We have somehow endured the fourth week of sheltering at home for the corona virus, and we are beginning to understand the nature of this crisis. It is also the 10 year anniversary of publication of “Mastering the Unpredictable.” The corona virus response is unfolding exactly like an unpredictable crisis — both the good and the bad. Continue reading
This is the final post on the problems of business process models for automating work, and one that sums it all up: hand drawn business process models simply are not agile enough.
In the last five posts I outlined five ways that business process models are dificient when it comes to automating work. In this post I give a sixth, and quite possibly the most significant problem: Agreement takes effort, and once you have agreement, that agreement becomes a barrier to further change.
We knew that BPMN needed fixing, but CMMN didn’t fix it enough. This is another installment in the series on how we need to move beyond process models for automating work. The last post pointed to limitations in BPMN, and this post covers CMMN.
One bright hope for business process modeling, developed between 2003 and 2010, was the standard known as Business Process Model and Notation (BPMN). This would be the way to model businesses! But today, most people use a simple flowchart in everyday use. Why is that?
Just this week I received an email from a professor in Germany with some process models and with the apology: “Sorry, these are not in BPMN or any formal notation.” Well, they usually aren’t and it is time to start asking they question: why? Continue reading
This another installment in the series pointing out the problems with using a hand-drawn business process model. The last post was how a business process model fails in the promise to be easier than programming. Even if you get past that issue, and hire programmers to make the models, a static model is not really suitable for a human organization anyway. Continue reading
Whew! It has been a few months since my last post in October on my way to the EDOC conference in Stockholm. Presentations and papers went very well there, and I have been working on an entirely new concept. It all centers around realizing that having to tie an organization down to a fixed, manually drawn process is the main problem. Instead, a completely new approach is needed for supporting business processes: Emergent Synthetic Processes.
A few weeks ago Peter Schooff recorded a discussion between us on the topic of cloud and goal oriented BPM. Here is the link:
During the presentations at the Workshop on Adaptive Case Management (ACM) on Monday, there was a growing question about the models: Not just how models should be constructed, but whether we should be using models at all. These ended up forming a major discussion at the end of the day, and even into the rest of the week, culminating with the final keynote questioning our obsession with models in BPM. This is my take on the main positions in the debate. Continue reading