Blog: Carthago delenda est!

<discussion group="BP group" ref="http://wrivkin.wordpress.com/2009/06/30/carthago-delenda-est/" />

The classic EA is some kind of “enterprise genotype” (a full nomenclature of enterprise artefacts) which is not yet well connected to “enterprise phenotype” (a set of observable characteristics such as performance).

I think that a formal link between can be done via “enterprise executable model” – EA enhanced by BPM and SOA.

Thanks,
AS

Linkedin: BPM and SOA - looking for your opinions

<discussion group="BP group" ref="http://www.linkedin.com/groupAnswers?viewQuestionAndAnswers=&gid=1062077&discussionID=4610507&sik=1246123336638&trk=ug_qa_q&goback=.anh_1062077.ana_1062077_1246123336638_3_1" />

I think some definitions should be stated explicitly at the beginning....

service, noun
explicitly-defined and operationally-independent unit of functionality

process, noun
explicitly-defined coordination of services to create a particular result

Remark: Services and processes can be considered to be intimately related since in real terms
• all processes are services,
• some operations of a service can be implemented as a process, and
• a process includes services in its implementation.

BPM discipline, noun
discipline which allows you to model, automate, execute, control, measure and optimise the flow of business activities that span the enterprise’s systems, employees, customers and partners within and beyond the enterprise boundaries

Remark: At present, the BPM discipline is the best way to implement process-centric enterprises.

BPM system, noun
<enterprise> portfolio of the business processes as well as the practices and tools for governing the design, execution and evolution of this portfolio

Remark: Any process-centric enterprise has its own enterprise BPM system. The enterprise BPM system may not be perfect (e.g. some processes may be only documented on paper, some details are only “located” only in the minds of certain people, etc.), but it does exist.

BPM suite, noun
coherent set of software tools for facilitating the implementation of a BPM system

SOA, noun
architectural approach for constructing software-intensive systems from a set of universally interconnected and interdependent services


The relationship: SOA provides recommendations for the implementation, execution and governance of services. The BPM discipline, by revealing the artefacts (roles, events, rules, object, KPIs, etc.) and the relationships between them, provides the necessary context (e.g. granularity) for the definition of services.

You are right – BP modelling is important. Obviously, each person models in his/her own, but a good modelling procedure can help different people to find out same artefacts which will be implemented via reusable services.

I believe that with a good architecture it is possible to archive optimum flexibility (see http://www.slideshare.net/samarin/architecting-enterprise-bpm-systems-for-optimal-agility-presentation )

Thanks,
AS

Blog: How to Extend PLM Reach – Process vs. Content?

<discussion ref="http://plmtwine.com/2009/06/22/how-to-extend-plm-reach-–-process-vs-content/" />

I think that content and processes are complimentary:
- processes help to generate better content (integration, security, collaboration, SLAs, quality, etc.) and
- content help to make better processes (serving needs of a person who is carrying out a particular task, smart routing, KPIs, etc.)

What mixture of content and processes you need in each particular case -- all depends. And this is a very dynamic balance - each time the point of most leverage may change.

I think that a properly architected BPM can significantly improve PLM.

Thanks,
AS

Webinars: How to use BPMN for modelling business processes ?

I will be talking about BPMN.
See webinars' schedule http://www.icmgworld.com/corp/serv/webinar_schedule.asp

Thanks,
AS

Linkedin: What impact do you find using a BPMS system has on end to end process time?

<discussion ref="BP group" />

Richard,
All depends. I recommend each time to find the point of most leverage -- it may be in automation of existing processes or in changing them.

Often the business people know what is wrong – some kind of “performance errors”. For example, the decomposition of such complex human activities into a mixture of automated and simple human activities not only saves work time and improves the quality of operations, but can also open up the possibility to delegate certain of the new simple human activities to less-qualified staff members. In one particular enterprise in which this decomposition was carried out for the activities of one group leader, we economized their time by about 1 man-month per year.

It is important that your enterprise BPM system (see “http://improving-bpm-systems.blogspot.com/2009/04/should-we-consider-third-forgotten-bpm.html” about different BPM concepts) can carry out small and incremental improvements. I wrote a book (it is not but yet publish) -- how to architect and implement enterprise BPM systems which are easy to evolve. The table of contents is available at http://improving-bpm-systems.com/book/toc.pdf. Hope you will find it of interest. Please feel free to contact me should you require more information.

Thanks,
AS

Inside Business Architecture: Defining Business Architecture

<discussion ref="http://insidebusinessarchitecture.ning.com/forum/topics/defining-business-architecture" />

My defintion is the following:

business architecture, noun

that part of enterprise architecture concentrating on the conceptualisation and evolution of the form and structure of the enterprise business system

More terminology related to it (e.g. "enterprise business system") can be found at http://www.improving-BPM-systems.com/terminology/business-related-terminology

Thanks,
AS

The Forrester blog for EA professionals: Principles don't matter

<discussion ref="http://blogs.forrester.com/ea/2009/05/principles-dont-matter.html" />


I always recommend to add my favourite principle:

"You may break any principle provided that you master it"

Sure that any of principle is just an advice. It is quite normal to break any them if you know the reasons which are behind a particular principle and how they do match to a particular situation. For example, in the chess game is it recommended to novices do not exchange the queen vs. a pawn, but such an exchange can be a part of a combination which leads to the checkmate.

Thanks,
AS