Comments on: Back to the Future http://itredux.com/2006/08/10/back-to-the-future/ New Rules for a New IT World Sat, 10 Dec 2011 03:24:58 -0500 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.9.2 hourly 1 By: Ismael Ghalimi http://itredux.com/2006/08/10/back-to-the-future/comment-page-1/#comment-9465 Ismael Ghalimi Mon, 28 Aug 2006 03:53:27 +0000 http://itredux.com/blog/2006/08/10/back-to-the-future/#comment-9465 Ryan, What you're describing sounds like a higher-level version of BPMN. Definitely much needed today. Ryan,

What you’re describing sounds like a higher-level version of BPMN.

Definitely much needed today.

]]> By: Ryan Armasu http://itredux.com/2006/08/10/back-to-the-future/comment-page-1/#comment-9460 Ryan Armasu Mon, 28 Aug 2006 01:22:24 +0000 http://itredux.com/blog/2006/08/10/back-to-the-future/#comment-9460 Ismael, Thanks for your posting. I guess one of my thoughts was that the ultimate customer is the business owner (in my mind anyway), and that some marketing efforts should be focused toward this customer. The beauty of the SCOR model is that it speaks to the non-technical business people in a simple, concise, and standard language they can understand -- and moreover leads them to see the connection between a very technical field and their ultimate objectives: revenue, profitability, and productivity. Besides, the standards adopted, even though fairly high level, led to faster development of supply chain applications across a lot more industries than just the Dells, Toyotas and WalMarts. I think something similar to this would have a positive effect on the BPM industry as a whole, and would lead to faster adoption rates, and ultimately more demand for the various BPM products. -Ryan Ismael,

Thanks for your posting. I guess one of my thoughts was that the ultimate customer is the business owner (in my mind anyway), and that some marketing efforts should be focused toward this customer. The beauty of the SCOR model is that it speaks to the non-technical business people in a simple, concise, and standard language they can understand — and moreover leads them to see the connection between a very technical field and their ultimate objectives: revenue, profitability, and productivity.

Besides, the standards adopted, even though fairly high level, led to faster development of supply chain applications across a lot more industries than just the Dells, Toyotas and WalMarts.

I think something similar to this would have a positive effect on the BPM industry as a whole, and would lead to faster adoption rates, and ultimately more demand for the various BPM products.

-Ryan

]]> By: Howard Smith http://itredux.com/2006/08/10/back-to-the-future/comment-page-1/#comment-7931 Howard Smith Sat, 12 Aug 2006 09:26:44 +0000 http://itredux.com/blog/2006/08/10/back-to-the-future/#comment-7931 Just to clarify: BPMN and IDEF3 are not in the same space. BPMN was designed as a canoncial visual representation for executable business processes, that is, BPML or BPEL models. IDEF3 models cannot, to my understanding at least, execute as IT systems. That is, you cannot draw an IDEF3 diagram and bring an entire enterprise-class application to life simply by using the "Save As" menu option. With BPMN and BPEL on a BPMS, you can. Thus, what Ismael calls BPM 2.0 is quite a different vision to "BPM" - Business Process Modelling as understood by the majority of BPM practitioners out there. This "third wave" of BPM in which process models are executable and adaptable systems is not the old BPM of the past. And it is not about taking an offline model and translating it into code either. Now, we can discuss the details of BPMN - frankly, I'm not a fan of it visually - an earlier version developed by Intalio was, in my view, far better. But we have what we have. I hope the new home of BPMN, the OMG, are now looking at all the visual metaphors "out there", as in IDEF, RADs etc, to see if they can be leveraged in BPMN. But remember, executability must be preserved. Just to clarify: BPMN and IDEF3 are not in the same space. BPMN was designed as a canoncial visual representation for executable business processes, that is, BPML or BPEL models. IDEF3 models cannot, to my understanding at least, execute as IT systems. That is, you cannot draw an IDEF3 diagram and bring an entire enterprise-class application to life simply by using the “Save As” menu option. With BPMN and BPEL on a BPMS, you can. Thus, what Ismael calls BPM 2.0 is quite a different vision to “BPM” - Business Process Modelling as understood by the majority of BPM practitioners out there. This “third wave” of BPM in which process models are executable and adaptable systems is not the old BPM of the past. And it is not about taking an offline model and translating it into code either. Now, we can discuss the details of BPMN - frankly, I’m not a fan of it visually - an earlier version developed by Intalio was, in my view, far better. But we have what we have. I hope the new home of BPMN, the OMG, are now looking at all the visual metaphors “out there”, as in IDEF, RADs etc, to see if they can be leveraged in BPMN. But remember, executability must be preserved.

]]> By: Francis Ip http://itredux.com/2006/08/10/back-to-the-future/comment-page-1/#comment-7883 Francis Ip Fri, 11 Aug 2006 20:00:55 +0000 http://itredux.com/blog/2006/08/10/back-to-the-future/#comment-7883 Interesting! We always reinvent the wheel from different perspectives. Moreover, most of the so-called new paradigms are just re-packaging of the field-proven practices, with new labels. For instance, IDEF3 was developed for process management, way before BPMN was defined and adopted. It is similar to BPMN, with layering support (e.g. process, activity, and task), while current BPMN dropped activity altogether! In essence, IDEF3 is 3 dimensional, while BPMN is still 2 dimensional. I believe that Ryan is looking for a Unified Business Model that can cover the whole spectrum of enterprise management activities, including Strategic Management, Operations Management, and Resources Management. If one wants to have a better handle on what Supply Chain should be, please read Prof. Michael Porter's seminal work on "Strategic Advantage" published more than 20 years ago on Value Chain. Ismael's "middle out" approach does address the yawning gap between business and IT communities. Such a gap has been in existence since computers were released to the general public. There is still no solution since the founding of ACM (Association for Computing Machinery) in 1952 on how to fill in the gap! The ones who can fill in the gap are those who are true "Enterprise Architects", with strong business acumens and appreciation for the limitations of technologies. Interesting! We always reinvent the wheel from different perspectives. Moreover, most of the so-called new paradigms are just re-packaging of the field-proven practices, with new labels. For instance, IDEF3 was developed for process management, way before BPMN was defined and adopted. It is similar to BPMN, with layering support (e.g. process, activity, and task), while current BPMN dropped activity altogether! In essence, IDEF3 is 3 dimensional, while BPMN is still 2 dimensional.

I believe that Ryan is looking for a Unified Business Model that can cover the whole spectrum of enterprise management activities, including Strategic Management, Operations Management, and Resources Management. If one wants to have a better handle on what Supply Chain should be, please read Prof. Michael Porter’s seminal work on “Strategic Advantage” published more than 20 years ago on Value Chain.

Ismael’s “middle out” approach does address the yawning gap between business and IT communities. Such a gap has been in existence since computers were released to the general public. There is still no solution since the founding of ACM (Association for Computing Machinery) in 1952 on how to fill in the gap! The ones who can fill in the gap are those who are true “Enterprise Architects”, with strong business acumens and appreciation for the limitations of technologies.

]]> By: BPMS Watch http://itredux.com/2006/08/10/back-to-the-future/comment-page-1/#comment-7793 BPMS Watch Thu, 10 Aug 2006 23:39:43 +0000 http://itredux.com/blog/2006/08/10/back-to-the-future/#comment-7793 [...] Ismael posts an interesting reader request on IT|Redux [...] […] Ismael posts an interesting reader request on IT|Redux […]

]]>