<reply to="http://mainthing.ru/item/181/#more-181"/>
Sure, there are serious problems with BPM which should be openly discussed. (I am going to do that also at a BPM seminar in Moscow today).
Before going through your list it is necessary to define what we are talking about see -- http://improving-bpm-systems.blogspot.com/2009/04/should-we-consider-third-forgotten-bpm.html about three axes of BPM.
1. The legacy of process disciplines is a great asset which should be used correctly. My advice is “How you do something may be more important than what you do” – customise the message to the target audience.
2. Agree. Terminology is a pain and there is no agreed reference model yet. Hope that bpmnexus.ning.com can improve this situation.
3. Don’t think so – in my experience if the third BPM is architected / designed / implemented correctly then it becomes a disruptive technology with many advantages.
4. It is never late to do good things (especially at your own home!).
5. It is well knowna that the mentioned technologies are very rich and overlapping, so they should be used partially and with critical understanding. Actually, explicit use of the third BPM simplifies the enterprise business system because BPM guides how to use other information technologies.
7. I think, the dot-com crash had a positive effect also – I saw dot-com architects moved to classic environments where they found issues from the real production.
8. Agree – at present BPM is vendor-centric. It should move to become customer-centric.
9. People is the most difficult aspect of the third BPM - “How you do something may be more important than what you do”.
10. BPMS is not the most critical part of the third BPM. Start small and adjust your tools as needed. Good architecture will help.
Thanks,
AS
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Posts
No comments:
Post a Comment