I got a wonderfully frank and straightforward e-mail from a vendor, in response to my recent post, "This is a Test: Are Vendors Credible BPM (or IT) Users?" The writer of the e-mail was Greg Carter, CTO and VP of Development for BPM solution vendor Metastorm, Inc. With Greg's permission, I quote below from his missive.
"As a point of reference, here at Metastorm we are asked if we use our product internally by quite a few customers and analysts.
"I think that BPM vendors are pretty lucky in general – the opportunities to use our own software are a huge bonus as BPM is so widely applicable to the ISV business. For example, we have 15+ business processes in use. All of our product planning and management processes, customer support, enhancement capture, sales lead tracking, marketing event planning, expenses, purchase request, and sales order processing are done via Metastorm BPM. There are dozens of applications in the queue as well.
"In my area we use our product for product component planning and management, tasking, and test and defect tracking.
"While of course we tell everyone that our product works flawlessly for our internal use, one place I think we can be quite objective about BPM is where it is [and is not] applicable. We don’t use our BPM product for Build Management or [sales force automation (SFA)], for example. We have [other] great, cost effective tools available to use [for those tasks]."
I believe Greg's e-mail highlights what I think of as best practices for vendors touting themselves as customers of their own solutions. Vendors should provide some credible details about how they are using their own tools internally, and not pretend to believe that those tools solve every business problem known to humankind. (As I remember Clint Eastwood's Dirty Harry character saying at least once, "A man's gotta know his limitations." This applies with equal force where one's chosen software solutions are concerned.)
In late January, ebizQ reported that Metastorm plans to focus enhancements of its BPM Suite on four areas in 2007. These include "end-user empowerment" via integration with Microsoft Corp.'s Office 2007 applications and Windows Vista, extensible process design and deployment, extracting business value from service-oriented architecture (SOA) deployments via BPM, and governance and business performance. Metastorm's Carter said at the time that this evolution mirrors a shift in focus from departmental challenges to enterprise-wide embrace of a "process-centric philosophy." Good goals, for a BPM vendor and a BPM implementer alike, I think.
Those seeking to achieve similar goals at their own enterprises might want to take some closer looks at Metastorm's offerings, plans, and successes, internally and elsewhere. It is also always instructive and illuminating to strive to ensure that your chosen or candidate BPM vendor's product road map aligns with your own business goals and plans. Please share your experiences as you put those vendors to the test – especially if you work for one of them!
Michael Dortch has been an analyst, 'information entrepreneur,' speaker, and writer about IT and 'the real world" for the past 30 years. After almost 10 years at the Robert Frances Group (RFG), Michael begins a new position with Aberdeen Group in September.
Dennis Byron is an analyst with ebizQ, focusing on Open Source Software as well as Business Process Management technologies.
