-
Via James Taylor (who disagrees with this point of view, as do I) — a vendor with a combined process/rules engine on why any other approach is just plain stupid, or “glorified spreadsheets called via a stateless web services from some workflow engine”
-
Pages
-
Feeds
-
Categories
- BAM
- BI
- blogging
- BPA
- BPM
- BPM history
- BPM standards
- BPMG-BPTG
- BRM
- business
- CEP
- compliance
- EA
- EAI
- ECM
- Enterprise 2.0
- ESB
- Links
- mashups
- off topic
- open source
- outsourcing
- Rant
- SaaS
- Six Sigma
- SOA
- Software design
- torcamp
- Vendors
- Web 2.0
- ·conferences
- AppianForum
- Architecture&Process
- ARISProcessWorld
- BEAparticipate
- BPMGProcess2006
- BPMThinkTank
- BrainStorm2007
- BusinessRulesForum
- E2.0 conf
- E2.0 TTW
- ExperienceTech
- FASTforward08
- ForresterITLeadership
- Gartner BPM
- IIR BPM
- InnovationWorld
- IntlBPM
- IQPC BPM
- IT360
- LombardiDriven
- mashupcamp
- NewSoftwareIndustry
- PegaWorld
- ProformaVision2006
- SAPevents
- SharedInsightsPCC
- TransitCamp
- TUCON
- Ultimus
- UserNet2005
Archives
- December 2008
- November 2008
- October 2008
- September 2008
- August 2008
- July 2008
- June 2008
- May 2008
- April 2008
- March 2008
- February 2008
- January 2008
- December 2007
- November 2007
- October 2007
- September 2007
- August 2007
- July 2007
- June 2007
- May 2007
- April 2007
- March 2007
- February 2007
- January 2007
- December 2006
- November 2006
- October 2006
- September 2006
- August 2006
- July 2006
- June 2006
- May 2006
- April 2006
- March 2006
- February 2006
- January 2006
- December 2005
- November 2005
- October 2005
- September 2005
- August 2005
- July 2005
- June 2005
- May 2005
- April 2005
- March 2005
-
{ 2 } Comments
Seems to me that everytime I have implemented anything more than a trivial workflow I find myself moving the decision making bits out to a rules engine. In other words, rules engines and workflow engines kind of go hand in hand in my experience. So, having the rules engine understand the context (data, parameters, and state for example) of the process side would be quite useful, not too mention more productive in a unified modeling environment, so I’m interested in why you also disagree with the idea of a unified rules and workflow engine.
Cheers, Gavin.
Gavin, I believe that BPM and business rules should co-exist and be integrated. However, I don’t believe that they should be part of the same engine, since rules may need to be reused elsewhere in the organization besides within processes (i.e., called from other applications), and most of the time when rules and process come from the same engine, the rules engine isn’t sufficient powerful (or available) for use as a general purpose rules engine. Of course, that means that you (usually) lose the ability to model the rules and process in a unified environment — although some vendors have integrated to allow this — but you gain both rules reuse and typically a more user-friendly interface for tuning the rules to impact in-flight processes.
I presented at the Business Rules Forum (link to my slides) in October on the integration of BPM, business rules and business intelligence, and I agree that there are quite different opinions on this. I’d be very interested in hearing more about your experiences with implementing process and rules together.
Post a Comment