Comments on: Lombardi Driven: Executive Roundtable http://www.column2.com/2008/06/lombardi-driven-executive-roundtable/ BPM, Enterprise 2.0 and technology trends in business. Fri, 20 Jan 2012 09:15:55 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.1 By: Lombardi Blog | Process People » Blog Archive » Lombardi Driven 2008 Conference, Day One http://www.column2.com/2008/06/lombardi-driven-executive-roundtable/comment-page-1/#comment-8258 Lombardi Blog | Process People » Blog Archive » Lombardi Driven 2008 Conference, Day One Thu, 19 Jun 2008 00:26:57 +0000 http://www.column2.com/2008/06/lombardi-driven-executive-roundtable/#comment-8258 [...] Lombardi Driven: Executive Roundtable [...] [...] Lombardi Driven: Executive Roundtable [...]

]]> By: Sandy Kemsley http://www.column2.com/2008/06/lombardi-driven-executive-roundtable/comment-page-1/#comment-8229 Sandy Kemsley Tue, 17 Jun 2008 19:39:55 +0000 http://www.column2.com/2008/06/lombardi-driven-executive-roundtable/#comment-8229 Phil, thanks for the clarification. I agree that we're in a transitional time; the challenge will be wresting control of the BPMS from the hands of IT. Phil, thanks for the clarification. I agree that we’re in a transitional time; the challenge will be wresting control of the BPMS from the hands of IT.

]]> By: Phil Gilbert http://www.column2.com/2008/06/lombardi-driven-executive-roundtable/comment-page-1/#comment-8228 Phil Gilbert Tue, 17 Jun 2008 18:43:03 +0000 http://www.column2.com/2008/06/lombardi-driven-executive-roundtable/#comment-8228 Hi Sandy, Just wanted to clarify something you said in this post and the last one. The point about IT-led process implementations being the normal state today isn't something we advocate as being a "good thing" but, rather, it simply is a fact. The vast majority of real BPM projects today are led by people in IT, and further, IT is the part of most companies that currently holds the reigns on BPM proliferation. This isn't [necessarily] good or bad... it simply is. Now as you wrote in your previous post, we see this as a transitional phase. First - some 6 years ago - BPM tools were used to solve single, business-led solutions. In many of these cases, the BPM vendor was _perceived_ as simply delivering a custom solution. The enterprise wasn't "buying BPM", they were "buying a solution, based on this new type of tool." Now we're seeing companies "buy a BPMS" or "adopt BPM" and disproportionally today it's IT that's leading the charge. And, yes, we see many more IT organizations today that have the cross-functional visibility and maturity than we see in business departments. This obviously is _not_ good. In order for the "next level" of BPM to take hold, the maturity to implement structured change inside the business _by_the_business_ must get a lot better, so that cross-functional dependencies and efficiencies are better understood, and then improved. The closer business can get to implementation of the project and the program the more latency we can take out of the "improvement machine." In the future - when we reach BPM nirvana - we will have common competencies and maturities _throughout_the_organization_ as relates to the management of the core, differentiating business processes. But we're not there today and that's the core message of Driven: what tools exist to facilitate the cultural shift from IT-led efforts to, in Rod's words, "one team." We're in a period of transition and the question isn't whether BPM moves more intimately into the business, but when. We're out to help that happen as quickly as possible. Thanks, Phil Hi Sandy,

Just wanted to clarify something you said in this post and the last one. The point about IT-led process implementations being the normal state today isn’t something we advocate as being a “good thing” but, rather, it simply is a fact. The vast majority of real BPM projects today are led by people in IT, and further, IT is the part of most companies that currently holds the reigns on BPM proliferation. This isn’t [necessarily] good or bad… it simply is.

Now as you wrote in your previous post, we see this as a transitional phase. First – some 6 years ago – BPM tools were used to solve single, business-led solutions. In many of these cases, the BPM vendor was _perceived_ as simply delivering a custom solution. The enterprise wasn’t “buying BPM”, they were “buying a solution, based on this new type of tool.”

Now we’re seeing companies “buy a BPMS” or “adopt BPM” and disproportionally today it’s IT that’s leading the charge. And, yes, we see many more IT organizations today that have the cross-functional visibility and maturity than we see in business departments. This obviously is _not_ good. In order for the “next level” of BPM to take hold, the maturity to implement structured change inside the business _by_the_business_ must get a lot better, so that cross-functional dependencies and efficiencies are better understood, and then improved. The closer business can get to implementation of the project and the program the more latency we can take out of the “improvement machine.”

In the future – when we reach BPM nirvana – we will have common competencies and maturities _throughout_the_organization_ as relates to the management of the core, differentiating business processes. But we’re not there today and that’s the core message of Driven: what tools exist to facilitate the cultural shift from IT-led efforts to, in Rod’s words, “one team.”

We’re in a period of transition and the question isn’t whether BPM moves more intimately into the business, but when. We’re out to help that happen as quickly as possible.

Thanks,
Phil

]]>