-
Very interesting discussion on working with business analysts in BPM: I think that this is critical for BPM success, and is a key weakness on many of the projects that I've worked on: even though I've been in the role of application architect, I've had to take on the role of business process analyst because the BAs have no experience or training on process analysis or process modeling.
-
Neil Ward-Dutton's take-aways from the recent TUCON conference: the value of event-driven processes and what the "two-second advantage" really means.
-
Comparing two open source BPM solutions: one full-suite solution intended to run standalone, the other an embeddable set of BPM capabilities to be built into other solutions, such as ECM.
-
Tom Baeyens of Activiti BPM responds to questions about their open source approach.
-
One part of a skirmish between Active Endpoints' CTO and the newly launched Activiti BPM team: questioning the feasibility of using a process virtual machine. Interestingly, BPEL is never mentioned; I think that Activiti stirred things up for BPEL-based vendors like Active Endpoints by stating that BPEL is dead.
-
I've seen the new Visio BPMN support and it looks good, but when Bruce Silver endorses it by using it to teach his BPMN class, you know that it has legs.
-
The 2nd part of a detailed technical and functional review of how Savvion fits into the Progress portfolio.
{ 2 } Comments
Hi, Sandy.
We’re happy you’re following what you call the “skirmish” between Active Endpoints and Activiti. We’ll have more to say soon, but I want to make sure people know our issues aren’t that they say BPEL is “dead” (I actually don’t recall reading that in the original posts, though I am sure the BPMN-is-only-pure-if-it-executes-on-a-BPMN-engine tea partyers will continue to mislead the community on that point at every opportunity).
Our issue is simpler: we fundamentally disagree with their approach.
Stay tuned…
Alex Neihaus
I was paraphrasing with the “BPEL is dead” comment: what they actually said is that BPEL will be replaced by BPMN for most general-purpose BPM applications, with BPEL being used only for pure service orchestration. Different from your viewpoint, as well as the viewpoint of other vendors with a BPEL engine; although I can see where they’re coming from, I believe that there’s a lot of momentum behind BPEL at this point and most people don’t really care what’s under the covers as long as the functionality is what they want.