-
Brandon Baxter of Lombardi: "Think about BPM as the layer between your people and your systems" – in other words, part of the functionality is to do things that your existing systems don't already do, plus orchestrate multi-system processes. This is positioning a unified UI capability as a primary driver for BPM; unfortunately, a lot of BPM implementations still do a lot of "swivel chair" integration with multiple applications still visible on the screen, due in part to deficiencies of the BPMS and part because of the lack of services/integration layers in the enterprise applications. Some good points on the value of BPM.
-
"Ask your analysts to provide world class requirements including functional and non-functional ones. Persude them to stay away from providing technical solutions so you can figure out how to automate your firm’s processes within the context of your SOA efforts." Excellent point on what business analysts should and shouldn't be doing. I very often see BA's delving deep into design (when they have no actual skills or experience to do so) instead of sticking to where they can add real value.
Pages
Feeds
-
Translate Site
-
Categories
- BAM
- BI
- blogging
- BPA
- BPM
- BPM history
- BPM standards
- BPMG-BPTG
- BRM
- business
- case management
- CEP
- cloud
- compliance
- CrisisCampTO
- EA
- EAI
- ECM
- ESB
- Lean Six Sigma
- Links
- mashups
- off topic
- open source
- outsourcing
- Rant
- SOA
- social software
- Software design
- technology
- torcamp
- Vendors
- Web20
- ·conferences
- AppianForum
- Architecture&Process
- ARISProcessWorld
- BEAparticipate
- BPM2009
- BPMcamp
- BPMGProcess2006
- BPMThinkTank
- BrainStorm2007
- BusinessRulesForum
- DemoCamp
- E2.0 conf
- E2.0 TTW
- ExperienceTech
- FASTforward
- FileNet
- Forrester
- Gartner
- IIR BPM
- InnovationWorld
- IntlBPM
- IQPC
- IT360
- Lombardi
- mashupcamp
- NewSoftwareIndustry
- Open Group
- Pegasystems
- Proforma
- Progress
- SAP
- SharedInsightsPCC
- TIBCO
- TransitCamp
- Ultimus
Archives
- March 2010
- February 2010
- January 2010
- December 2009
- November 2009
- October 2009
- September 2009
- August 2009
- July 2009
- June 2009
- May 2009
- April 2009
- March 2009
- February 2009
- January 2009
- 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
-
Blog under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 3.0 License
-
{ 2 } Comments
re: unified UI as primary driver – actually i think that is taking the positioning too far. even when swivel chair is still required, BPM can be the glue that routes the work to the right person at the right time, or brings them the set of contextual process information they need to get the job done. the primary driver of value is that BPM can make the interaction of people and systems make sense, and can synthesize these disparate parts into meaningful logical processes.
Also, as for the deficiencies – these deficiencies are more often on the side of the legacy systems rather than the BPMS tooling. And it probably doesn’t make sense to stop the BPM bus so that a legacy system can be web services enabled- when that system catches up, you can link it up to your process at that point in time (some time in the future).
I said “a” primary driver, not “the” primary driver: obviously, there are others, but Brandon places a lot of stress on that point. I’ve seen a lot of deficiencies on the part of BPMS, as well as any services layer over legacy systems; maybe I’m just working with less-capable BPMS than you
Post a Comment