Today Robert Shapiro of XPDL 2.x fame, also a member of the BPMN 2.0 Finalization Task Force in OMG, delivered an update on progress toward completing both XPDL 2.2 and BPMN 2.0. Here is the link to the unedited replay. Also, Sandy Kemsley does her usual fine job of summarizing the high points here. I would just add a couple points to the discussion. The first regards an explicit sorting of BPMN 2.
Next month I will be delivering my BPMessentials "BPMN Method and Style" training in Rotterdam. These are public 2-day classes, and include a 60-day license to itp commerce Process Modeler for Visio and individual post-class certification. The content and unique approach of the class is described on the BPMessentials website. We not only show you what the BPMN 2.0 shapes and symbols mean, but teach a step-by-step methodology and elements of style.
Because BPMN 2.0 is a standard and defines an XML serialization, you can create a model in tool A and import it into tool B. Right? Umm, actually no. Well, isn't that what a standard is supposed to do? Yes. And isn't that what OMG has been claiming for years that BPMN 2.0 will do? Yes again. So once BPMN 2.0 is finalized in June, we still won't have tool interoperability?
Not a lot of BPM news out of IBM at Impact this week. The most surprising thing for me about it is how thoroughly Lombardi - acquired just a few months ago - has enthralled the WebSphere executives. At the opening keynote, WebSphere GM Craig Heyman called Lombardi Teamworks, rebranded IBM WebSphere BPM Lombardi Edition, "the core BPM product." Really? And at today's keynote session, Beth Smith, another top WebSphere executive, devoted the only demo of the session to a conventional walkthrough of Lombardi BluePrint and Teamworks, I mean WebSphere Lombardi Edition.
A year ago around this time IBM launched BPM BlueWorks, a collaborative BPM learning environment in the cloud where users could read about BPM, set up their own private workspaces, and use free IBM tools for "process discovery." Since then it has pretty much stayed below the radar, but with the recent introduction of a new BPMN 2.0 modeling widget in both BlueWorks and WebSphere Business Compass (fka WebSphere Modeler Publishing Server), IBM is ready to make some noise about it.
[This post describes an approach to integrating the Decsion model of von Halle and Goldberg with process modeling in BPMN. For Part 1, click here.]
Before describing the integration of decision modeling with BPMN, I need to summarize the Decision Model approach described by Barb von Halle and Larry Goldberg in their excellent book. I can?t do it justice in a simple post; if you want to find out more, just get the book.
The Decision Model
Although the book does not use the term, I would call it a metamodel for business decisions, i.e., a description of the relationships between specific decision components and the principles governing how they can be combined. It does not specify a rule language, and is in fact language-independent. Business-oriented decision models, which are the focus of the book, use a structured form of natural language to define business rules. Those are easily mapped to IT-maintained data models and engine-specific rule languages for execution.
Just as the relational model imposes constraints on the organization of datasets, the Decision Model imposes constraints on the organization of rulesets. A business decision is defined as "a conclusion that a business arrives at through business logic and which the business is interested in managing." The Decision Model provides the framework for structuring that business logic. It makes most sense to use the Decision Model and its associated methodology when the decision has high busness value or the decision logic is subject to change, or is complex, or is reused in multiple business processes. In those situations, the Decision Model?s advantages in management and governance justify the small additional burden its structure imposes. It is most useful for organizations like financial services or insurance, where the number of decisions that must be simultaneously maintained and tweaked can run into the hundreds or thousands.
There has been a good response to the BPMN self-test. The scores have been lower than I expected, but I have gotten nice feedback from the answer sheet and expanations I send out afterward. It's fair to say that while the diagram patterns in question describe common business scenarios, they probably represent the part of BPMN that goes beyond traditional flowcharting. BPMN's appeal is its basic familiarity to flowcharters, but it offers a lot more.
This morning Progress Software announced the acquisition of Savvion for $49 Million. On the heels of last month's acquisition of Lombardi by IBM, I think it's safe to say this marks a real turning point in the market for BPMS. To me it is a disquieting one, as it suggests the failure of BPM's "business empowerment" promise to translate into sustainable revenue for the platform vendor. The transaction price here is kind of shocking, surely a sign of the shaky current economy, but the larger trend is also disturbing.
I want to call your attention to three recent white papers I've written and posted on the site. They are all free downloads available to anyone registered on BPMS Watch. All three deal with the new generation of tools available to help users get started in BPM and bridge the once-formidable divide between business process analysis (BPA) and execution in a BPMS. The worlds of BPA and BPMS have long been poorly integrated.
Most of the changes between BPMN 1.2 and BPMN 2.0 have to do with extending it from a diagramming notation to a language for executable process design. Both my book BPMN Method and Style and the training that goes along with it deal with non-executable models, what I call Levels 1 and 2. Level 1 is limited to a basic working set of shapes and symbols familiar to business - similar to the new Descriptive conformance class of BPMN 2.