Earlier today, I commented that you couldn’t swing an analyst’s report without hitting a BPM/business rules alliance; see what I mean?
Still catching up on some webinars that I missed, here’s one from June 30th about BPM and Business Rule Management Systems (BRMS). It’s hosted by Peter Carter of ILOG, and although he’s not the most dynamic speaker that I have heard, there’s some interesting content on the slides for those of you who might be working through the relationship between BPM and business rules:
- BPMS focus on how people and systems interact
- BRMS focus on how decisions are made
His point is that BPM can get you to a certain point in process automation, that is, where the only human intervention is for decision-making; BRMS can take you further to automated decision-making so that the only human intervention is for exception-handling. Of course, you can embed rules within a process map in any of the BPMS that I’ve ever worked with, but the rules are typically not explicit and may have to be replicated at a number of points in the process map, depending on the capabilities of the BPMS: most of the systems are really not built for explicit rules management. And, although all the BPMS vendors claim that it’s easy to have a business analyst change the process map at any time, in reality I’ve never seen an organization that would allow that to happen without (justifiable) layers of technical review and testing to ensure that the new process logic doesn’t break something. As I mentioned in this post, you’re pretty unlikely to find someone within the business part of an organization that is sufficiently trained/experienced in systems thinking to be able to make what are essentially programming changes, even if they are using a pretty graphical interface.
Business rules typically interact with a BPMS at a specific point in process, usually to generate a value and/or determine the next action to take based on the current parameters (e.g., pricing, eligibility determination, scoring, case assignment, data validation). That makes it a lot easier, and a lot less dangerous, to allow a business analyst to modify business rules without an undue amount of IT involvement: since the process map is not changed, there is no danger of work becoming orphaned or misdirected through a business rule change as long as the process map was properly designed in the first place.
This is why all industrial-strength BPMS are either OEM’ing a business rules engine into their product these days, or integrating tightly with one: you can’t swing an analyst’s report these days without hitting some new BPMS/BRMS alliance. ILOG’s certainly a driving force here, with alliances with Siebel, FileNet, Oracle, IBM, BEA, Fuego and a host of other major players. There’s one major exception to this alliance trend: Pegasystems’ BPM Suite is natively built on a rules engine, which has given them a leg up on the process+rules craze.
Going back to Mr. Carter’s presentation for a moment, I also like the way that he defines business rules from both a business and IT perspective:
- From the business perspective, business rules are “formal statements of business policy that define or constrain some aspect of the business”
- From the IT perspective, business rules are “business logic to be implemented in one or more business applications”
Too often the definition is made from only one of these two perspectives and, like Mars and Venus, someone doesn’t fully understand what was said.
If you want your business rules integrated with your processes, you’re going to have to figure out how your BPM tool and rules engine will integrate, then pull your rules out of the paper procedure manuals, mainframe applications, spreadsheets and all the other places where they live, and get them into that BRMS. Easier said than done, but rest assured that rules engines are here to stay in the world of BPM.
I was cruising blogs today and noticed a few people using Bloglines for their blogroll, so decided to do the same as “Blogroll” in the sidebar (the “Other Links” section following that is for non-blog links, created using Blogrolling). I like using Bloglines for linking to blogs because it keeps up to date with what I’m actually reading on blogs, and it uses the folders within Bloglines to create subheadings on the list. Right now, I have exposed my folders on BPM-EA-BI and Other IT, which are the only ones that are remotely related to what I blog about.
If you’re new to the world of integration, EAI, SOA and all those other good things, you can tune into the ebizQ webinar Integration 101 – From Application Integration to SOA on Tuesday at noon Eastern:
In this webinar, Roy Schulte, Vice President and Research Fellow in Gartner Inc., joins Lance Hill, webMethods Vice President Solutions Marketing, to make some sense of all the acronyms (BAM, BPM, SOA, EDA, CEP) and to describe at a fundamental level the different integration technologies that can be leveraged to integrate and enhance business systems and processes.
Roy Schulte is pretty smart about these technologies, and webMethods has just won the ebizQ EAI Buyer’s Choice award. Should be an interesting discussion.
I just took the MIT weblog survey. Go ahead, try it, we might learn something from all this. You have to register for a login key, but the whole thing only takes about 15 minutes.
I posted back in April about how I had started to use LinkedIn, and since then I’ve been actively working at building and using my LinkedIn professional network. I regularly review my connections to see if there is anyone who I should be following up with, and I sometimes browse my connections’ connections to see if there is anyone that I should be networking with. I started following that trail tonight, and a couple of hours later, here I am at 1:30am still poking around.
Christian Mayaud, a second-degree connection who has almost 8,000 connections of his own, lists his Sacred Cow Dung blog in his LinkedIn profile, on which I found his “Cheaters’ Guide to LinkedIn” (most of which I don’t see as “cheating” but as best practices for making the most of the network). That pointed me to two Yahoo! groups, MyLinkedinPowerForum and LinkedInnovators, which in turn contain a ton of other information about using LinkedIn for professional networking (plus a lot of the usual crap). Just when I was almost caught up on my reading…
Update: I saw this link this morning that describes to newbies how to get started with LinkedIn without being overwhelmed. I think that I’ll send it to all those people who accepted my invitation but still only have one contact (me) a month later.
I just received an email from a recently-graduated engineer in Germany, looking for advice on how to become a credible resource on BPM projects with only theoretical BPM knowledge and a lack of business knowledge — in other words, how to ramp up from being a newbie with a decent technical degree into an experienced BPM consultant. I didn’t want to send off some flippant answer about long years of hard work, so I spent some time thinking about a few of the key things that I did (and still do) to turn myself from a techie with an engineering degree into a BPM architect who spends as much time thinking about business as I do about technology.
My advice to him:
First, research constantly about BPM, particularly case studies. There are lots of great resources on the web, such as BPMG, that have articles on everything that you would want to know about BPM, including real live case studies. Attend a BPM conference or two, such as ones by BPMG or Gartner, listen to more experienced people talk about what they’ve done, and make some contacts that you might be able to call on when you need some free advice.
Second, do some technical research into a few major BPM products, so that you can become somewhat of an expert on how BPM products work even if you haven’t worked with them. Many BPM vendors are very happy to have you learn more about their products, and if your target customers typically use a specific product (such as FileNet or Tibco), then research the technology behind that product or even attend vendor training so that you can stay one step ahead of your first customer on the technical side.
Third, learn more about your customers’ business. For example, most of my customers are in financial services and insurance, and I have become an expert on the business processes in these organizations through research and observation, even though I have never worked for a financial company (I’ve always worked for — or owned and operated — software or service companies). Even if you don’t have a contract with a potential customer yet, offer to come in and do a brief walk-through and analysis of their operations. Sit down with some of the people while they are working and ask them what they are doing, and why they’re doing it: that’s the best way to learn about the details of a business process. Very often, an outsider can observe something in a business that someone in the company won’t see, so you may be able to tell them something about their business that they don’t know after just a brief walk-through, if you’re observant.
Lastly, focus on the business issues, not the technology. If you are consulting on BPM directly to an IT department rather than a business department, the project has a high probability of failure: remember that the “B” in BPM stands for “Business”, and you have to stay focussed on what value that you are bringing to the business in order to successfully implement BPM.
I finished up my email by telling him that there is no real substitute for experience, but it’s possible to educate yourself about BPM in a way that provides obvious value to prospective customers. Many people in the customer organizations (even in the IT department) don’t have formal systems training, so this is a good opportunity to put to use all those analysis and problem-solving skills that they taught us in engineering, just applied to business instead of technical problems.
The thoughts of my previous post on BPM and agility came on the heels of a conversation with a collegue in Australia who was looking for anyone who had implemented a comprehensive “ECM vision”, including BPM, web content management, records management and document management. It appears that most companies are implementing one large ECM-related project and some bits and pieces of the other parts; I have to admit that most of what I see is still at the hallucinatory stage rather than a full-on vision, and is neither cohesive nor comprehensive.
How many cusomter organizations really have an ECM vision, and more importantly, how many have the ability to implement it?