Sorry, this entry is only available in Русский.
It ain’t a classic blog post but rather a rolling-out story. No one knows how it will go neither who is the killer
The reader of this blog Crisitan submitted a comment asking how to model “state machine”-like processes:
Here is my made-up story: we are trying to model and implement a computerized system for handling the lifecycle of some licence obeying the rules below.
The Ministry of Energy of some country issues licences for oil exploration and production to applying oil companies. Oil companies must get a licence before they may legally produce or explore for oil in that country. When companies get a licence from ministry, they are said to own the licence. In order to get the licence, a company must first apply for it via ministry. Any licence application gets reviewed by ministry staff and, if application is approved, it results in the issuance of the licence. A licence has an Issue Date and an Expiry Date. Every time Expiry Date is moved forward, it does so at most one year at a time, but it may be moved forward repeatedly thru the Renew Licence function of the system.
Depicting process interactions with external stakeholders is a standard stumbling block for BPMN newcomers.
A typical example:
There are a whole bunch of errors: » read the rest
Occasionally I get BPMN diagrams like this:
This is the “Payment process” composed of interacting “Accounting department process”, “Business unit finance department process” and “Corporate finance department process.” » read the rest
From time to time we are approached by prospects requesting task control automation by BPM.
The idea is simple: someone assigns tasks by setting goals, responsibles and terms. It’s easy enough to develop a system automating terms control, due dates reminders, statistical analysis, etc.
In short, we want to make a profession out of BPM.
The current issue of BPM market in Russia and worldwide is the lack of a common ground - a core set of concepts, techniques and technologies that would be accepted by all stakeholders.
Process management is a discipline with a long history: TQM in the 70’s, re-engineering in the 90s, BPM in the 2000s. Lean and Six Sigma also have process aspects. Apart from this mainstream, there is a number of esoteric doctrines shared only by the author or a small group of followers.
How does it look from a potential customer perspective? He/she sees a number of gurus, each evangelizing his own way. They cannot agree with each other. They aren’t helpful beyond the relatively narrow scope. The natural question “where can I read about it?” doesn’t meet a clear answer. Besides, BPM is not widely presented in universities and MBA courses. Sub-disciplines (e.g. modeling or automation of processes) are available but BPM as a holistic discipline is not offered in a significant scale.
Not surprisingly, only the most self-confident customers get into it - those who have intellectual resources to pave their own route in a rough sea of BPM. Hence the predictable result: today, 10 years after the birth, BPM is still at the Early Adopters stage of the Technology Lifecycle.
BPM is a fun for practitioners yet that’s what scares off potential customers - they’d prefer something more simple, common, boring if you like.
Can this situation be changed? We believe it’s not only possible - the time for the change is now.
Thanks to the efforts of BPM pioneers we now have practical experience in methodology, technology and implementation. A number of organizations have achieved spectacular success in BPM. The community of BPM enthusiasts in Russia develops a common view of process management issues for more than 5 years. We have matured to develop a consensus on BPM basics. (Just basics - it’s not about eliminating diversity and creativity in the whole BPM domain.)
And it’s easy to do because there is no need to invent the basic platform. For 10 years there is an organization called ABPMP (www.abpmp.org) - The Association of BPM Professionals - comprising more than 6,000 members around the world. And it isn’t just a club: ABPMP published and further develops (the third edition to be released soon) the BPM CBOK (Common Body of Knowledge) and certification system called CBPP (Certified Business Process Professional) based on BPM CBOK.
By creating the ABPMP Russian Chapter we want to assist the transformation of BPM into acknowledged discipline and eventually to add dynamics to the BPM market.
Is it real? Looking at the project management state of the art, there is every reason to say yes. PMBOK there vs. BPM CBOK here. A system of certification here and there. Yet unlike BPM, there is no need to explain what a project management is. The reason is obvious: BPM is younger. But it will pass with age.
Another encouraging example is ABPMP Brazil Chapter. I was surprising to hear from American colleagues that BPM ideas in Brazil are more widespread than in the US. No doubt there is a contribution of the local ABPMP Chapter and its president Gart Capote who advised me on establishing the chapter in Russia (thanks, Gart!) Why not achieving a similar success here? Russia has endless opportunities for process management and BPM.
So far, the initiative group has created a Russian Chapter (www.abpmp.org.ru) and registered it with ABPMP International. The next important milestone is the kick-start meeting - the registration is opened.
Planned Chapter activities are: Russian BPM glossary, BPM CBOK translation into Russian, CBPP certification, seminars, workshops etc.
Get involved now!
There is a Russian idiom “The Hamburg Score”. It comes from a legend saying that professional wrestlers of the world gathered in Hamburg once per year at the beginning of XX century to find out who is the best. The point is that they did it for themselves, not for public.
This story came into my mind at bpmNEXT conference because of its unique atmosphere: no marketing stuff, no lead generation, no speculations about what BPM is – nothing of what one may expect at a typical BPM event. Just a professional showcase of tomorrow’s BPM. » read the rest