On BPM in Europe and the US – Thomas J. Olbrich
My impression is that companies in the US are quick to pick up on new topics, turning them into marketable ideas and then failing to follow through on them. One of the main reasons as far as I can make out is that BPM in US companies has two extreme positions and practically no middle ground: Processes are (and have been for a long time) a top management topic but as an abstract concept only. The other extreme is the business analyst and operational level: Lots of work in the trenches of daily business but so buried beneath methods and tools that it fails to get noticed. Accountability for processes? Nada. Process organisation? Nada. Middle management as the link between business strategy and processes? Doesn’t exist.
On BPM Benefits – Jon G Ryder
I would suggest that BPM delivers a solid platform from which an organisation can rapidly, and cost effectively, adapt by changing processes faster, and in a more controlled fashion than any other option.
On BPM and Case Management – Stephanie Quick
CM is evolution of BPM. BPM must have a presence within the organization in order to understand and benefit from CM. It is an approach to improving how work is done. It is methodology and technology. Understanding the process landscape with visibility is kernel. Not all knowledge workers work the same. Conducting an historical analysis of how they work, what their needs are and their expectations; taking a user experience based approach to design will allow work to advance quickly and be easier, with the objective of creating a long lived case. Collaboration must be done within context of the case; control is imperative.
On BPMN 2.0 – Bruce Silver
I suspect that BPMN-based BPM Suites will continue to use the notation part of BPMN, and model the data and data mappings, messages, gateway conditions, and so forth in their own proprietary way, as they have for the past several years. To me, that’s BPMN support but not BPMN 2.0 support.