Continuing the pattern from my past few post on Antifragile concepts, today consider Naive Intervention, that idea assuming that simple model actually represents a complex system can lead to disastrously bad decisions. Continue reading
There is a continual ongoing debate on how best to express how people plan to work together. Earlier posts make the case that two-dimensional graphical languages are inappropriate for knowledge workers. Many argued against this saying that these languages are still useful for process specialists. However, for unpredictable work, the knowledge worker must directly do the process planning. This post addresses the question of whether we might be able to use two languages in one system: one for the knowledge workers, and one for the business analysts. Continue reading
While participating in discussions of case management, and while reviewing the submissions to the ACM Excellence Awards, I see two distinct approaches to case management — one approach called Adaptive Case Management (ACM), and a different approach which meets an entirely different need which we should call Production Case Management (PCM). This is an excerpt from the new book summarizing the winners of this year’s ACM Excellence Awards. This chapter explains the difference, and how these fit into a spectrum of process technologies.
Steve White gave a keynote speech at the BPM2012 conference this morning on the history and development of BPMN. He has been the driving force for BPMN from the beginning, chairing the development committee for many years, and he is still driving this forward today. He gave an excellent overview of the origins and development of the notations. My interest picked up when we started to talk about case management Continue reading
What is the role of two-dimensional process graphing for knowledge workers in Adaptive Case Management (ACM)? It is a given that an ACM system must support some form of process plan. This post explores how a knowledge worker might specify a process plan, what are the requirements on that means of specifying, and what technical training requirements exist for the workers who specify the processes. Continue reading
In April, Michael Poulin made a proposal for something he calls “Purpose Case Management“. While I am not convinced that this idea represents a new category of technology, the discussion and analysis of the problem is well worth the read.
While scanning discussions of Case Management, I am seeing two distinct approaches. Those familiar with this blog already know of Adaptive Case Management (ACM). However, there is a different approach which meets an entirely different need. I call that approach Production Case Management (PCM) and let me explain the difference. Continue reading
By now you have all heard, BPM is dead. It was loved to death, smothered by good intentions. All the vendors claimed to have BPM — and more! The analysts would point to anything vaguely about people doing work, and proclaim it is “just another BPM.” And yet BPM wore so many faces that it was impossible for anyone to clearly identify it. Continue reading
It is a simple idea, but one of those key differences that makes all the difference. We all know the traditional process life cycle: design the process, automate it, measure performance, and cycle around to improve the design. Instead, we should completely throw the old process life cycle. Don’t design a process, but instead give people a tool they use to get work done. Then, after the fact, we look and see what the process was. Continue reading
There is a lot of discussion about what ACM should be, often talking about what a “user” will want. But there are many kinds of users who have many differing needs. To break out of this trap, I don’t use the term “user”. I use the term “case manager” or “knowledge worker” and when I say this, think of something like “artist”. Like author Dan Pink says, knowledge workers are creative people like artists. Continue reading
Thinking Matters 