The problem with IT folks defining the next generation of the BPM discipline is that IT folks come with technology and architectures biases. The process folks want to process model the world, data and content folks want all the data and states predefined, the rules folks want to define all the logic ahead of time and the events folks want to look for events they deem interesting beforehand. The application math formulas to static data by the business intelligence folks require a fragile environment. What’s wrong with this picture? None of these approaches are balanced and none are flexible by nature.
Social BPM will require a flexible and integrated approach to these four facets. Dynamic BPM technology is the process answer to the next generation of BPM but that’s not good enough alone. Adjustable content management is the content/data answer to the next generation of BPM, but that’s not good enough alone. Boundary constraints is the policy/rule answer to the next generation of BPM, but that’s not good enough alone. Complex events management is the event answer to the next generation of BPM, but that’s not good enough alone. Real time BI that leverages in-flight data is the BI answer, but that is not good enough alone. Are you catching a pattern here? Flexing each individual approach is good but falls short of the goal.
The intelligent application of all of these approaches will be necessary going forward. Biases will have to be left at the door and the intelligent inclusion of all of these aspects to tie human and machine interaction in the next generation of BPM technologies and disciplines will be the way of the future.
Thank You for reading! And please feel free to leave a comment!
All information presented here is © copyright Carkean Solutions Ltd., 2010 - Not to be used without our permission - The views expressed here are the views of an individual not the corporation