Category Archives: Workflow

Model Strategy & Performance

Posted on by
3

In an earlier post, I introduced the concept of a “Model Preserving Strategy” versus a “Model Transforming Strategy” and defined them as two approaches that a BPMS can take in the lifecycle of a business process. I then posted a couple of situations where the Model Preserving Strategy is a better choice, but it is not always a better choice. This post is dedicated to those situations where the Model Transforming Strategy shines.

The main reason for transforming a model into another form, is to realize performance improvements. Continue reading →

Model Strategy, Round-Trip & Agile Development

Posted on by
3

We often talk about the process “round trip”. The process lifecycle is explicitly about moving the process through different people with different specializations. The business analyst draws a high-level model and the systems integrator includes details for connecting the systems. Another dynamic is the continual process improvement that occurs when you assess how effective the current process is, make a change at the high level, and take that change through the lifecycle again. Continue reading →

Model Strategy & Analytics

Posted on by
2

A by-product of automating work is the records is made that indicate precisely when each task is started and completed. Analytic information about how your organization is working can actually be far more valuable than the cost savings derived from the automation. A lot can be learned from this analysis that can help you improve your organization. Some claim that this is the principle benefit of BPM.

In an earlier post, I introduced the concept of a “Model Preserving Strategy” versus a “Model Transforming Strategy” and defined them as two approaches that a BPMS can take in the lifecycle of a business process.  This post delves into how process analytics are effected by model strategy. Continue reading →

Model Strategy: Preserving vs. Transforming

Posted on by
16

It started out as a casual conversation over drinks at the Oct 2008 BPM Tech Show in DC, late in the afternoon, after the tutorials and presentations had finished. We wanted to know: “why is there such a variation in different BPM systems?” This expanded into a breakfast meeting the following morning on the topic of “What are advantages/ disadvantages of either preserving or transforming a BPM model?” We found that most existing systems tend to follow one of two possible strategies. Existing BPM Systems (and their associated methodologies) can be categorized as supporting either a “Model Transforming Strategy” or a “Model Preserving Strategy”.

It was remarkable how passionate people were about their position. Continue reading →

Is the BPMN/BPEL Debate a Dead Horse?

Posted on by
8

Bruce Silver’s latest post “Reframing the BPMN vs BPEL Debate” calls to question whether it is worth continued discussion of the definition of BPM. Like most of Bruce’s posts, it is insightful and well worth reading. This is in response to a post by Boris Lublinsky on “BPEL: Who Needs It Anyway?”

I am a little surprised by Bruce’s response,  Continue reading →

BPM is not Software Engineering

Posted on by
48

A lot of the confusion and difficulty in the BPM community is because some people think that BPM is a kind of Software Engineering.

Update: Please reference the post: One Common Definition for BPM where BPM is clearly a practice of a manager who assesses and improves the process for an organizational unit.  It is not the development of the application that support activity.  This post originally written in 2008, we find that even in 2014 there is still confusion on this point. Continue reading →

BPMN is still useful for small businesses

Posted on by
2

I received by email a couple questions today, repeated below with my answers.

I am an independent software developer turned architect / business analyst. Over the last year or so I have found quite a bit of work by going into businesses and explaining them how their own internal processes work (through made up flowcharts and long winded explanations).

Question 1: Do you think the BPMN is overkill for documenting a small businesses BP? Continue reading →

Directly Executing BPMN

Posted on by
24

The article “Why BPEL is not the holy grail for BPM” presents a scenario for implementation which is difficult for BPEL based products to actually execute. It presented a particular product based on BPEL that was not able to execute this diagram.  What about products that are based on executing the BPMN directly without conversion? Continue reading →

BPEL-Grail

Posted on by
4

Finally a well considered and detailed article on the limitations of the approach to BPEL.

There are a few vendors who promote BPEL as as the one-and-only-true-way to support BPM. In fact, it is good for some things, but fairly bad at a large number of other things. It is my experience that BPEL is promoted primarily by vendors who specialize in products we might rightly call “Enterprise Application Integration” (EAI). These companies have recently taking to calling their products “Business Process Management”. Potential users should be asking the question “Is BPEL appropriate for what I want to do.” Continue reading →

Will BPMN 2.0 have “Model Portability”?

Posted on by
1

The big feature coming in BPMN 2.0 is the ability to serialize the model into a form that is portable between tools.  Regular readers of this blog will know that we have this today with XPDL, but those responsible for the future of BPMN say “We are going to give you something better.”  OK, I am all for progress to something better, but are they really going to achieve this? Continue reading →