"Is SOA the way that this increasing tension might be relieved in many organizations?"
To rephrase: "Can the way an architecture is defined (the architectural style) relieve the tension between groups?" IMO, no. If the groups are working at cross-purposes, the architectural style is irrelevant.
"I doubt IT is going to give up working towards standardization and cost savings and I know that if business units feel their customers are not being served by what IT is providing, they are going to continue pushing for autonomy."
IT, as a part of the business, can certainly voice concerns about costs and how centralization, reduction of redundancy, etc. should be considered. But once the groups decide on a direction, IT needs to follow the architecture (e.g. the BA and/or the EA) just as all the other groups do.
In other words, don't view IT and "the business" as separate entities. IT is a part of the business. The customers of the business are the customers that IT serves, not "internal customers." If redundancy is what the business (which includes IT) has decided is the right approach, then that's what is to be done--regardless of what IT as an individual group think ought to be happening.
Quote of the week:
“[Independent business units] are constantly seeking to diverge in order to meet the specific needs of their customers. At the same time IT continues to work towards increased centralization. As you can imagine, this is creating some tension…. Is SOA the way that this increasing tension might be relieved in many organizations? I doubt IT is going to give up working towards standardization and cost savings and I know that if business units feel their customers are not being served by what IT is providing, they are going to continue pushing for autonomy. If not SOA, how is this tension going to be resolved?”
