For me, the most troubling part of the BPM Think Tank event was my roundtable on The Business Value of BPMS. The roundtable format was an open-ended discussion with 10-12 attendees on a specific topic, formulating a problem statement and then a proposed ideal future state. I expected a discussion about which of BPMS’s putative benefits — business/IT alignment, process efficiency, compliance, agility, and performance visibility — was most valuable to the business or had some issue blocking full realization. Instead, to my surprise, I found that most “practitioners” at the table — business architects, IT analysts, and BPM consultants — didn’t get BPMS at all. They got BPM, and were “doing” BPM, but it was just modeling, i.e. cross-functional “process thinking,” documenting how it’s done now and how it could be done better. Executing the process? Huh? Why would anyone want to do that?
I expect that reaction from business folks, but these were IT. The good news? They get BPM, how it can improve business-IT alignment and performance optimization. The bad news is that they equate BPM to modeling (plus perhaps BI/BAM). The idea of building process implementations without programming and executing them on a process engine (which also monitors process performance, enforces business rules, etc) still draws blank stares.
BPMS vendors — not modeling tool vendors, not implementation consultants — are the primary funding source for the conferences, web portal sites, and other channels of BPM market education. They’re evangelizing the benefits of BPM, and it’s working… But the market is attaching those benefits just to the modeling piece. The vendors as a group haven’t yet closed the sale on the incremental business value of BPMS, i.e executable design, process automation, and process performance monitoring.
BPMS vendors need to take some time out from bashing each other and join in common cause to educate the market — both business and IT — about BPMS as a different style of process implementation, what it gives you beyond what you get with modeling alone. And provide proof points, case studies of customers who have done it and achieved the benefits.
I am so glad to read this post because you just described my problem. I don’t get it. Honestly.
I’ve been reading here (and elsewhere) about BPMS and BPM and SOA and… In the end, I cannot quite get what you’re talking about. I am a really good Business Analyst. I think I could be good doing some of the things y’all discuss. But so far I just don’t get it.
Maybe I need to see it working, try it out, find a coach, something, because based on what I’ve read so far the message is just a jumble to me.
I would say that this is not just a question about using BPM, but to use the right tools and languages for each situation.
The technology platform (Java, .NET) is abstracted away behind the inter-connectivity of WS-* and SOA.
The new domain specific tools and languages should be able to run, not just represented in models. I think what’s important is to discuss is why models must be replaced with new languages.
Business Analysts is one important group these new languages should attract.
jdavidson, I am not surprised at your confusion. Enterprise Software companies have a habit of being so excited with their technology, features, and new 3-letter acronyms that they often fail the very people they are trying to help. There is a disconnect between the technology developers and the users of the technology. If you are interested in learning about these solutions, you might want to contact a few vendors and ask for case studies and even the opportunity to talk with a few customers. Sometimes they can also provide a customer “walk-through” or an in-context scenario-based demonstration that highlights the value of the solution, versus the typical “feature/function, let me show you how cool this is…” style.