Don't mix models and realization?

Active Endpoints has long experience from process execution environments. In this post, Michael Rowley gives his response to the BPEL vs. BPMN debate. Michael is questioning the relationship between models and its realization. He makes a note about the tiny little details you need to add to your model for making it executable saying - "... and they can’t be fuzzy or imprecise" about the ability to express them in BPMN.

Model-driven design is a hot topic, not just in the BPM space but in all software development domains. Business people have been invited to the round tables when discussing software design, thanks to the modeling approach. Certainly there will be initiatives taking the model too far, but in a couple of years there will probably be a balance between model and realization and we could hopefully work together with a seamless model-to-realization process ;).

Zip-top bags, monkeys, and BPM

I attended and talked at a BPM conference last week, arranged by IDS Scheer in Stockholm. One of the keynote speakers was a guy talking about human behavior and how to step out of the box.

He talked about how we act in front of airport security, when asked to put liquid and gels in a plastic bag, even though we know that bag will not be safe when the bomb goes off. This story relates to all the brainless people and ass-kissers we are put up to cope with during the work hours.

The best story was the one about the monkeys and the bananas. It went like this ...

Start with a cage containing five monkeys.

Inside the cage, hang a banana on a string and place a set of stairs under it. Before long, a monkey will go to the stairs and start to climb towards the banana. As soon as he touches the stairs, spray all of the other monkeys with cold water.

After a while, another monkey makes an attempt with the same result - all the other monkeys are sprayed with cold water. Pretty soon, when another monkey tries to climb the stairs, the other monkeys will try to prevent it.

Now, put away the cold water. Remove one monkey from the cage and replace it with a new one. The new monkey sees the banana and wants to climb the stairs. To his surprise and horror, all of the other monkeys attack him.

After another attempt and attack, he knows that if he tries to climb the stairs, he will be assaulted.

Next, remove another of the original five monkeys and replace it with a new one. The newcomer goes to the stairs and is attacked. The previous newcomer takes part in the punishment with enthusiasm! Likewise, replace a third original monkey with a new one, then a fourth, then the fifth. Every time the newest monkey takes to the stairs, he is attacked.

Most of the monkeys that are beating him have no idea why they were not permitted to climb the stairs or why they are participating in the beating of the newest monkey.

After replacing all the original monkeys, none of the remaining monkeys have ever been sprayed with cold water. Nevertheless, no monkey ever again approaches the stairs to try for the banana. Why not? Because as far as they know that's the way it's always been done round here.

And that, my friends, is how company policies are made.

So how does the monkey story relate to BPM?

Don't beat up the guy trying to improve your business processes with the clear goal of rationalizing you and your collegues?

Platform Evolution and 'Dublin'

Mapped a couple of vendors on to a general platform evolution time line. Process column refers to process execution capabilities, not BPM.

A few weeks ago Microsoft announced 'Dublin', a distributed host for WF/WCF based applications. 'Dublin' is an integrated environment within Windows Server, just like Internet Information Services, COM+, and Windows Sharepoint Services. BizTalk will now be positioned as Microsoft's answer to IBM's, Oracle's and BEA's integration suites. 'Dublin' takes a step up on the platform evolution and aligns to products like WebSphere Process Server, leveraging Workflow Foundation.

The only remaining question now would be - what will be the real product name?

BPM tries to appease process workers

I recently watched a free BPM seminar with Forrester's Connie Moore where the result from an online survey was presented. The question was "What do you see as the primary benefit of BPM efforts?"

1. 24% said Increased productivity for process workers
2. 18% said The ability to provide real-time visibility into key processes
3. 15% said The ability to change processes quickly and easily
4. 13% said The ability to model business processes
5. 12% said Consistent process execution across business units or geographics
6. 12% said Optimization of processes
7. 4% said Decreased reliance on IT for supporting and changing processes
8. 1% said The ability to test work for compliance and remediate problems

I can agree that 2-8 are relevant to BPM, but increasing productivity for process workers I would say has nothing directly to do with BPM. There is an indirect link between BPM and productivity though. BPM should definitively be a driver for IT investments to increase productivity, like ECM, BI, Enterprise Search, Collaboration, Messaging, etc.

I think this result is just a way to appease the process workers who fear BPM. Name one capability of a BPMS that will increase the productivity directly of a process worker.