2010-04-10

Reply to Post: Does BPM need a W3C type Standard? No way!

<Blogpost ref="http://andrewonedegree.wordpress.com/2010/04/06/does-bpm-need-a-w3c-type-standard-no-way/" />


BPM (as a discipline, tools and the practice) needs standards – they are steps (like in a ladder) to move forward. Example of W3C is a bit “wider” then you mentioned – there is a set of coherent standards: a) xHTML for structure and content, b) CSS for presentation, c) DOM-based API for dynamic modifications, and d) some other specialized standards. And, very important, there is an architecture which gives the context for all those standards.

Good acceptance of HTML (all vendors are checking their product with acid3.acidtests.org) considerably reduces development efforts – previously 25 % has been spent for covering “specific features” of popular Web browsers. As well as this is a base for moving to HTML5.

In the case of BPM we have neither real standards (just publicly available specifications) nor architecture. But by having commonly agreed and executable BPMN we can use it within wider range of applications (i.e. innovate), e.g. in the traditional “case management” for planning and execution of short chains of steps (or activities). Similar as in the chess game some players think only about the current move and some players think for several moves in advance.

Thanks,
AS

1 comment:

Anonymous said...

I have been re-reading some of this and since i wrote the blog sometime ago, many things have changed with how I look at BPM.

I still stand by the fact that BPM should not have standards introduced, they are far too restrictive. However, I take this further now. BPM itself is far too restrictive to deliver what it promises to business.

BPM already has some standards in the way it works, the way we design processes and the way those processes get implemented. Essentially these are all built around rigid flowchart type implementations (and thats essentially where BPM is today). This standard view / way of thinking is great for simple, medium-high volume, highly repetative processes, but for the other 80% of work processes carried out in the organisation, this is too rigid to deal with day to day life...

BPM should be an ideal, and should not get itself bogged down with ways of thinking, working or in any way shape or form "standards". Business needs are far too adaptive, need to be far more agile and BPM needs to cover more of them well. Unforuntately IT doesnt get BPM, instead we try to put IT based rules and thinking on something that is not IT born. BPM is about business, and there are no standards set there for how a business chooses to work. Sure there are rules and regulations, but a business is not restricted by such low level standards. BPM needs to evolve and move away from standards further and further, it needs to drop the reliance on a standisation for classifying work and processes and move to a far more adaptive, agile and social way of working...