Typical challenges that often cause concerns during a BPM initiative include:

• Focus on automation supersedes process excellence and continuous improvement
• Complex transformation programs end up in failures, as the business scope is not prioritised and the program roadmap not defined in advance
• Traditional Waterfall business requirements & process analysis phase takes  an average of 6 – 9 months  with no results to show in production for at least a year and as a result, business sponsors often get disillusioned with BPM
• Lack of alignment between the investments across business strategy, process improvement and automation activities

• Business outcomes and Key Performance Indicators (KPIs) are rarely validated in terms of actual metrics
• BPM solutions are usually designed without considering the holistic Enterprise Architecture
• Confusion between value of BPM platforms  and CRM, EAI, ECM  platforms
• Average time to assess BPM needs, define technology specifications, evaluate alternatives  and arrive at a technology decision takes more than 6 months
• Role of BPM in enterprise technology stack is not standardized or defined

-

As a management consultant and a BPM practitioner, I have been through many situations in which I have helped organisations implement new BPM initiatives and turn around less successful projects. My experience in handling such challenges has allowed me to identify the specific characteristics of a successful BPM project.

The three main steps that can help ensure the success of BPM projects  are:

• Setting the vision, articulating the business problem and quantifying it

o  Educate IT and business teams about BPM fundamentals

o  Align stakeholders/ departments on initiative scope & priorities

o  Have a clear understanding of the business problem as it relates to business objectives

o  Identify a ‘Candidate’ process for the first project

o  Ensure business case and define KPIs for improvement

• Mobilizing teams and delivering a solution to the business problem

o  Ensure  there is business participation in all phases of the project

o  Ensure team composition has a well balanced mix of IT, process  and business user representation and expertise

o  Ensure business transformation supersedes technology goals

o  Select suitable technology platforms (Process/Rules/Integration/UI/BAM)

o  Agree upon and adopt suitable BPM methodology & standards. Don’t adopt a Big Bang approach! Iterative approach ensures ‘Quick Wins’

o  Ensure BPM design and architecture are scalable and built for change

• Measuring the outcomes and seeking the next business problem

o  Have clear metrics to ensure that the outcomes can be appropriately measured

o  Identify the roadmap with prioritised follow on opportunities

-

Adopting these guidelines will allow businesses to have better control over their ability to drive business change rather than react to changes placed upon them. IT will also have more flexibility to integrate existing systems that deliver solutions which are in line with business needs and end user expectations.

As new iterations of the same process or new processes are brought onboard, a momentum is created and what started out as a tactical solution becomes a strategic and dynamic process platform. In addition, the various systems that are currently used to deliver a silo capability to the various functions inside each of the organisation’s divisions can be exposed to other divisions (if appropriate) and therefore improve IT reuse and drive consistent working practices across the organisation.

I would be keen to hear your experiences and lessons learnt while implementing BPM programs.

-

Originally posted July 2011 @ my Virtusa blog.

-

Mark describes how the various Software Development Methods (used during an SDLC) often reflect the culture, structure and processes of the Organisation and promotes either positive or negative characteristics when it comes to Delivery of  Solutions that meet Business needs.

He states that the typical negative impact on an organisation manifests itself in various costly ways:

…Each time an organization embraces a new methodology, it triggers a large change management exercise. Within IT, this change typically involves a three-to-five year process that results in the following direct costs for a 1,000-person IT organization:

• Consulting, training, and mentoring costs to go from novice to competent, and even expert, using Stuart and Hubert Dreyfus’ skill acquisition model. For 1,000 people, this can cost $1 million to $2 million.
• Knowledge management, to avoid the risk of relying on tacit knowledge in the heads of coaches and consultants. If performed, the capture of standard work, or “our way of working,” results in more than $1 million in costs related to process-related software.
• Changes in approach can also trigger the need for new process management tools. Cost can range from free to $1 million or more.
• Costs related to putting a new software delivery infrastructure in place. Hitting the reset button can cost upward of $5 million.

Many SDLC methods are similar but due to their origins and adoption over time has led to the reality that no two are exactly the same. In the image below Mark shows how the various approaches can be categorised into four Organisational types as aligned to Agile, Lean and Unified Methods:

• Clan/Family Culture: Here you have a culture that emphasizes collaboration. Your leaders tend to be facilitators and team builders, who value commitment and communication. They think effectiveness is driven by developing people and spurring participation.
• Adhocracy Culture: Your company emphasizes creativity and has leaders who are entrepreneurial innovators, who value transformation and agility, and have a high level of risk tolerance. They think that innovation and vision are the best paths to effectiveness.
• Market Culture: Here the orientation is competition. Your leaders are hard-driving competitors, who emphasize goal achievement, market share, and profitability. Customer focus and aggressive competition lead to effectiveness.
• Hierarchy/Bureaucracy Culture: Your company tends to focus on control, with leaders who coordinate, monitor, and organize. Efficiency, timeliness, consistency, and risk aversion are the watchwords. Control and efficiency are seen as the best path to effectiveness.

Filed under: Analysis & Research, BPM, BPM Articles, BPM Best Practice, BPM ROI, Business Strategy, Centre of Excellence, IT Strategy Tagged: Agile, BPM, Lean, RUP, SDLC, Systems Development Life Cycle, Unified ]]> https://bpmfundamentals.wordpress.com/2011/04/17/software-development-methods-a-pragmatic-approach/feed/ 0 bpmguru https://bpmfundamentals.wordpress.com/2011/04/13/whos-next-on-the-hp-bpm-aquistions-list/ https://bpmfundamentals.wordpress.com/2011/04/13/whos-next-on-the-hp-bpm-aquistions-list/#comments Wed, 13 Apr 2011 12:20:31 +0000 Ian Louw http://bpmfundamentals.wordpress.com/?p=2249 ]]> After the recent news that Open Text is to acquire Metastorm, it has been revealed that the long rumoured HP talks with Tibco have not gone as planned.

-

According to a Reuters article,

Hewlett-Packard Co (HPQ.N) had considered buying business software company Tibco Software Inc (TIBX.O) until two weeks ago when talks fizzled, two sources familiar with the matter told Reuters.

The Reuters article goes on to say that

It was not clear why the talks fell apart or if they will be resumed, although the tech giant is currently scouring the industry for other software targets, the sources said.

Tibco has been the subject of takeout rumors for the past several years, yet the company has never disclosed that it has been in talks to sell itself.

The question now is who will HP target to fill its capability gaps? Doug Henschen (InformationWeek) thinks that

If HP is now shopping for other companies, as Reuters’ report suggests, Software AG and Progress Softwareare both potential targets, given their integration, SOA infrastructure, and business process management software. Software AG is larger than Tibco, with about $1.4 billion in revenue last year. Progress is smaller, at $156 million in 2010 revenue.

What are your thoughts?

• Who are you upsetting?
• Who are you connecting?
• Who are you leading?

In a related talk, David Logan talks about the five kinds of tribes that humans naturally form — in schools, workplaces, even the driver’s license bureau. By understanding our shared tribal tendencies, we can help lead each other to become better individuals.

I came across this BPM  Video site recently. It is probably targeted at those of you who are avid video fanatics interested in BPM and thought I would share….

I will leave it up to you to decide how useful it is but there seems to be something for everyone.

-

Between now and year-end 2014 an intensifying focus on process-related skills, competencies and competitive differentiators will increasingly separate process excellence leaders from the laggards among the Global 2000, according to Gartner, Inc. Gartner has identified some of its key predictions for business process management (BPM) in 2011 and beyond.

“A key theme in our BPM predictions for 2011 is the rising focus on making business process improvement (BPI) a core competency of the organization — and on the capabilities and tools required to gain that competency,” said John Dixon, research director at Gartner. “Increasing process skills in the Global 2000 will further separate the companies with enlightened process experts from those that are simply competent in the basics — and will intensify the negative repercussions and devastating consequences from public exposure of process weakness.”

It goes on to state that:

• Between now and year-end 2014, overlooked but easily detectable business process defects will topple 10 Global 2000 companies.

• By 2015, context-aware computing will be used to rejuvenate at least 25 percent of “commodity” enterprise processes that are currently perceived as “low value.”

• By 2014, process templates from “nontraditional application vendors” will be included in the shortlisted options for 70 percent of application purchases.

• General BPM certification will grow in value but will not be materially relevant to BPM hiring decisions before 2015.

Would love to hear your thoughts on how well prepared your organisation is.

Further reading:

• Focussed Business Strategy is making a Resurgence
• BPM Centre of Excellence – Strategic & Tactical Value Explained
• BPM Skills

-

According to the press release OpenText said:

“Metastorm will add complementary technology and expertise that enhances our ECM solutions portfolio,” said John Shackleton, President and Chief Executive Officer of OpenText. “We look forward to welcoming its employees and customers to OpenText.”

Metastorm commented that:

“We are excited by the opportunity to join the OpenText team,” said Robert Farrell, Chairman and Chief Executive Officer of Metastorm. “Combined with OpenText, Metastorm will be able to provide a broader and deeper range of offerings to our customers, while leveraging the strength and stability that comes with being part of a larger global organization.”

Follow the various opinions and comments here:

• LinkedIn discussion on Gartner Business Process Management (Xchange) Group
• CMSWire
• eBizQ

Interested in hearing your thoughts.

-

The Standish Group, an IT research organisation, documents this annually and has historically found that 31.1% projects are cancelled before completion, 52.7% of projects will cost 189% of their original estimated cost and only 16% of projects are completed on-time and on-budget.

Apart from the typical Project Management and Software Delivery Governance and Optimisation improvements that can be adopted to improve this situation, a further and probably more advantageous approach would be to adopt ‘Problem Architects’.

Solution Architects (the opposite of Problem Architects) are more commonly technical specialists focused on defining a technical solution that is usually heavily dependent on ‘clear’ business requirements often formulated by users and project Business Analysts. In most cases, this tends to be an inexact science as it is often too complex, too ambiguous, and has lots of errata due to tight project specific deadlines.

-

Forrester 2010 research has found that:

“…40% of organizations now have an established business architecture program. And most of the rest are working toward creating one. For a large majority of EA teams the question has shifted from ‘When should I start my business architecture effort?’ to ‘How do I get business architecture moving?’…“

Jeff Scott, Senior Analyst at Forrester has found the following based on his research on the subject:

• “…Capability maps are not just for the business. A number of EAs are interested in building capability maps for IT. They see capability maps as a powerful tool to help improve IT’s ability to serve the business. Another perspective was, ‘If you can’t get the business to engage, start with what you know (IT) and build on it’…”

• “…Business architects from the business have a different perspective…Their business-focused viewpoints brought a lot of depth to the discussion, though it left me a little uneasy about the future of business architecture in IT. If business architecture really takes off, will it be able to survive as an IT function?…”

• “…Traditional EAs are challenged to become business architects. As I spelled out the details of how to become a more business-focused enterprise architect, one architect expressed her frustration. ‘Wait a minute! I came to IT so I could work on technical problems – not business problems.’ Her comment clearly articulates what I see as the number one challenge for EAs over this decade. Am I a technologist first and business person second or is it the other way around? I don’t think EAs will be able to keep one foot in each area for long; they will have to make a clear choice. It’s going to be a hard one…”

-

Introducing a Problem Architect, aka a Business Architect, early in projects is a good way to establish the scope and focus of the problem to be solved. It’s non-invasive to the business users because everyone can agree upon the problem at hand and it’s complementary to IT because it helps mitigate the risk of guessing what the real problem is.

I welcome your thoughts and experiences on this subject.

-

According to this Google post they had the following to say…

We have always pursued innovative projects because we want to drive breakthroughs in computer science that dramatically improve our users’ lives. Last year at Google I/O, when we launched our developer preview of Google Wave, a web app for real time communication and collaboration, it set a high bar for what was possible in a web browser.

They go on to say that ….

We were equally jazzed about Google Wave internally, even though we weren’t quite sure how users would respond to this radically different kind of communication…

…But despite these wins, and numerous loyal fans, Wave has not seen the user adoption we would have liked. We don’t plan to continue developing Wave as a standalone product, but we will maintain the site at least through the end of the year and extend the technology for use in other Google projects like Buzz.

As a early adoptor I found it interesting and very innovative. However, early on it became apparent that it was a very technical and feature rich application that only techies really knew what to do with. If anything Wave was too far ahead of its time and perhaps had too many features that confused users.

In short, it can be described as ‘a solution waiting for a problem’. Just think if it was as good at predicting the future as keeping track of the past….

Many times innovation and failure is not a bad thing. It usually provides the impetus to spawn other ideas and solutions that find a greater and more fertile audience in other areas. Any ideas on what they plan on coming up with next?