3 days ago 20 822
When the customer refuses to listen to the experts they have hired to run the BPM project and demand a waterfall process. It's never a good sign when waterfall is the preferred methodologySo is there ever a call anymore where waterfall is the preferred methodology?
Peter Johnston wrote: So the real question is do we need a cascade at all? Are we involving IT purely because our BPM software is badly (or arrogantly) designed? Or because some IT person wants to tell people what to do? Thinks he knows business better than them. We saw this with Websites. Websites used to be hard – every page had to be put through a review procedure, agreed by the board and then installed by IT. The result was awful long-winded jargon heavy websites no-one read. Then Marketing Automation found a way round – creating templated landing pages which anyone could create. BPM is simpler than a spreadsheet (or a Web CMS). So why isn’t it on everyone’s computer? How exciting could it be if people were allowed to try out things for themselves? AB test. Evolve processes. I'll wager it could make a bigger difference than democratising Websites. The thing is, by making BPM hard, we are stopping it reaching widespread acceptance. And we are opening ways for people to find a way round. Waterfall is stopping BPM from transforming businesses. And by stopping it from becoming widespread, it is costing IT people jobs.There are a few flaws with this train of thought. 1) BPM is not simpler than a spreadsheet. maybe workflow, but not the development of systems that offer much in terms of value. 2) just because regular people "can" create applications doesn't mean that they should. I want my LoB employees focused on their respective jobs not on building IT systems. Ideally, the LoB has the flexibility to alter the behavior of the process or application based on their specific expertise and/or judgement. This is the yet undelivered promise of adaptive case management.