals of today's clients' needs?"

5. Survey: What's your wish?

Let's have a little fun this month and just dream about what we'd change in

Lawson if we could change any ONE thing. I know Lawson has had their Enhancement Request System in place for a while now, but I have not seen any public statistics on its success.

 

If you could have any ONE wish granted, what major functional change would you

recommend? I'm not talking about minor changes, like changing a field size or

screen layout--I want to know what MAJOR changes you'd make.

 

Perhaps a new module? An interface that's missing? Some screens that should be

combined? I'm particularly interested in functional--rather than environment--

enhancements, although everything's fair-game.

 

Just ONE enhancement though--what would it be?

 

Send me your vote and thoughts to mailto:survey@lawsonguru.com,

and I'll share them in future issues. I will keep them confidential,

so please don't be bashful.

6. Lawson Tips & Tricks
If you have a tip you'd like to share, send it to
mailto:tips@lawsonguru.com.

a.  If you're using the Excel addins, your login info (server, username,

and password) is automatically saved. It's not obvious how to change this

if you want to login to a different server.

 

Just click the ? Button on the toolbar, and you'll get a message "Click the OK button to clear the login information"...click OK.

 

You'll then be prompted for a server/username/password the next time you

invoke the wizard.

 

b. Moving Lawson printer definitions between Environments on Unix/NT is

easy, but not obvious. Here's how:

 

1. Dump the printer file in the source environment:

 

$ rngdbdump -c GEN printer > printer.csv 

2. Switch to the target environment, and use importdb to import it:

 

$ importdb -f GEN printer printer.csv 

Note: If you're using the Lawson Environment 7.3.3 or higher, you'll

need to turn off Lawson security to use rngdbdump and importdb with GEN.