Turns out that we belong to a professional elite.
Not only hard working professionals – Intelligent professionals.
It’s not me that said it…
Gartner have coined a new acronym: iBPMS
(Intelligent Business Process Management)
It seems that BPM Suites have now evolved into Intelligent BPM Suites
Now, not every BPMS can be defined as an intelligent BPMS. You need to embed BPM with event processing, real-time operational intelligence, CEP, BAM, message-oriented middleware and cloud messaging, otherwise you’re a dumb-dumb.
I’m unfairly poking fun at Gartner. The intent behind the new acronym is to emphasize the usage of more sophisticated BPM scenarios that can be used.
The problem with IBPMS is that most of the vendors focus on new customers.
New customers usually mean new BPM programmes, basics, keeping it simple.
There are not a lot of customers with mature BPM programs running.
(Take the usage of BPM simulation, for example. Most of the customers are not yet mature enough for simulation.)
Complex Event Processing (CEP) is about identifying the most meaningful events within the process events, analysing their impact, and kicking off a new process to resolve the issue.
CEP fits organisations with mature business process management platforms running.
A company new to BPM will find it hard to see so far down the line.
So, if you thought you were just good looking and have a great sense of humour, it turns out that you are also incredibly intelligent.
But you probably knew that already…
Adam Deane 
Just a quick rant, probably our of my early-morning post-Christmas thoughts:
So, you have these three guys: who should be intelligent? The Business, the Process, or the Management? (or maybe the people?)
Given the features you mention for iBPMS, I think one could name these systems as he wants: expanded BPM, extended, empowered, async, dynamic, whatever,.. but I don’t see any intelligence really.
By: Marco Brambilla (@MarcoBrambi) on 09/01/2012
at 8:06 am
Maybe the ‘intelligent’ part implies that the system thinks an acts for itself (like the Matrix, but many years early and hopefully less viciously). If that’s the case, then the ability to sense and respond would be the intelligent part. Listeners, CEP (as you say), automated responses that move work along the value chain. With Big Data arriving faster than most are prepared for, this ability will become the way BPM stays out of the data muck that arrives with BD.
Good point on simulation and also good point on mature BPM. It exists, but in pockets.
By: Chris Taylor on 09/01/2012
at 3:04 pm
Hi Adam, the problem is they didn’t want to call it ACM …
By: Max J. Pucher on 09/01/2012
at 7:18 pm
I think Max has it right 🙂 pretty funny. we’ve seen this before (quadrant vs. wave anyone?).
Or, maybe they wanted to emphasize different things than ACM. Well, those that chase analyst findings/reviews will have some new items to chase down 🙂
By: Scott Francis (@sfrancisatx) on 09/01/2012
at 8:47 pm
What actually is “intelligent”? Because we learnt “first define, then use the term”. And what is Stupid or Unintelligent or Non-intelligent BPM? We could even use a BPMS unintelligently, even an Intelligent BPMS. So, perhaps it’s meant that the user of an BPMS should use it intelligently? What is not always the normal case… Or is Intelligent BPM a combination of Intelligent CEP (because there is also iCEP in opposite to stupidCEP or so) + normal BPM without Intelligence + used by an intelligent user + for intelligent applications or perhaps also non-intelligent applications. And so on:-)
By: Rainer von Ammon on 10/01/2012
at 12:17 pm
…and the retarded me always thought it was about using Process Management or Case Management systems for the Business…intelligently!
Its such a relief to know that i can now save on my intelligence and rely on iBPMS 🙂
Thank you Gartner!
By: Sanooj Kutty on 31/01/2012
at 6:42 am