Comments on: BPMS Usage Patterns http://www.column2.com/2009/08/bpms-usage-patterns/ 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: TomDebevoise.com » The Three Metaphors of Business Process Modeling http://www.column2.com/2009/08/bpms-usage-patterns/comment-page-1/#comment-14191 TomDebevoise.com » The Three Metaphors of Business Process Modeling Fri, 07 May 2010 18:57:38 +0000 http://www.column2.com/2009/08/bpms-usage-patterns/#comment-14191 [...] part of today’s advanced enterprise architectures.  The event-driven process is one of the seven important process usage patterns. Organizations use the pattern to interact and respond to a growing volume of business events and [...] [...] part of today’s advanced enterprise architectures.  The event-driven process is one of the seven important process usage patterns. Organizations use the pattern to interact and respond to a growing volume of business events and [...]

]]> By: Sandy Kemsley http://www.column2.com/2009/08/bpms-usage-patterns/comment-page-1/#comment-11580 Sandy Kemsley Wed, 12 Aug 2009 15:39:00 +0000 http://www.column2.com/2009/08/bpms-usage-patterns/#comment-11580 What's now being labelled "case management" likely grows out of the older "collaborative BPM" category. Lots of activity in that space now. More BPMS vendors are trying to cover more of these usages patterns in order to stay relevant for their customers (or at least stay on Gartner's MQ), and customers need to start rejecting the vendors that provide only a single type of BPM functionality. Too often, the first BPMS vendor into a large organization becomes some sort of corporate standard, and if it can't do a decent job of all of the types, then there are some pretty disastrous projects. What’s now being labelled “case management” likely grows out of the older “collaborative BPM” category. Lots of activity in that space now.

More BPMS vendors are trying to cover more of these usages patterns in order to stay relevant for their customers (or at least stay on Gartner’s MQ), and customers need to start rejecting the vendors that provide only a single type of BPM functionality. Too often, the first BPMS vendor into a large organization becomes some sort of corporate standard, and if it can’t do a decent job of all of the types, then there are some pretty disastrous projects.

]]> By: Tom Shepherd http://www.column2.com/2009/08/bpms-usage-patterns/comment-page-1/#comment-11579 Tom Shepherd Wed, 12 Aug 2009 13:31:45 +0000 http://www.column2.com/2009/08/bpms-usage-patterns/#comment-11579 Sandy, thanks for this review. I tend to agree that event- and decision-centric should be considered functionality rather than entirely separate usage-types. If anything, I would say that the analysis part of event-centric can be used to optimize a human-centric process by including automated decisions into that process, i.e. business rules automation as part of the process. Regarding Case Management and the interest of late, I personally believe that part of the increased interest is that companies are becoming more sophisticated as they implement BPM, and that is leading them to realize the limitations of a rigid model-driven approach. Structure is good, necessary and valuable, but only when it doesn't impinge on the ability to effectively get the work done. Case Management seems to address some of the flexibility limitations in most BPMS by adding the ability to handle the "on the fly" behaviors that are necessary in many real-world processes. I'd also say that this same sophistication on the part of the companies implementing BPM solutions is part of why we're hearing more about Dynamic and Unstructured BPM as well. Sandy, thanks for this review. I tend to agree that event- and decision-centric should be considered functionality rather than entirely separate usage-types. If anything, I would say that the analysis part of event-centric can be used to optimize a human-centric process by including automated decisions into that process, i.e. business rules automation as part of the process.

Regarding Case Management and the interest of late, I personally believe that part of the increased interest is that companies are becoming more sophisticated as they implement BPM, and that is leading them to realize the limitations of a rigid model-driven approach. Structure is good, necessary and valuable, but only when it doesn’t impinge on the ability to effectively get the work done. Case Management seems to address some of the flexibility limitations in most BPMS by adding the ability to handle the “on the fly” behaviors that are necessary in many real-world processes.

I’d also say that this same sophistication on the part of the companies implementing BPM solutions is part of why we’re hearing more about Dynamic and Unstructured BPM as well.

]]>