1. Peter Schooff
  2. BPM Discussions
  3. Tuesday, 07 November 2017
  4.  Subscribe via email
While we often discuss the great many technological advances to processes on this forum, what would you say has been the biggest advancement in the management aspect of BPM of late?
Patrick Lujan Accepted Answer Pending Moderation
Blog Writer
"Big Data is the new oil" was all the hype three years ago this time, but analytics has been making slow steady progress for about ten, twelve years now. When properly understood and applied, the insights into process have greatly enabled the powers that be to know, real-time, what's going on and what to do about it. Go back and look at the full circle graphics for BPM c.2004 and that premise is now a reality, at least the possibility of it. Now, if we could just get more people to actually execute on that ability.
No significant advancement over the past year, in other words.

I agree with this.
  1. one week ago
  2. BPM Discussions
  3. # 1
Kay Winkler Accepted Answer Pending Moderation
The beautiful thing about BPM is that the technological and methodological aspects of it are so intrinsically intertwined that a true segregation isn't possible nor recommended.
With that in mind, I think the most welcoming aspect in BPM as a discipline over the past year or so, has been the acknowledgement and active incorporation into company’s strategic plans of multiple, parallel BPMS flavors and technologies. As part of the design phase, decision makers are now more likely to plan for a secure and scalable architecture that caters to multiple platforms at once - be it an ECMS with workflow capabilities, an iBPMS platform, a BPMS niche player or everything together. In addition to that, it seems, these corporations also tend to adopt a formal BPM specific discipline framework, such as the ABPMP's CBOK (common body of knowledge).
NSI Soluciones - ABPMP PTY
  1. one week ago
  2. BPM Discussions
  3. # 2
Emiel Kelly Accepted Answer Pending Moderation
I think we've seen a trend to more self steering in the teams/people that execute processes.

We've seen a move from power in the board to power on the floor. Like Buurtzorg here in the Netherlands.

Not everywhere of course, but it's a trend I see. And I like it. And some dutchees are doing a lot of research on it https://corporate-rebels.com
Sharing my adventures in Process World via Procesje.nl
  1. one week ago
  2. BPM Discussions
  3. # 3
Dr Alexander Samarin Accepted Answer Pending Moderation
I noticed in several RFPs that any coordination of work is considered as a process (very good) and it is forced to be described in BPMN (not always good). The latter leads to absurd situations in which huge BPMN diagrams devote only 10 % of their shapes to added-value work. Certainly we need to repeat to management again and again that coordination of work is not only flow-charts.

  1. one week ago
  2. BPM Discussions
  3. # 4
Karl Walter Keirstead Accepted Answer Pending Moderation

Hard to understand why they don't get " . . . . .coordination of work is not only flow-charts"

If you manage to get the point across that if you can easily have 500 instances of one flowchart with different instances at different steps you might need a large gymnasium to get sufficient wall space to put up 500 flowgraphs, with "runners", to mark up the flowgraphs with felt pen markers, you are barely started.

Unless the durations of the tasks are very short, knowledge workers often need to suspend tasks and later return to the tasks. Each interruption has an "S" curve on withdrawal then another on re-engagement. Next, we have handoffs at change-of-shift, and supervisors changing priorities. The sum of withdrawals/re-engagements can easily exceed the sum of task performance times.

Accordingly, there is no way work can be coordinated in the absence of RALB (resource allocation, leveling, balancing) and no way to have Case continuity without a Case History that shows who did what, when, many times how, complete with date and timestamped, user-signed forms showing data, as it was, at the time it was collected, on the form versions that were in service.

Absent 'multi-directional data exchange", your BPMs is an island, incapable, without extensive manual effort, of seamlessly connecting to / from multiple local and remote systems, applications and devices.

Lastly, we have 'why'. Many workers, at a practical level, have no clue why they are doing what i.e. there is no mechanism for seeing how, a Case, for example, contributes to the organization's competitive advantage.

I suppose there is no harm requiring BPMN in RFP's if cost/time are not important.
  1. http://https:\\kwkeirstead.wordpress.com
@Karl, your sentence about WHY is the answer. There are two views on processes - an external observer and an architect. The former sees who is doing what, when, how, etc. and the latter sees why the process is as it is "drawn" by the former.
Unfortunately, our curent tools are not good to capture this WHY and distribute it through everyone.
I think, the focus on WHY correlates with @John's "understanding the job is the critical unit of analysis".

I guess I need to listen to the Competing against Luck podcast.

I hope I will see that "job" means a) writing up SOWs then b) seeing to achieving the goals/objectives of such SOWs.

The other approach involves sitting in a silo, waiting for some request to appear under the door.

For me, the overarching needed capability is real-time predictive analytics and retrospective analysis of such analytics (i.e. why a Case went this way vs that way, what guidance was available at the time to influence going this way or that way, was the user's action reflective of such advice?).

One thing to have readily available context/situation appropriate advice but another thing entirely to get users to heed such advice.
Let us go back - from "Practical Process Patterns: Customer eXperience As A Process (CXAAP)" -- This blogpost is inspired by the sentence "The reason customers use our products and services, is to get jobs done in their lives." from http://bridging-the-gap.me/2013/06/03/designing-the-business-around-the-experience/" -- see http://improving-bpm-systems.blogspot.ch/2013/06/practical-process-patterns-cxaap.html
++1 @Alexander, the two "get the job done" references (one by @MClark497 and one by @Samarin). These items predate the Christensen material by one and three years respectively. More evidence of a trend providing context for the successful use of BPM process automation technology. Which in turn benefits any organization that can adopt and use this technology in support of the "jobs to do". (It would be an interesting discussion as to the difference between "work" and "job").
  1. John Morris
  2. 1 week ago
TWEET: More how #BPM #process technology can help you "get the #job done" -> "Practical Process Patterns: Customer eXperience As A Process (#CXAAP)" f/@Samarin - http://bit.ly/2m2r1qI #JTBD #JobAsProcess #CX #CustomerJourney #ProcessPatterns #Work #Automation
  1. John Morris
  2. 1 week ago
Thanks @John. Understanding "job to be done" must start with WHY(s). And business process model is a good tool for this. See the 17th law of BPM https://improving-bpm-systems.blogspot.ch/2015/07/laws-of-bpm-business-process-management.html
  1. one week ago
  2. BPM Discussions
  3. # 5
John Morris Accepted Answer Pending Moderation
The "jobs to be done" phenomenon could be providing momentum for more management process focus.

Released less than a year ago, Clayton Christensen's new book "Competing Against Luck" (October 2016) is getting a lot of traction as a major update to his original theory of innovation and disruption. The book is both an achievement and a signpost concerning management attention to process.

Here is a fascinating podcast of a discussion on this topic, between Marc Andreessen and Clayton Christensen, on the a16z Podcast: Competing Against Luck (September 1, 2017)

06m30s: [Clayton Christensen] - "...it will kill you if you don't understand how the world works. In other words, these processes in these established companies..."

21m21s: [Clayton Christensen] - "... we decided that understanding the customer is the wrong unit of analysis. But rather jobs arise in our lives and we realized that we have a job to do -- we have to go out and find something to get the job done -- understanding the job is what we need to understand, not the customers -- because the job is the causal mechanism that causes people to pull it into their lives and use it -- understanding the job is the critical unit of analysis ... "

And an HBR podcast, December 2016: The "Jobs to be Done" Theory Of Innovation.

Christensen's advocacy of a theory of disruption (The Innovator's Dilemma) was the launching point for a thousand ships. In a fascinating new development, Dr. Christensen has responded to criticism of the original theory -- with a turn to the job. I would call this almost "a turn to 'work'", even if the discussion more often uses the term "job" than the term "work". The fact that there's so much buzz around the "jobs to be done" phenomenon is evidence I think of management's increasing concern to "open up the black box" of how things get done. And Christensen, per the reference above, even uses the term "process".

How does this development in management discourse relate to the original question? The trend is the context within which BPM programmes are supported. And it's very current. If you view the screen shot below (via the DropBox URL, not sure how to drop inline into the text), the blue line references Google search activity for ( "jobs to be done" ) versus (BPM process). There's a dramatic spike in #JTBD searches over just the last 12 months.

Google Trends screen shot for "jobs to be done surge"
To recreate, search Google Trends with (1) ["jobs to be done"] and (2) [BPM Process], "2004 to Present"

Do we think that BPM champions will find executives a little more interested this year in the technology of getting the job done? It's almost as if managers are being told "your work is your responsibility". Anything else is magical thinking. Who knew?!
TWEET: Is #BPM #process tech the secret to #JobsToBeDone acceleration? - http://bit.ly/2zqWdoO - @PSchooff @BPMdotcom #JTBD @ClayChristensen
  1. John Morris
  2. 1 week ago
  1. one week ago
  2. BPM Discussions
  3. # 6
David Chassels Accepted Answer Pending Moderation
After couple of decades I think the past year has seen progress. The poor start for BPM linked to the failure in the capability offered by software to deliver via such as BPEL and currently BPMN Now there are signs this is changing evidenced by relevant questions in this forum about no low code quick delivery. The link to the "Digital" movement gives that focus on the needs of supporting people and aids the promotion of BPM. The tag Digital Business Platform "DBP" sets a move to understand "How" with good focus on new architectures to orchestrate data including legacy as required. Adaptive capability been around for while and needs greater understanding again how and incorporated into DBPs. Business needs to drive this .......that remains the challenge and BPM being readily supported for delivery will help.
  1. one week ago
  2. BPM Discussions
  3. # 7
  • Page :
  • 1

There are no replies made for this post yet.
However, you are not allowed to reply to this post.