Comments on: A Short History of BPM, Part 7 http://www.column2.com/2006/06/a-short-history-of-bpm-part-7/ BPM, Enterprise 2.0 and technology trends in business. Wed, 07 Jan 2009 18:40:01 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.7 hourly 1 By: Sandy Kemsley http://www.column2.com/2006/06/a-short-history-of-bpm-part-7/comment-page-1/#comment-5152 Sandy Kemsley Thu, 29 Jun 2006 15:49:00 +0000 http://www.column2.com/2006/06/a-short-history-of-bpm-part-7/#comment-5152 Sandy (the other one!), I don't think that BPM started with integration-type processes, as you imply in your comment, I think that there were two separate threads (human-facing workflow, and integration-focussed EAI) that eventually intertwined to create BPM. Lately, however, the term BPM has been co-opted somewhat by the integration vendors, such that some people have been using the term "human-facing BPM" for that side of it. I consider it all BPM, and to be a true BPM suite, you need to cover the entire spectrum to some degree. Sandy (the other one!), I don’t think that BPM started with integration-type processes, as you imply in your comment, I think that there were two separate threads (human-facing workflow, and integration-focussed EAI) that eventually intertwined to create BPM. Lately, however, the term BPM has been co-opted somewhat by the integration vendors, such that some people have been using the term “human-facing BPM” for that side of it. I consider it all BPM, and to be a true BPM suite, you need to cover the entire spectrum to some degree.

]]> By: Sandy http://www.column2.com/2006/06/a-short-history-of-bpm-part-7/comment-page-1/#comment-5151 Sandy Thu, 29 Jun 2006 15:10:38 +0000 http://www.column2.com/2006/06/a-short-history-of-bpm-part-7/#comment-5151 BPMS can be used to understand organizations through expanded views that would not otherwise be available can be used to organise and present.Although the initial focus of BPM was on the automation of mechanistic business processes, this has since been extended to integrate human-driven processes in which human interaction takes place in series or parallel with the mechanistic processes. And I think that the future development will be devoted to this process. BPMS can be used to understand organizations through expanded views that would not otherwise be available can be used to organise and present.Although the initial focus of BPM was on the automation of mechanistic business processes, this has since been extended to integrate human-driven processes in which human interaction takes place in series or parallel with the mechanistic processes. And I think that the future development will be devoted to this process.

]]> By: Sandy Kemsley http://www.column2.com/2006/06/a-short-history-of-bpm-part-7/comment-page-1/#comment-5150 Sandy Kemsley Thu, 15 Jun 2006 20:11:27 +0000 http://www.column2.com/2006/06/a-short-history-of-bpm-part-7/#comment-5150 Brett, I probably should have called it a short history of BPMS, since it is more about how the tools developed to meet the business needs. I agree that no vendor does it all, and in fact I typically still see at least two BPM products in any large organization that I work with: one more human-focussed, one more integration or B2B-focussed. Getting all the tools to play together is the challenge, in spite of web services and some other standards that have improved the situation somewhat. Brett, I probably should have called it a short history of BPMS, since it is more about how the tools developed to meet the business needs. I agree that no vendor does it all, and in fact I typically still see at least two BPM products in any large organization that I work with: one more human-focussed, one more integration or B2B-focussed. Getting all the tools to play together is the challenge, in spite of web services and some other standards that have improved the situation somewhat.

]]> By: Brett http://www.column2.com/2006/06/a-short-history-of-bpm-part-7/comment-page-1/#comment-5149 Brett Wed, 14 Jun 2006 20:01:42 +0000 http://www.column2.com/2006/06/a-short-history-of-bpm-part-7/#comment-5149 Just ran through this series of posts. This is a very interesting perspective on BPM. I and most of the others I know who are doing BPM work usually tell the story from the perspective of how BPM eveloved as a management discipline (sometimes called process-oriented/centric/based, focused management) rather how the software tools converged to finally address the real needs of the business. So, I won't comment on the accuracy or potential skewing of this technology-oriented timeline (I do know a couple "pure-play" vendors who would argue about some of it with you though). From my POV, it seems like the tools lag the need which is why they have evolved the way they did... as the tool vendors recognize what people are actually trying to do with their products, they added functionality. I think that trend has continued and now some of the "suites" are recognizing a need to integrate BA & BI functionality way beyond BAM's capabilities (as you put it, only "half-decent") if they really want to have a round-trip inclusive BPM solution. I think it is important to keep in mind what the context, scope and nature of the real "problem set" when discussing the options for solutions. Today to really support an enterprise or large-scale business process management discipline, requires 4 or 5 different tools that don't naturally play nice together. So the suites still have quite a way to go to be complete solutions. Hope you follow the "history" with a future trends episode... looking forward to next installment. BC Just ran through this series of posts. This is a very interesting perspective on BPM. I and most of the others I know who are doing BPM work usually tell the story from the perspective of how BPM eveloved as a management discipline (sometimes called process-oriented/centric/based, focused management) rather how the software tools converged to finally address the real needs of the business. So, I won’t comment on the accuracy or potential skewing of this technology-oriented timeline (I do know a couple “pure-play” vendors who would argue about some of it with you though). From my POV, it seems like the tools lag the need which is why they have evolved the way they did… as the tool vendors recognize what people are actually trying to do with their products, they added functionality. I think that trend has continued and now some of the “suites” are recognizing a need to integrate BA & BI functionality way beyond BAM’s capabilities (as you put it, only “half-decent”) if they really want to have a round-trip inclusive BPM solution. I think it is important to keep in mind what the context, scope and nature of the real “problem set” when discussing the options for solutions. Today to really support an enterprise or large-scale business process management discipline, requires 4 or 5 different tools that don’t naturally play nice together. So the suites still have quite a way to go to be complete solutions. Hope you follow the “history” with a future trends episode… looking forward to next installment. BC

]]> By: /pd http://www.column2.com/2006/06/a-short-history-of-bpm-part-7/comment-page-1/#comment-5148 /pd Tue, 13 Jun 2006 23:09:57 +0000 http://www.column2.com/2006/06/a-short-history-of-bpm-part-7/#comment-5148 ahh..nice !! For a while, I thought you had forgotten this series, yeah you must be busy with other stuff too.. anyhoot, I was going to email you to ask you whatever happened to this series, but now I dont have too :)- thanks for the post. I have been following this series of article !! ahh..nice !!

For a while, I thought you had forgotten this series, yeah you must be busy with other stuff too..

anyhoot, I was going to email you to ask you whatever happened to this series, but now I dont have too :)-

thanks for the post. I have been following this series of article !!

]]>