Effektif BPM, Blueworks Live and the Right Context

I’ve been interested in Effektif BPM since its launch earlier this year.

Scott Francis and Bruce Silver’s view that the tool was like the process automation bits of BlueworksLive made me more interested. BPM Tools quite often need access to data, integration or documents. Migrating all these things to the cloud can a barrier to adoption in many businesses. The idea of a lightweight process engine focused on organising humans and creating visibility seems to me like a natural slice of functionality to take into the cloud.

It’s Uncanny

I have yet to see the tool but, if the screenshots from this presentation are anything to go by, the resemblance between Effektif and the process automation pieces of Blueworks is uncanny.

Here’s a screenshot from the presentation and below it a process application that I made as a demo to a client this afternoon. Judge for yourself:

Effektif BPM Business Travel Screenshot

Blueworks Live Business Travel Screenshot

But Context is King

Bruce Silvers hopes that Effektif might bring increased focus and success to the story:

This looks to me a bit like the automation piece of IBM’s Blueworks Live – the part you don’t hear that much about – but obviously Effektif has a greater incentive than IBM does to expand its capabilities into the BPM/case mainstream.

via Scott Francis on the BP-3 Blog

But, I think that Effektif will more successful than IBM in getting traction with this collection of features for a different reason.

IBM embedded these capabilities in BlueworkLive which is essentially a process discovery tool. It’s used by process improvement teams and business analysts. Obviously, the process automation features need everyone in the organization or at least the value stream to be users of the tool. Most people didn’t buy Blueworks with this use-case in mind. They licensed it to only their six sigma black belts to provide them with the best tools available.

IBM put these features into the wrong tool.

In IBM BPM, these features would have been a powerful set of capabilities to deal with ad-hoc processes. In BlueworksLive, they are still a powerful set of capabilities but trapped in a process analysis context where they can not prosper.

People buying Effektif are looking for a BPM solution in the cloud. They are looking to empower their business users. So, hopefully, Effektif will provide a better context for the process automation features of BlueworksLive than Blueworks itself has done.

It will be interesting to see what the future brings.

Notes from Impact 2013 :: Smarter Process and the Confused Story of Case Management and BPM

3 Replies

As part of newly announced ‘Smarter Process’ initiative, IBM recast quite a bit of their BPM market positioning at Impact last week. Probably the most problematic part of the IBM BPM technology story has been the relationship between their various BPM products.

Two years ago when IBM merged Websphere Process Server and their newly acquired Lombardi Teamworks product into the IBM BPM product, I think most people expected a similar rationalisation of IBM BPM and Filenet-based Case Manager in near future.

Smarter Process perhaps begins to take us closer to a technology vision which coherently emcompasses both IBM’s BPM story and their case management story. But, really there were three different aspects of this story at the conference and it might be worth considering them separately.

The High-Level View

The marketecture for the first-time explicitly included Process Management, Business Rules and case management as first-class and co-equal capabilities in the Smarter Process portfolio. Here is the slide that was used on the main stage and in almost every BPM session at the conference:

Smarter Process Marketecture

Rules, Process and Case — ODM, BPM and Case Manager — Right across the middle of the slide.

This message was well-received if not well-understood. Here’s Sandy Kemsley’s take on it:

The Case Manager stuff went by pretty quickly, and wasn’t included in my pre-conference briefing last week, but I think that it’s significant that we’re (finally) seeing the FileNet-based Case Manager here at Impact and on the same marketecture chart as BPM and ODM. I’m looking forward to hearing more about the level of integration that they’re going to achieve, and whether the products actually combine.

via Sandy Kemsley

It’s interesting that the Case Manager materials were not included in the pre-conference analyst briefing a week before the main conference. That’s probably indicative of how quickly IBM’s thinking is evolving in this space.

Detailed View

Starting last year at Impact with IBM BPM 8.0 and culminating in this year’s 8.5 release, IBM has been investing making it easier to include documents into your BPM processes.

IBM has included and iteratively improved a CMIS Connector to allow documents to manipulated in a content repository from BPM. With new 8.5 release, this connector will be tested against Filenet, Sharepoint and Alfresco but is likely to work with any repository that supports the CMIS standard. There is also functionality to trigger process activity based on events in the content repository.

The big news in 8.5 is that they have added a local repository that can store documents against process instances. This is not a full-power ECM but cheap and cheerful way to support some documents in your processes. The cool part is that you develop against the local document store using the same CMIS connector that you would use to develop against an external store. You simply need to migrate the documents and change the endpoint in the connector to scale up to a full-power ECM (like Filenet).

For me, this set of functionality starts to tell a story at the feature level about how IBM can start to get IBM BPM and Case Manager working together. Get started with one product and grow up into the other as your need grows.

Middle View

If the marketecture and low-level features are both starting come together, what about the story in the middle?

Frankly, there is more work to do. While some of the elements are starting to arrive, all the components are not there yet.

But, don’t take my word on it. Here is Bruce Silver’s take:

Case management. Everyone – IBMers included, I think – expected some kind of merging of BPM and case management to be announced. It still didn’t happen; lingering warlord bickering over revenue recognition is the rumor. Unlike last year, none of the BPM analysts had the heart to ask IBM about it publicly. The IBMers seemed just as miserable about it as we were. Grade: Inexcusable

via Bruce Silvers

Notes of Impact 2013 :: First Thoughts on the Product Announcements

Leave a reply

As always, there was a wealth of information and interesting customer references packed into the first keynote. Over the next days, these themes will be detailed and explained.

Two elements of the product announcements struck me as interesting and worth watching:

The Prominence of BlueworksLive :: The customer reference for the BPM product family was a BlueworksLive customer and it was the top release announced in the BPM product group. This is subtle but seems significant. IBM ODM and IBM BPM always have their biggest releases of the year at Impact while BlueworksLive is a cloud product that releases new features every two months. Given that, top billing seems relevant.
The Integration Bus :: Message Broker has been rebranded as Integration Bus and elements of other ESB products have been added. The technology ramifications are not completely clear from drive-by treatment in the initial keynote but this feels like the kind of portfolio simplification that BPM has gone through under Phil Gilberts over the last several years. If so, I would view this as positive for customers. Less products with clearer value propositions would be a good direction for IBM to adopt more broadly.

It should be interesting to see if the rest of the conference reinforces or undermines these impressions …

BlueWorksLive April Release :: Decisions Get Full Support

Leave a reply

In the lead up to IBM’s Impact Conference, they have released a new version of their online process modelling tool, BlueworksLive.

Aside from some minor additions to the process modelling capabilities, the exciting part of this release is that significant extension of the core capabilities of the product to cover business rules discovery situations. Previously, there was some limited capability to capture rules in a process context but the new capability (shown below) really makes ‘Rules discovery a first-class artefact in BlueworksLive’ — To quote the release video.

The video is can be found here and is worth a watch if you are interested in the new capabilities.

The interesting thing about the new capabilities is that BlueworksLive is clearly being moved into a position to be THE requirement gathering tool for the the BPM suite of products in IBM. Operational Decision Manager (formerly, jRules) and IBM BPM are the big two products but will be interesting to see if a future release will allow you to gather requirements for IBM Business Monitor, their Business Activity Monitoring tool, as well.

Decision Discovery

First Projects and The Power of Complaints

Leave a reply

Last week on his Theo Priestley suggests a great place to start with Case Management (and I would add) BPM implementations — Complaints and Enquiries Processes.

He writes:

Complaints is perhaps one of the best processes to actually tell you from a customer’s perspective what is actually wrong with your organization, not what you think is wrong with it. Whether you like it or not, the customer has their finger on the pulse of your broken processes more than you do. And implementing an automated solution, whether simple workflow or full-blown case tool, will give you that much needed insight and tracking in order to support further process improvement and widen the scope for solution implementation.

via IT Redux

I could not agree more.

In fact, that blog post was published 1 day before I was speaking at the IBM Technical Academy in Athens about Modexe 180.

Modexe 180 is a light-weight case management solution for complaints management built on top of the IBM BPM product set. It’s something that we have been developing at Modexe — based on the work we have been doing with our clients.

I could write more about it but it’s probably easier if you just read about it from the Modexe website or from here.

I’m sure I’ll be writing more about it soon and, if you are interested, I’d love to talk with you about it.

How the Cloud Changes Enterprise Software

Leave a reply

Over on ReadWrite, Jeetu Patel, the GM of EMC Synplicity, writes about the impact of SaaS software on enterprise software.

It’s a pretty typical list-of-things-guest-post.

Lots of good points and one that just doesn’t go far enough.

The Number Two thing SaaS will change about enterprise software forever is “Simplicity Trumps Feature-Rich.”

Here’s the explanation:

For decades, enterprise software providers have jammed features into their products to meet every IT and user need. The mobile first, cloud-computing world is all about apps that do one thing really, really well. A portfolio of simple, elegant products that are easy to use and easy to implement makes more sense than a complex, comprehensive solution with a long roll-out time and a steep learning curve.

via ReadWrite

Really?

Salesforce and Box have plenty of features and are SaaS.

I’ve blogged previously about how most of the innovation in the HR sector are cloud vendors. Is Workday somehow short of features?

How about Netsuite in the ERP Market?

True – Some cloud vendors might be 1-dimensional. But, its just not right to suggest that SaaS or cloud-based vendors aren’t feature-complete or feature-rich.

It’s Convenience, not Simplicity

The cloud does change the game but not because cloud-vendors lack features or are more simple.

SaaS vendors are just really easy use. They are easy to test drive so people can experiment before needing to make a huge upfront investment. Often, you can get going with a credit card in an afternoon. Sometimes, its free.

This is a game-changer.

In his book, The New Kingmakers, Redmonk Analyst, Stephen O’Grady, makes the case for convenience quite elegantly:

Given two technologies, the one that’s easier to obtain, configure, and use will usually be the one that wins. Convenience trumps features – even in situations where the more-convenient project is functionally inferior.

via The New Kingmakers

This is a more accurate and more nuanced understanding of how the cloud effects enterprise software.

It’s not just about simplicity or features. It’s about getting the chance to play with the product immediately.

The internet era is all about Instant Gratification.

Box World Tour :: Big Customers, Big Lessons

Leave a reply

Herve Coureil, the CIO of Schneider Electric, was on the main stage at the Box World tour last week.

Most of the discussion was a pretty standard testimonial for a customer conference but Herve represents something of an extraordinary customer for Box.

He bought 50,000 seats.

He spoke about Mobility and the Consumerization of IT as the drivers for the technology choice but he hit his stride when talking about the unique characteristics of a cloud rollout versus a normal IT project. The big two he identified were the network and adoption.

It’s the Network, Baby

A cloud rollout can change the mix on your network substantially.

Most organisations have extremely fast internal networks on a hub and spoke model but significantly less points to access the wider world. Often, this makes sense from a security perspective as there are less access points to secure.

But, cloud applications sit in the wide world and document-centric applications (like Box) will be uploading and downloading constantly. User acceptance and perception of success will be heavily coloured by how easily and seamlessly documents can be added and downloaded for collaboration.

Buying a product with a richer feature set but not having enough bandwidth to use it properly will kill user perception and acceptance of the deployment as quickly as buying the wrong product.

Winning their Hearts

A normal IT project has a long arc towards deployment

Requirements are gathered, technology selected and procured, systems are installed and then customised before it gets into the hands of end-users.

The nature of this model often drives larger and more centralised projects – a project needs to deliver sufficient return to justify that level of investment.

The cloud changes the game.

With a system like Box or Salesforce, users can be working on the system almost immediately with little IT assistance. In office of the CIO, this fact often drives concerns around Shadow IT – business users disintermediating the IT function and just buying technology.

But, Herve correctly points out that the cloud also brings opportunities for a forward-thinking CIO who introduce the cloud as well. You have different choices about how to scale the implementation. Here are some ideas from Herve’s approach:

Rollout will be driven by use cases — people will be brought onto the system as its used to solve a business problem. This approach should help match the effort invested to value received and hopefully show the technology in its best light (as a way to get things done easier).
Viral rollout will not be prohibited — Although the ‘official’ rollout will be driven by use cases, users of the system will not be restricted from introducing new users to the system, allowing employee evangelists to organically develop the platform.
Adoption should be tracked and driven.
Local and regional considerations need to be considered. For example, certain types of data will not be suitable for Box under German law. The rollout and adoption plan as well as the technical implementation needs to be mindful of these considerations.

In the end, a system is only as successful as its users make it but the cloud might change the game on how you get there.

Forrester Wave for BPMS 1Q13 :: Not about technology?!?

Leave a reply

The Forrester Wave for BPMS, 1Q2013 is out today.

And, this blog post will not be about the contents of the report since I’m unwilling to part with $2,495 to read it. If anyone at Forrester wants to get me a copy, I’d be happy to offer my thoughts.

But, Clay Richardson’s accompanying blog post is interesting in its own right.

It’s not the technology …

For me the most interesting passages of Clay’s post are:

Whether you’re looking to enter into BPM from a dynamic case management (DCM) perspective, a human workflow perspective, a smart process perspective, or a straight through processing perspective is really only one piece of the puzzle. The other big piece of the puzzle focuses on building out sustainable practices that continue to deliver real business value and transformational benefits over an extended period of time.

[Later, he continues]

Historically, Forrester has tracked BPM software across three different market segments: document-centric BPM suites, human-centric-BPM suites, and integration-centric BPM suites. However, through market consolidation these three segments are merging into a single BPM suite offering that can cover three different work patterns: dynamic case management (DCM), human workflow, and straight-through processing. Increasingly we see BPM suites moving toward the provision of a single design and development environment that support multiple process patterns and use cases.

via Forrester

This passage and the blog post in general seems to suggest that Forrester is taking the position that implementation is as important and perhaps more important than the technology.

I’ve long thought that It’s not the technology but how you use it that’s important. I’m just glad the analyst community is catching up.

Bonitasoft and Current BPM Market Trends

Leave a reply

Theo Priestley on his ITredux blog published a great interview with BonitaSoft’s Vice President of Marketing, Mac MacConnell. There is lots of interesting elements to the conversation and its worth a read in its entirety.

Here are some highlights …

Where is the business coming from?

At the start of 2013, conversations have begun to shift, especially in Europe and North America. There is an expectation that we will shortly enter a new era of municipal, federal and potentially global regulation. Managers are looking down the road and researching techniques and technology to manage this new environment. “Compliance” and “audit trails” are the buzzwords of the day.

via ITredux

I agree that Compliance is a big driver in the BPM market but I am surprised that he has only seen an uptick in compliance activity in 2013.

This trend started a couple years ago in the UK with the Northern Rock failure and the nationalisation of banks like RBS. Since that time, most of the activity I see in the BPM market is in the Financial Services and Public Sector with Regulation and Compliance as key themes.

I wonder if the difference in timing has to do with the types of organisations that adopt open source software versus IBM BPM (where I work most of the time) ….

How to deploy BPM?

[Businesses] are still approaching BPM as a solution for a specific process or department. Some BPM gurus and BPMS vendors will argue that this is short-sighted.

I disagree. I cringe when I hear about organizations undertaking monolithic BPM initiatives. The best indication of future success is having a process owner (department head) call BonitaSoft, after seeing BPM work well in another department, and say that they would like to share similar progress. BPM works best when people are pulled to it because they see its transformative power, not when it is pushed upon them in a massive undertaking.

via ITredux

What a great point and largely spot-on.

But, the problem with the centralised, enterprise-wide ‘Let’s Platform BPM technology’ approach is more fundamental than lack of evangelists with successful projects behind them. Simply put, it is almost impossible to roll out a global BPM platform and not have the project lead by IT.

After all, they are the guys who platform technology.

So, to make the same point more broadly, a global roll-out of BPM technology by IT is likely to look and feel like any other global technology rollout in your organisation.

I have seen the global rollout approach go well and I have seen it go poorly.

But, this approach doesn’t play to any of the strengths of BPM as a class of technology. Afterall, BPM should be about the business.

Comments and Commentary

An online clipboard for my thoughts on technology, business and innovation

Notes from Impact 2013 :: Smarter Process and the Confused Story of Case Management and BPM

The High-Level View

Detailed View

Middle View

Notes of Impact 2013 :: First Thoughts on the Product Announcements

BlueWorksLive April Release :: Decisions Get Full Support

First Projects and The Power of Complaints

Forrester Wave for BPMS 1Q13 :: Not about technology?!?

It’s not the technology …

Bonitasoft and Current BPM Market Trends

Where is the business coming from?

How to deploy BPM?