Resolved
1 votes

Do you think Salesforce will occupy part of the BPM market in the near future?

Thursday, December 18 2014, 09:43 AM
Share this post:
Responses (9)
  • Accepted Answer

    Thursday, December 18 2014, 09:55 AM - #Permalink
    Resolved
    4 votes

    CRm and Process management are complementary, especially as CRM mostly employs encoded processes which is worse than definable flow diagrams. So the answer is a yes, but in principle CRM needs user-definable and adaptive processes because CRM is more like case work than like orthodox business process. Given the current state of affairs Salesforce won't know the difference ... and users use what they get.

    The reply is currently minimized Show
  • Accepted Answer

    Thursday, December 18 2014, 11:04 AM - #Permalink
    Resolved
    1 votes

    I completely agree with Max in terms of SFDC, but I think the more interesting evolution will be BPM platforms encroaching on the turf that Salesforce 1 wants to occupy, namely "helping IT lead innovation with tools and services to build mobile and social business apps faster than ever before." BPM is much better-positioned to do this than SF 1.

    The reply is currently minimized Show
  • Accepted Answer

    Thursday, December 18 2014, 12:53 PM - #Permalink
    Resolved
    1 votes

    Exactly! Every technology is a way to automate a process so SFDC is a Business Process Management solution already. If they make the workflow more customizable and adaptable they'll move closer to the BPM space and away from the CRM space. SaaS solutions are notoriously difficult to customize on a per customer and per user basis other than by offering a number of optional looks, feels and options. So it might be harder than they think to crossover to be a full blown BPM solution. 

    The reply is currently minimized Show
  • Accepted Answer

    Thursday, December 18 2014, 04:35 PM - #Permalink
    Resolved
    1 votes

    As far as I know, any process-centric solutions comprises several artefacts, such as events, roles, screens (or forms), rules, goals, data, documents, coordination techniques (flow-chats, case folder, check-lists, etc.), audit trails, KPIs, reports, services, processes and automation scripts. Ideally, all of these artefacts are explicit, versionable and externalisable to quickly assemble a business solution. Modern BPM-suites are trying to be (at least) good with all mentioned artefacts.

    I think that force.com is very good with data, screens and automation scripting; maybe also with some ad-hoc coordination. What’s about other artefacts?

    Thanks,
    AS

    The reply is currently minimized Show
  • Accepted Answer

    Friday, December 19 2014, 03:58 AM - #Permalink
    Resolved
    2 votes

    In addition to agreeing with Max, I'd like to say that unfortunately (or fortunately for the up-and-comers?) Salesforce doesn't have a business process DNA (the passage from Benioff's book where he recalls the epiphany he had when he realized how much potential laid in the fact that his customers should be able to rename the frigging tabs in his app... man, this still hurts my brain) and it occupies some BPM space out of sheer logic: CRM is a business process.

    Salesforce is a weird company - it combines a high-touch enterprise sales process with an SaaS delivery model. I think this is the main reason they keep bleeding cash from an operating standpoint. They can still get away with it as they bully other enterprise spaces with their stock exchange cash, but this is not sustainable.

    I would bet my money on a BPM player that does CRM too, rather than on a CRM player that reinvents itself as BPM.

    And while I'm at it, I'd actually bet my money on a Case Management player that does BPM too. Where are they? :)

    • Dr Alexander Samarin
      more than a month ago
      Bogdan, I think SF position themselves as a PaaS as well.
    • Bogdan Nafornita
      more than a month ago
      Alexander, they are also positioning themselves as "no software", which we know is a stretch :-)

      Yes, I know about their force.com, I was excited about it until I tried to use it for my own private project. Also, their pricing is crazy. Good luck with that.
    • John Morris
      more than a month ago
      Thank goodness someone can call out SF. As a sales person who has "had to" use SF adding up to five years in total, I can't say much for what the product does for the "pointy end of the stick". And my friends that are more familiar with the innards of the thing don't have complimentary things to say about the data model either -- which is more serious. I love the comment about "rename the frigging tabs" -- that kind of captures that lack of deep science behind the whole thing. Sales doesn't really attract the "theoretically minded" and the result is that the CRM software that sales people have to work around to do the job.

      Some day . . . hey if anyone wants to build a killer CRM package that when released will overnight become the personal sales platform for a million professional reps, let me know. (I just reviewed a very large number of today's hottest CRM packages, from the low-end on up. With few exceptions, most people don't get it. And the few exceptions have failings that make them unusable. My sense was that a lot of CRM designers aren't really strong on "normalized" conceptual modeling.)
    The reply is currently minimized Show
  • Accepted Answer

    Friday, December 19 2014, 04:45 AM - #Permalink
    Resolved
    1 votes

    This is a deeper question than it seems. Trouble with SaaS and in particular the big players such as SFDC and Workday is that they are not making profits!  So the model has a fundamental flaw and something needs to change? Would you allow your mission critical front end process to be “owned” by an unprofitable thus inherently unstable company?

     

    SaaS should be seen as a payment method without a “lock-in” so once “lease” payment reach end of contract there needs to be an option is to ”move” hosting which includes of course bring back in-house?  

     

    Looking at “BPM” supporting software this requires customisation and in built easy change which for most hardcoded vendors will be a challenge and expensive to support. Will SFDC be able to support? I doubt it. Sure their marketing department will make claims but buyers better understand just “how” it works and make sure you can get you processes back not just your data!

    • Bogdan Nafornita
      more than a month ago
      small SaaS players are normally very profitable at gross margins in the 70-80%.

      However, the big, megalomaniac SaaS companies have a massive and expensive salesforce, a convoluted business model and an unhealthy appetite to swallow any competing small business as margin sweeteners, with operational integration being an afterthought. This turns to very high operating costs that more than offset the high margins, and this almost defeats the purpose of deploying via cloud.
    The reply is currently minimized Show
  • Accepted Answer

    Ian Gotts
    Ian Gotts
    Offline
    Friday, December 19 2014, 07:41 PM - #Permalink
    Resolved
    2 votes

    Some great comments here. Having been involved with BPM for 16 yrs and been a Salesforce.com reference customer for 10 yrs, there a couple of comments/corrections I would like to suggest.

    - Salesforce is only unprofitable due to its insane marketing and M&A spend driven by a goal of $20bn rev

    - Salesforce does not have BPM in its DNA. Marc certainly doesnt. They have BPM tools but they get little or no marketing. 

    - BPM is becoming irrelevant because it is too generic, is a platform and not an "outcome".  CX, increased sales, better service, compliance achieved and analytical insights are results that business buyers will pay for.  BPM is/was bought by IT and they are no longer in the driving seat.

    • Bogdan Nafornita
      more than a month ago
      I think BPM as a product in a sales kit is becoming irrelevant. BPM as a business platform technology is becoming more relevant as it effectively provides the foundation of a higher level business programming language.
    The reply is currently minimized Show
  • Accepted Answer

    Monday, February 16 2015, 10:47 AM - #Permalink
    Resolved
    2 votes

     

    I get the impression that we don’t really want to answer the question of whether Salesforce occupy the BPM market, perhaps because we don’t see Salesforce as a potential BPM platform or, as Bogdan puts it, a company with ‘a business process DNA’. But perhaps they will make progress anyway.

    Meanwhile, the questions of whether Salesforce should occupy part of the BPM market is interesting too. After all, from the point of view of Salesforce users and BPM specialists, it probably doesn't have to.

    Max notes that CRM and BPM are complementary, and that CRM needs adaptable processes. If you're thinking about integration, which is where I'm coming from, then this sounds like an integration problem: it's better to integrate complementary tools than try to make one big tool that does everything. It’s may well be easier to integrate Salesforce with a BPM solution than it is for Salesforce to add process management without making the whole product less usable.

    Note that the fact that Salesforce is SaaS doesn't really change anything, compared to more traditional integration scenarios. If anything, integration is easier with cloud-based services whose APIs are more public and better-documented than in-house solutions’.

    Finally, Ben speculates about BPM platforms getting involved. From my point of view, this means integrating with Salesforce so that it can participate in processes managed by an external process engine. This shouldn't be a surprise, because Salesforce offers APIs that make various interesting things possible. Also, for what it’s worth, Effektif has just got started with Salesforce integration.

    So to return to the original question: although anything’s possible, there are three good reasons to believe that the answer is no:

    1. Salesforce isn’t a BPM company and will struggle to provide compelling process management
    2. BPM doesn't have to be inside Salesforce, because of the integration alternative
    3. Betteridge’s law of headlines (see Wikipedia) :)
    The reply is currently minimized Show
  • Accepted Answer

    Thursday, February 19 2015, 03:11 AM - #Permalink
    Resolved
    2 votes

    As my little experience stretches; SFDC doesn't support my processes at all. It made them only worse. Maybe it was the implementation, but man, I think throughput times are 10 times higher now. So BPM? Maybe, but not so exciting.

    But to be honest; since SFDC I have more data entered than I have ever dreamt of.

    The reply is currently minimized Show
Your Reply

Join the Discussion

Want to join the discussion?

Login, or create an account to participate in the forum.

Top Participants

Dr Alexander Samarin
278 Replies
01/10/2016
David Chassels
271 Replies
30/09/2016
Emiel Kelly
223 Replies
30/09/2016
Bogdan Nafornita
210 Replies
30/09/2016
E Scott Menter
182 Replies
28/09/2016