BPM in Action

As I've repeatedly harangued here, one of the most consistent challenges I see to effective BPM is that current "Ps" (processes) are rarely well documented. Which means a foundation for BPM and business knowledge management (BKM) efforts that is shaky, at best.

So capturing and documenting incumbent processes is important. But how best to do it?

Well, as we industry analysts love to get paid to say, "That depends." However, I have come up with a couple of ideas that might help.

I have seen multiple companies make very effective use of items frequently called "business application profiles" or "BAPs." These are collections of information about specific applications. That information can range from which users are authorized to access the application to which internal staff and/or external vendors are responsible for its support. They can also include detailed information about the platforms on which applications run, and the other applications with which they share interdependencies.

The great thing about BAPs is that they can be created and managed with little more technologies than spreadsheets, word processing, or paper and writing implements. If there are more sophisticated collaboration tools available, they can of course be pressed into service, but they aren't prerequisites.

The other great thing about BAPs is that collectively, they provide snapshots of elements of what might be thought of as a map of key applications and their interdependencies, with one another, with IT infrastructure elements, and with key business goals – and processes.

Which brings up the idea of "business profile processes," or "BPPs." Documents similar to BAPs could be very helpful in understanding the interdependencies linking key business processes to one another, supporting applications and other IT infrastructure elements, and overall business goals. BPPs can also help facilitate the conversations IT and business decision-makers need to have to prioritize and integrate – in other words, to manage – key business processes.

Creating initial BPPs may require some detective work. Specifically, it may require tracking how applications, enterprise intellectual property (IP), and services are actually used. Again, if there are workflow management or similarly functional management tools available, they should be brought to bear on this challenge. However, if such tools are not available, interviews and notes should work sufficiently to get started.

Effective BPM and BKM starts with as much knowledge as is available about what the business wants and needs to achieve, and how people, tasks, and information are or are not aligned in service of these goals. BPPs can help any business to develop a more clear and complete picture of the present, which can only help in any efforts intended to make for a more predictable and manageable future.

Does your enterprise use BAPs and/or BPPs or similar information stores as part of BPM/BKM efforts? If not, does the idea make sense, or not? Let me know, so I don't become too enamored of an idea you don't find valuable.

Posted by mdortch in BPM  |  Permalink  | Comments (1)  | TrackBacks (0)

Microsoft Corp. announced that it had won the first new customer for its Azyxxi health care management software since Microsoft acquired the company behind that software last year. New York Presbyterian Hospital will use the software, developed by actual doctors working with software developers, to gather administrative, clinical, and financial data from systems at five major health-care centers in the New York metropolitan area.

Hmm. Software developed with input from practitioners of specific, particular processes, "business" and otherwise? Deployed in ways that span multiple locations and platforms to deliver actionable information to various "enterprise" role-players? Sounds a lot like human-centric BPM, or, if you like (and I do), "business knowledge management" (BKM) to me.

This is also coincident with how Microsoft is integrating Microsoft Office and its Dynamics business applications with back-end systems such as those from SAP AG. This type of integration, combined with capture of information about the use of "front-end" Office and Dynamics applications, also leads inexorably toward BPM, BKM, and their ilk. (Yes, they have ilk. Lots of ilk. See almost all previous posts in this space, or e-mail me, and we'll talk.)

So what's the downside? Well, Microsoft's ultimate BPM/BKM strategy is still more confusing than clear, at least to me and others with whom I've discussed such things. Microsoft Office applications make logical front ends to BPM and BKM initiatives, but how best to integrate them with which BPM/BKM applications? Microsoft has formed a Business Process Alliance, and announced plans to support the Business Process Execution Language (BPEL), but will that support actually mean fully seamless interoperability with other vendors' solutions? Microsoft Dynamics applications may also make good front ends to BPM/BKM applications as well, but similar questions apply.

And now there's Microsoft going after specific verticals with acquired applications. How will that play out? Which markets will it pursue with such solutions, and which will it target in other ways? Will there be versions of Office tailored for specific verticals, perhaps via templates and/or customized menus?

Lots of questions, few answers. And Microsoft hasn't yet articulated a strategy that is either sufficiently comprehensive or obviously interoperable with other solutions or open standards to reassure me. What about you? Do let me know. Meanwhile, I'll see if I can't pry some more useful information out of "the Colossus of Redmond," perhaps with help from your comments and questions.

Posted by mdortch in BPM • Microsoft  |  Permalink  | Comments (0)  | TrackBacks (0)

According to SiliconValley.com, a technician reformatting a disk drive at the Alaska Department of Revenue accidentally deleted information about a $38-billion oil-funded state account that distributes payments to residents. The technician then mistakenly reformatted the backup hard drive, too. Then, the Department discovered that its backup tapes were unreadable. Alaska officials pressed consultants from Dell Inc. and Microsoft Corp. into service, but none were able to restore either drive or to read the backup tapes. So the department had to bring in the 300 boxes of paperwork that had been captured and stored electronically, and press a half-dozen seasonal workers and 70 regular employees into overtime and weekend service to get the data back into a computer-usable form. At a cost of more than $200,000.

Now, I'm not in or near Alaska, but my tiny mind says that if Dell and Microsoft were involved, the system being worked on – or worked over, as it turned out – was probably based on standard PC-type architecture and components. So one of the critical BPM-related lessons to be learned from this debacle is to test backups regularly, and to revise the processes by which they are made and maintained whenever any fail their tests.

Another BPM-related lesson: implement protections equal to the criticality of the resource being protected. This means, for example, that it should be nearly impossible for any one technician to have simultaneous access to a primary hard drive and its only backup. It also means that the Alaska Department of Revenue, along with any other organization, might consider equipping highly critical systems with outboard backup hard drives such as those from Iomega Corp., Imation Corp., LaCie, and other manufacturers, or to connect them to automated online backup services such as Backup.com (and NOT AT&T Online Vault, as discussed here previously). Either or both has got to cost less than $200,000 – or whatever reputational damage is caused by such a disaster if it hits your enterprise…

Posted by mdortch in BPM  |  Permalink  | Comments (0)  | TrackBacks (0)

We interrupt our apparent mini-series on BPM vendor evolution to bring you more exciting reports from the front lines of business process failure…

As you may have read in my posting on testing, I tried, I really tried, to give the AT&T Online Vault back-up service a fair shot at my business. The upshot of that attempt was that I downloaded the software and a patch for the software, and left it running on my computer, which was plugged in and online, as requested for a first backup. I went to bed, and awoke the next morning, to find less than 5 percent of the fewer than 300 megabytes of files I wanted to protect were backed up.

Infuriated, I dug through the AT&T software and online documentation, only to find no clear, explicit instructions for how to deactivate my free trial and the software. So I e-mailed the helpful representative who'd fixed my original software problems, and found out that removing my PC from the list of systems known to and approved by the software would deactivate the service. So I did that. I then used Windows' trusty "Add/Remove Programs" feature to remove the relevant software.

Only it didn't all go away. And I didn't realize this until my system repeatedly, suddenly, and mysteriously slowed down and started generating unusual amounts of online traffic. So I poked around in Task Manager, to find a process related to my terminated AT&T Online Vault account still trying to make backups! I had to restart my system and keep it offline long enough to remove the software entirely, before it tried again. (That software also required that I change the physical location of some of my files, so it wouldn't try backing them up, but did not undo this change upon being uninstalled.)

So I went to my old online backup provider, Backup.com, formerly "@Backup." Within an hour, I had activated a free trial account, downloaded and installed their software, told it what files I wanted to back up, backed them up. I also within that time set the schedule for regular subsequent backups, which have gone off without a hitch.

Now, I don't know how it is that "the new AT&T," with all of its resources and experience, couldn't figure out how to deliver an online backup service at least equal to what Backup.com provides, in terms of clarity of instruction, ease of use, flexibility, and functionality. Frankly, I don't know why AT&T didn't just craft a licensing or co-marketing deal with Backup.com, which has been in the business since 1997. But I suspect there are some broken business processes and/or political considerations behind how such decisions get and got made. I could be wrong. But I doubt it.

In any case, the BPM-related lessons here are that it's not enough to test how new software or business services run, nor how well they do (or do not) install successfully on a variety of systems. It's also essential to test how well they can be de-installed or rolled back, and how well they can restore host systems to their respective states before the attempted installation or invocation. And, of course, this applies to supporting documentation as well. Just as "measure twice, cut once" is always true in construction and repair, "test more, support less" is always true with new applications, services, or technologies.

Regarding NetIdentity, they have for years offered a great domain-sharing service that, among other things, makes having an e-mail address of "yourfirstname@yourlastname.com" relatively easy and inexpensive to have. I had used NetIdentity as my primary personal e-mail provider happily for years as well. Then, the company was purchased by Tucows Inc., a premier site for downloads of freeware, shareware, and "trialware." Now, I have no idea about the internal heavy lifting required when the NetIdentity services were moved from their original infrastructure to the Tucows infrastructure. What I do know, however, is that ever since then, my e-mail access has been far less reliable, and often much slower. I also know this problem is endemic, based on the sometimes incendiary comments made online about Tucows, its customer support, and its management. I haven't given up the service yet, but I'm using Google's Gmail a LOT more.

The BPM lessons here are two-fold. Fold the First: Make every upgrade and infrastructure transition as invisible to users as possible, especially where software as a service (SaaS) is concerned. Salesforce.com, Inc. and WebEx Communications, Inc. are two companies very good at this, and useful examples of how it should be done.

Fold the Second: Assume that every time you try to make an upgrade or infrastructure change invisible, it won't be. That means communicate clearly, before, during, and after the transition, and keep users and other stakeholders in the loop regarding progress. That way, even if there is a surprise malfunction or other hiccup, those users and stakeholders are far less likely to panic, rebel, and cast blame.

Make sure processes at your business address these sometimes-hidden issues, explicitly and effectively. And test those processes from time to time, to make sure they work the ways you think they should. Let me know how process testing works – and doesn't work – at your organization, or others known to you, and let's see if we can't improve things at least a little.

Posted by mdortch in BPM • Software as a Service  |  Permalink  | Comments (1)  | TrackBacks (0)

I've quoted Shakespeare's Henry V above. (That's "Henry the Fifth" for the apparently increasing number of you who have never received instruction about Roman numerals.) The king went on to say this to encourage his troops into spirited battle.

"In peace there's nothing so becomes a man
As modest stillness and humility:
But when the blast of war blows in our ears,
Then imitate the action of the tiger;
Stiffen the sinews, summon up the blood…"

Now, I of course know that there's nothing about BPM and related subjects that's anything like war. However, I do fervently believe there are Things Going On that will require IT and business decision-makers at user and vendor companies to similarly gird themselves in preparation for an unknown, but likely turbulent future.

Some of that turbulence is already evident, as users and vendors struggle to integrate and consolidate their efforts and thinking around business analytics, intelligence, and the capture, discovery, mapping, management, and optimization of business activities and processes. But a very interesting element of this has to do specifically with the combination of search and analysis/intelligence functionality.

I've written here previously about how unstructured data can both challenge and inform BPM efforts. The thing is, a lot of useful information – almost all truly useful information, according to some – is captured and stored as what computers, at least, think of as unstructured data. And of course, unstructured data, being, well, unstructured, is much harder to search through and extract from than neat little columns and rows of known, consistent characters.

So IBM has devoted a fair amount of effort into developing and encouraging development of technologies that make searching unstructured data less onerous and more useful. That effort has led to offerings and initiatives such as LanguageWare, a "human language technology" platform intended to ease and speed multi-lingual (or, as IBM calls it, "language-neutral") analysis and management of unstructured data such as what businesspeople often call "content" and "documents." Also OmniFind, the search and text analytics technology that is a key component of IBM's content management portfolio. And the Unstructured Information Management Architecture (UIMA) project. And, of course, IBM's acquisition of FileNet, one of the first content management solution vendors to focus on the intersections between business content and process management.

And now, IBM is partnering with BI and analytics solution vendor Business Objects SA. As reported at ebizQ, IBM has announced a new "dynamic warehousing" strategy, and some new data warehousing solutions. One of these includes Business Objects Crystal Reports Server; another supports tight integration with Business Objects' Crystal Decisions BI suite.

This is separate from yet another IBM announcement of BI integration with IBM enterprise computing solutions. Also as reported at ebizQ, IBM announced integration into its System i "all-in-one" business computing platform a special edition of the WebFOCUS BI suite from Information Builders.

What does all of this mean? Broader and deeper abilities to unearth clues and facts about how real people use real information to do real work. Information that can greatly inform efforts to discover, map, and optimize business processes and workflows, for systems and users. More powerful features for searching for – and actually finding – actionable information about the processes governing IT resource and infrastructure management and business alignment. And a wide range of options, for a broad and growing range of enterprise sizes and types.

At least, that's what I hope and believe. What about you? Do let me know.

Posted by mdortch in BPM • Collaboration • IBM • IT Infrastructure Management  |  Permalink  | Comments (0)  | TrackBacks (1)

So Cisco Systems, Inc. is buying WebEx Communications, Inc., as reported at ebizQ, and you may be wondering "Why?" and/or "What the heck has that got to do with BPM?" Both good questions, each of which I'll attempt to answer, at least cursorily.

Cisco said WebEx brings it all kinds of additional goodness to add to its "unified communications" vision, especially for small and mid-sized businesses. Now, when I hear terms like "unified communications," I remember reading what Gandhi said in response to a request for his opinion about Western-style "representative democracy" – "it would be a good idea." But I think I understand what Cisco intends to mean. (And that last sentence reminds me of something Humpty Dumpty said in Lewis Carroll's "Alice in Wonderland" – "I know you believe you understand what you think I said, but what you fail to realize is that what you heard is not what I meant." But I digress.)

Basically, all communications (and, increasingly, all collaborations) other than in-person, face-to-face meetings are enabled by IT and networks, a lot of which rely on Cisco technologies. From Cisco's perspective, then, "unified communications" is shorthand for "matching communications technology mixes seamlessly with how people want and need to communicate." Hence, the BPM connection. (I'm sure Cisco would also add something about doing this in ways that create new and extend existing revenue streams, but perhaps fortunately, that's not my focus here.)

WebEx, meanwhile, has attracted more users to its software-as-a-service (SaaS) collaboration and communications platforms than even Salesforce.com, about which I've written repeatedly here previously. In addition, WebEx recently introduced WebEx Connect, which basically enables developers and enterprises to build and deploy processes and applications atop the WebEx SaaS platform. This is at least conceptually similar to what Salesforce.com has done with its SaaS platform and development tools, and both are very good ways to build processes into frequently used business applications and services. Which, in turn, is, I think, a great way to make processes ubiquitous and invisible, increasing the odds that they will actually get managed effectively.

Now, what makes this particularly interesting is that Salesforce.com has of late been touting Cisco itself as one of Salesforce.com's recent big customer wins. This perhaps sets the stage for some interesting competitions between Salesforce.com and WebEx solutions within Cisco, some interesting integrations of the two environments at and/or enabled by Cisco, or all of the above.

In the meantime, though, this is another prime example of vendors evolving in response to the evolution of user and enterprise behaviors, goals, and needs. Whatever you do and wherever you work, I'm pretty certain you should be tracking what Cisco and WebEx do and plan, as well as what Salesforce.com has in mind. The range and scope of available, on-demand, process-enabled applications is about to start getting pretty big pretty fast, and you want to be ready. Ready or not, let me know what happens, and what you plan to do next.

Posted by mdortch in BPM • Collaboration • Software as a Service  |  Permalink  | Comments (0)  | TrackBacks (0)

As you probably know by now, and as reported by ebizQ, Oracle Corp. plans to acquire Hyperion Solutions Corp. Herewith, some thoughts on that planned acquisition, and its implications for BPM.

Oracle makes databases. Oracle also makes software that analyzes information in databases and, it is hoped, delivers analyses that help to inform better business decisions. This is frequently called "business intelligence" (BI).

Hyperion makes software that analyzes and reports on indicators of how well the business infrastructure is performing – and, directly and indirectly, how well the supporting IT infrastructure is performing. Those reports are intended to help decision-makers improve business performance. This is frequently called "business performance management" (BPM, at least frequently enough to cause confusion with business process management, about which more very soon now, as well as here previously.)

Oracle and Hyperion have said that companies are increasingly combining business intelligence and performance management functionality. Perhaps. I would argue that there are probably more companies doing neither, and many companies doing one or both, but only in limited fashion, and not necessarily well.

However, one of the clear and unarguable benefits of the Oracle-Hyperion link-up is stated fairly clearly in the "Letter to Hyperion Customers" posted at what is still, so far, the Hyperion Web site.

"The proposed combination extends Hyperion's capabilities beyond the finance department with operational analytic applications and complementary BI tools from Oracle. Oracle customers will gain access to Hyperion's best-of-breed performance management solutions and to our domain expertise in financial management."

By my lights, this is at the core of much of what's going on among BPM-related vendors, and what's affecting many user strategies. Vendors are trying to extend the reach of their particular solutions – and their "control" over those user "accounts" – by acquiring and/or allying with providers of additional functionality. Users, meanwhile, are trying to identify areas where BPM-related functionality is flourishing – within, say, IT and/or financial departments – and to replicate and scale those successes.

So this may actually be one of those lucky times when vendor and user needs and incentives are fairly closely aligned. What users need are policies, proven practices, and technologies that together help them know enough about current processes and their interdependencies to achieve continuous improvement of those processes. Business activity monitoring (BAM) and optimization, analytics, BI, and other previously disparate takes on this challenge are instead, I believe, elements of larger concepts discussed here previously. These include business knowledge management (BKM), human-centric BPM, and human interaction management, among others.

Smart vendors, such as Oracle and Hyperion, are reading the tea leaves and responding accordingly, from their respective strengths. Users have to be their own industry analysts (and work closely with the full-time industry analysts their companies engage) to differentiate such alliances and acquisition from those driven more from desperation or necessity. If vendors appear to be working together or merging while adoption of their independent offerings is stagnant or decreasing, this may be a sign.

Meanwhile, IT and BPM decision-makers at enterprises already using Oracle and Hyperion solutions stand to gain greater integration, of those solutions and the services that support them. Those decision-makers at enterprises using competing comparable solution sets may want to call upon their chosen vendors, and demand information about how they intend to respond. Please let me know how they do respond, and how you respond to those responses. Meanwhile, vendor evolution continues…

Posted by mdortch in BPM  |  Permalink  | Comments (0)  | TrackBacks (0)

I've recently traded introductory e-mail pleasantries with Dennis Byron, author of the new ebizQ "Open Source Software in Integration" blog. Dennis is also the leading light behind IT Investment Research, watchers of the top 12 IT vendors, their partners, and the trends that affect them. I'm already a big fan, primarily because of Dennis' opinions about open source software and the FUD ("fear, uncertainty, and doubt") that plagues its supporters and benefits its detractors.

Anyway, electronically meeting Dennis got me thinking about BPM as an investment. Not in terms of buying stocks in BPM companies. That kind of investment analysis is not my strong suit, as a look at my investment choices before, say, 2000 would tell almost anyone. I mean viewing BPM as an investment in your business.

At both the highest strategic levels and at the deepest levels of granularity, business processes literally run the business. Whether that happens consciously and with the fully informed and engaged participation of all actors in the value chain is a separate set of issues. Whether formal, documented, and enforced or not, there are processes running every business.

Given that, anything that can improve control of those processes and their alignment with declared business goals and requirements is not only a good thing, but an investment in the success of the business. An investment that I would argue is more critical than almost any other, since just about every other business investment is itself driven by some set of processes that also needs management.

This means that before you start investigating specific BPM solutions, you need to get every decision-maker at your enterprise aligned with the idea that business processes are in fact critical resources that deserve effective management. This effort will itself benefit from the support of sound, proven processes – but that support is by no means essential. What is essential, however, is that someone who fervently believes in the business value of BPM must lead a sustained marketing and sales effort, if not an actual "charm offensive." Nothing less will get and keep all other critical stakeholders and influencers committed to the cause.

In addition, anything like meaningful ROI estimates for investments in BPM concepts and processes can only help persuasion efforts. Fortunately, lots of opinions and resources can be found right here at the BPM section of ebizQ, starting with the musings and observations of my fellow BPM-focused bloggers Kiran Garimella, Keith Harrison-Broninski, Sandy Kemsley, Joe McKendrick, and James Taylor. (If you haven't yet, you should definitely check out the recent roundtable podcast that included all of us opining about BPM in 2007 and beyond. You should also check out the article by ebizQ analyst David A. Kelly that instigated the whole thing.) Equally fortunately, there are also useful white papers and analyst reports to be found at ebizQ. Candidate and incumbent BPM vendors should be willing and able to support these efforts as well.

BPM is an investment for any enterprise, long before any money is shelled out for any particular solution. Understanding the criticality of that investment, and committing to it the personal and corporate resources necessary for its success, are challenges too many IT and business decision-makers underestimate. So make sure you and your colleagues don't – and let me know how that's working for you and your enterprise, to paraphrase Dr. Phil…

Posted by mdortch in BPM  |  Permalink  | Comments (1)  | TrackBacks (0)

There's another exciting ebizQ webinar coming up on March 28, with a killer topic for BPM wonks, despite the slightly ungainly but entirely appropriate title. It's "Taking Enterprise Mash-ups From Buzzword to Business Reality – Gain One Integrated View of BI, CRM, ERP and Other Enterprise Systems."

The speaker is Paul Wlodarczyk, VP of Solutions Consulting at JustSystems, possibly the largest software company the most of us had never heard of before now. Just Systems claims to be Japan's largest software company. It is likely best known in North America for xfy, software that enables creation of XML-compliant composite applications atop IBM Corp.'s Lotus Notes platform. As I've opined here previously, the latest Lotus Notes represents significant opportunity to build business processes into applications and services. Which I'm convinced is a good thing.

Paul was previously "a Service Line Manager for a content lifecycle consultancy with Xerox Global Services." So my semi-educated guess is the guys knows a little bit about how BI (business intelligence), CRM, ERP, and other applications get mashed up in ways that align with and deviate from business processes in real-life business environments.

Why is this important? Two primary reasons.
1. Composite applications, or mash-ups, get that way as they get closer and closer to mirroring and supporting how real people do real work in real businesses – or at least would like to do their work.
2. Business processes drive how real people do real work in real businesses – and how those people do their work defines, or at least should define, how well those processes are working, and where they need refinement, replacement, or retirement.

For those who are trying to succeed with BPM, one of the most effective ways, in my opinion, at least, is to embed process-related and process-supporting features into every element of the IT infrastructure users touch. Those "BPM streams" can be collected, consolidated, and managed in ways that enable consistent deployment and improvement of key processes, without getting in the way of users. The tools to make this possible are still few and limited in scope, but better ones are coming. So now is the time to start thinking about the processes needed to maximize the value of those tools, and all of your BPM investments. (This is as true for vendors trying to sell BPM as it is for users trying to make it work, by the way.)

So do try to attend Paul's webinar, or at least to replay it from the archive if you can't make it live. Despite the omission of "BPM" from its title, I'm sure you'll benefit from it, whether through new ideas or validation of what you're already doing. And if you are doing anything with or about composite applications or mash-ups that's BPM-related, please let me know.

Posted by mdortch in BPM • Collaboration  |  Permalink  | Comments (0)  | TrackBacks (0)

So when one visits Microsoft's "Preparing for Daylight Saving Time changes in 2007," one reads the following.

"The U.S. Energy Policy Act of 2005, passed by the U.S. Congress July, 2005, extended Daylight Saving Time (DST) in the U.S. by approximately four weeks. As a result, beginning in 2007, DST will start three weeks earlier on March 11, 2007, and end one week later on November 4, 2007, resulting in a new DST period that is four weeks longer than previously observed."

However, the Palm, Inc. newsletter I just received via e-mail begs to differ, as shown below.

"Daylight Saving Time (DST) begins March 11, 2007 -- three weeks earlier than last year. DST will also last one week longer in the fall as well, changing back to standard time on November 11, 2007 [emphasis added]."

Hmm. Palm and Microsoft have both issued software updates for their devices, and lots of people (including yours truly) rely on accurate synchronization of their Palm and Windows devices. This could therefore be sticky, if the updates share the disagreement highlighted in each company's outreach materials.

By the way, according to the article "Energy Act Shifts Daylight Saving Time, Sets Appliance Standards," found at the Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy Web site of the U.S. Department of Energy, says this.

"Yes, thanks to the Energy Policy Act of 2005, in 2007 Daylight Saving Time will start on the second Sunday in March instead of the first Sunday in April, and will end on the first Sunday in November instead of the last Sunday of October [emphasis added]."

Hmm. The folks at Palm may want to re-review their processes for creating, editing, and validating their outreach materials, especially those related to potentially critical software updates. If you know someone at Palm, or are someone at Palm, you might want to let them know. And if you experience and process-related DST successes or failures, you might want to let me know.

Posted by mdortch in BPM  |  Permalink  | Comments (0)  | TrackBacks (0)

After finally deciding that prayer and fatalism were not enough, I decided after a multi-year hiatus to venture back into the world of online backup services for my personal information. And since I've been a long-time, relatively happy AT&T and SBC customer, I thought I'd give AT&T Online Vault a try.

Sign-up was a breeze, and within minutes, I received an e-mail with an authorization code, and link for downloading the software I'd need to use the service. So I click on the link, and get an error message, asking for the authorization code, which I had, and something called an "Installer ID," which I did not have, or know anything about. Nor was it mentioned in the confirmation e-mail I received. The instructions accompanying the error message said I should find it in some "activation e-mail," but I have yet to receive one of those. And of course, leaving the Installer ID field blank didn't work.

So I called the phone number included with the error message instructions (always a useful touch), and within a few minutes, was told by a more-friendly-than-helpful "technical support" operator -- after he collected a bunch of information, including my physical address, for some reason -- that it would take "no more than 24 hours" to resolve my issue. See, he has to create a trouble ticket, then forward it to the technical support people who can actually do something, who would then have to figure out how best to send me a link to an installation download that will actually work for me. And then send it, of course.

After I got off the phone, on a whim, I decided to try e-mailing AT&T Online Vault, to let them know of my disappointing initial experience. Fortunately, the same e-mail that contained the support telephone number also contained a support e-mail address. Unfortunately, my attempt to send mail to that address bounced.

Relevant BPM Lessons:
1. Test everything that's customer-facing multiple times, under multiple configurations of real-life conditions. That includes all support-related contact information, such as telephone numbers and e-mail addresses. Don't assume everyone uses the same browser, the same type of PC, or even the same revision or modification of "the same" stuff. Do assume that a customer in the middle of a problem who gets bounced e-mails, busy signals, fax tones in response to voice calls, or no answers at all will not remain a customer for long.
2. Put basic system requirements in blindingly obvious places, preferably near wherever the decision to buy or try something gets made. This is especially true online and in e-mail, but applies equally to, for example, package inserts.
3. Empower first-line support personnel to be both friendly and helpful. For example, if they have caller ID, which "my" operator did, consider giving them address look-up, so they can simply confirm information I know they already have access to, rather than forcing me to give it to them.

All of the above is easily addressed with effective processes. And it can buy you customer goodwill you can't buy otherwise. Agreed? Disagreed? Either way, let me know!

Posted by mdortch in BPM  |  Permalink  | Comments (0)  | TrackBacks (0)

Just a reminder to avoid falling victim to potentially annoying, if not incredibly disruptive, stupid BPM tricks by remembering that Daylight Saving Time (DST) starts this weekend, and now extends through the first Sunday in November. The following links should be useful jumping-off points -- but make sure to follow directions in order, and that individual update efforts are tightly synchronized with those of your enterprise's IT department, if it has one.

+ Microsoft Windows: http://support.microsoft.com/gp/dst_topissues
+ Apple (for those who have not yet installed the Mac OS X updates that already include DST updates): http://docs.info.apple.com/article.html?artnum=305056
+ Palm: http://www.palm.com/us/support/downloads/dst_winmo.html (for Windows Mobile devices) and/or http://www.palm.com/us/support/downloads/dst_palmos.html (for Palm OS devices)
+ All other environments: contact your vendor or channel partner, or visit their Web site(s) immediately, if you haven't already done so.

(By the way, I don't go out of my way to pick on Microsoft, but sometimes, they make it so easy. After updating my own ancient Windows 2000 laptop for DST per Microsoft's relatively easy and painless online instructions, I was offered the chance to provide feedback to Microsoft about my surprisingly painless and straightforward experience. So I chose to do so -- only to be taken to a Web page that said "This Service is Currently Not Available." Sigh...they try, they really try...)

In any case, more on more BPM-specific stuff, including more follow-up to this week's popular and well-received BPM in Action Virtual Conference, soon. Meanwhile, make sure to update everything around you that has a computer and a clock in it ASAP, so you can in fact, I hope, have a nice, relaxing weekend!

Posted by mdortch in BPM  |  Permalink  | Comments (0)  | TrackBacks (0)

You still have the opportunity to hear a great "real-life BPM" story featuring Preferred Meal Systems, Inc. You can register here -- and you should.

You also still have the opportunity to experience a panel discussion about how to get from traditional BPM to "Automated, Human Centric, and Collaborative Processes," as previously, frequently discussed here and elsewhere. You can register for that session here -- and you should.

Opportunities to experience stories and discussions like these don't come along every day -- and most of them certainly don't come along directly to your desk or laptop. So don't miss them!

Posted by mdortch in BPM  |  Permalink  | Comments (0)  | TrackBacks (0)

At least a bit sadly, today is the last "live" day of the ebizQ's "BPM in Action" Virtual Conference. I want to personally thank all of you who have participated, especially those who have written to me with comments, questions, and suggestions. But I also want to remind everyone that there's lots of value to be gotten out of the resources ebizQ has assembled for and around the event, even after things wind down today.

Come back to www.bpminaction.com, and send your colleagues as well, to grab replays of all the key sessions, and the presentation materials used by the speakers. And don't miss the other relevant resources ebizQ is making available to you. One of these, thanks to SAP AG's Business Process Expert Network, is a blog entry from Professor Yvonne Antonucci of Widener University, "How do we determine the skill set of a Business Process Management Expert??" (When you register, you will also have the chance to join SAP's Business Process Expert Network for free, something you should definitely do. It's a vibrant, informative online community.)

Speaking of BPM skills, if you haven't yet, you should definitely check out Gian Trotta's podcast featuring Derek Miers discussing "the BPM skills gap" and the BPM Learning Framework he's developed to address it. Even if you don't agree with all of Derek's musings, they provide some great starting points for developing your own approaches to making sure your organization has or gets the BPM skills it needs to succeed.

And of course, there's the Forrester Wave analysis of leading integration-centric BPM suite vendors. Again a great starting point for your own specific vendor evaluations and comparisons, and available free to registered ebizQ users. (And don't forget the ebizQ Analyst Corner, where you will soon see more relevant research from me and my RFG colleagues, as well as from other analyst firms.)

So enjoy the rest of the BPM in Action Virtual Conference, today and via replays later. Use what you learn, in concert with the other ebizQ resources at your disposal, to craft an actionable, effective BPM plan for your specific enterprise and its specific needs. And of course, let me know how it's going, so we can continue discussing and learning together!

Posted by mdortch in BPM  |  Permalink  | Comments (0)  | TrackBacks (0)

Day One of the ebizQ's "BPM in Action" Virtual Conference was a cavalcade of useful information, for those just getting started with BPM, and for those seeking to use BPM to take their enterprises to the next level. If you missed any of it, or want to share it with colleagues who missed it, replays will be available online here on Thursday.

Day Two will build upon the momentum, with a special focus on real-life user experiences. You can learn how Babcock and Wilcox, market-leading provider of power generation systems, is using BPM to power more sales and productivity. You can see how Preferred Meal Systems, a provider of innovative solutions for feeding everyone from children to seniors, everywhere from airlines to the military – is using BPM to feed its needs for "future-proof" ERP and enterprise agility. And you can enjoy ebizQ analyst Beth Gold-Bernstein's attempts to ride heard on some of the most interesting thinkers about BPM on the planet today, in my admittedly biased opinion.

The agenda's here. Check it out, and don't miss a bit of Day Two – live, in replay, or both. And let me know what you think and thought about the BPM in Action Virtual Conference. More later.

Posted by mdortch in BPM  |  Permalink  | Comments (0)  | TrackBacks (0)

Tomorrow is the opening day of ebizQ's "BPM in Action" Virtual Conference – for which you should register immediately after reading this, if you have not yet done so. That very event basically created the much-appreciated opportunity for me to gain access to this bully pulpit. I therefore thought I'd take a brief break from my usual observations, rants, and recommendations, to emphasize and expand on some points made by ebizQ editor in chief Elizabeth Book in her blog today about the event.

"BPM in Action," like BPM itself, is all about you. Your enterprise, your experiences, your business goals and needs. Like any great conference, BPM in action is constructed and structured to give you more and better tools and insights for addressing specific BPM challenges at your organization. Whatever its size or core business, every enterprise is a business, every business relies on processes, and those processes need consistent, effective management. So if you are a decision-maker at a business, even if it's a business of one or two people, there's value aplenty for you in tomorrow's Virtual Conference.

If you haven't yet done so, make sure to register for the keynote addresses featuring my analyst industry colleagues, Ken Vollmer of Forrester Research and Janelle Hill of Gartner. Our companies may compete (even though we all share a fair number of clients), but we all agree that BPM is critical to sustained business success. I'm sure they'll leave you thinking, and ready for action. Also, the panel assembled by my ebizQ blog-mate Sandy Kemsley, "BPM and Enterprise 2.0," is a great opportunity to hear from some of the people I consider both thought and action leaders in BPM.

Of course, nothing beats real-life user experience, and the sessions scheduled for "BPM in Action" feature numerous examples of users succeeding with BPM. So the conference offers a plethora of information you should find interesting, relevant, and useful to BPM efforts at your own enterprise – all without leaving your office, your backyard, your favorite table at your favorite (or currently most convenient) Wi-Fi equipped caffeine dispensary, or wherever you happen to be connected to the Internet.

You can find the entire agenda for the "BPM in Action" Virtual Conference here. I strongly encourage you to participate, and to encourage your colleagues to do so as well. After all, education and validation are critical first steps toward developing and promoting "BPM-aware" attitudes and corporate cultures. And you will find both education and validation at this event. So participate, and enjoy! (And for those of you who really need to get out more, I'll be back to my usual activities in this space soon enough. You didn't think I had no opinions about Oracle buying Hyperion, for example, did you?)

Posted by mdortch in  |  Permalink  | Comments (0)  | TrackBacks (0)

As covered here previously, Microsoft has forged a new association of partners focused on business process management. The company has also unveiled at least some of a road map for support of the increasingly popular Business Process Execution Language (BPEL).

Separately, Microsoft has begun distributing to partners an early version of a forthcoming new release of its CRM software. Code-named "Titan," this forthcoming release will, according to published reports, include three options for users. They can buy the software and host it internally, as they always have. They can purchase Microsoft CRM as a service hosted by Microsoft partners. Or they can purchase Microsoft CRM as a service hosted by Microsoft itself. (The company has been building data centers aggressively in advance of the roll-out of this option.)

Now, as is discussed almost constantly across the blogosphere and elsewhere, Microsoft has a challenge to overcome that does not burden perceived software-as-a-service (SaaS) competitors such as Salesforce.com. Microsoft has a hefty ecosystem of partners who have made pretty good livings supporting and working with Microsoft's traditional hosted software. When those partners have to compete with partners who offer CRM SaaS, including Microsoft itself, not all of them are expected to thrive, or even survive.

Further, Microsoft is working with BPM/CRM/ERP applications giant SAP AG, on something called "Duet." Duet is software the two companies jointly developed and sell, intended to integrate Microsoft Office front-end applications with SAP back-end solutions. But as Microsoft's Dynamics CRM and ERP solutions increasingly gain SaaS features, Microsoft will be increasingly challenged to help customers and partners to understand exactly what Microsoft offerings they should be obtaining, and from whom.

(If you don't think this is a serious problem for Microsoft, you haven't been following the confusion the company has created with its Live and Office Live offerings. Basically, few people inside or outside Microsoft seem able to understand or clearly articulate the company's overall vision for online services, including SaaS options. It's not clear at all that clarifying the boundaries separating partner-hosted, Microsoft-hosted, and user-hosted Microsoft solutions for BPM, CRM, and ERP is going to go any more smoothly.)

What to do? Well, if your company uses or is considering Microsoft Dynamics solutions, you should be meeting with your primary Microsoft partners now. You should be grilling them extensively about their awareness of what Microsoft is doing, and plans to evolve in response. If your company uses SAP solutions, you might want to keep an eye on Duet, and on competing offerings and services from Microsoft and its partners. (If you're a Salesforce.com user or partner, you probably have little to worry about, at lest for the next 12 to 18 months, which is probably how long it will take for Microsoft and its partners to work out revised business models and strategies.)

Meanwhile, I'd be passionately interested in your opinions about Microsoft's potential as a supplier of market-leading BPM, CRM, and/or ERP solutions, directly and/or through its partners. So please do share, while I continue to mull all of this over. If I come up with anything else worth sharing, I will of course let you know…

Posted by mdortch in BPM • Microsoft  |  Permalink  | Comments (1)  | TrackBacks (0)