Wrong confirmation ID
  • Email
  • Favorite
  • Download
  • Embed
  • Private Content

Loading…

Flash Player 9 (or above) is needed to view presentations.
We have detected that you do not have it on your computer. To install it, go here.

Alexander Samarin + Follow Processing...

Creating a synergy between BPM and electronic archives

by Alexander Samarin on Apr 27, 2010

  • 981 views

My presentation at ECA 2010 in Geneva http://www.bar.admin.ch/eca2010/index.html

More…

My presentation at ECA 2010 in Geneva http://www.bar.admin.ch/eca2010/index.html

Less

Accessibility

Tags

electronic archives bpm

Upload Details

Uploaded via SlideShare as Microsoft PowerPoint

Usage Rights

© All Rights Reserved

Flagged as inappropriate Flag as inappropriate
Flag as inappropriate

Select your reason for flagging this presentation as inappropriate. If needed, use the feedback form to let us know more details.

Cancel

5 Embeds 19

http://www.slideshare.net 13
http://www.lmodules.com 2
http://www.businessprocessincubator.com 2
http://translate.googleusercontent.com 1
http://static.slidesharecdn.com 1

Statistics

Favorites
0
Downloads
31
Comments
6
Embed Views
19
Views on SlideShare
962
Total Views
981

1–6 of 6 previous next Post a comment

  • samarin Alexander Samarin , Chief enterprise architect at This planet Thanks Max. I saw many time that IT people and IT-tools vendors are very good coordination techniques. Those techniques are very powerful, but implicit for the business. And, finally, the business is responsible for daily use of those techniques. I found very useful for the organisation when people (mainly the business) use for their work explicit methods. As usual, the balance is necessary.

    Can you share details about ' Anyway, I propose that also predictable processes are easier to define without flowcharts.' please?

    Thanks,
    AS     2 years ago Reply
    Are you sure you want to Yes No
  • mjpucher mjpucher Alexander, thanks. Cooking is a good example where following the process does not definitely create great tasting food. It is a knwledge activity and can't be handled by a flowchart. You may be able to create a flwochart model that looks like a cooking process, but you would not be able to control it. It is further connected to the shopping process, tools capabilities, food quality, parallel activities, and A LOT of experience. The recipe is a resource list and a guide, no more. Why would someone bother to create a process to cook if he knows how to do it. Anyway, I propose that also predictable processes are easier to define without flowcharts.

    PS: I am a pretty good cook myself.     2 years ago Reply
    Are you sure you want to Yes No
  • samarin Alexander Samarin , Chief enterprise architect at This planet Thanks Max,

    I consider the process as the explicit coordination, because the coordination is important as a way to achieve a desired outcome. Sure, this is an intentional limitation. Your approach, if understood correctly, is to focus on implicit coordination. This is fine, because different levels of coordination and different coordination techniques may co-exist and co-operate. It is important to use the right technique in a particular case. In many occasions I was asked for strong coordination which is implemented by processes. I discussed this the chapter 5 of my book (certainly, I only touched this topic).

    Concerning your 'a flowchart will deal with ten different inbound and outbound content elements that are created/used/worked on by different actors and that in summary set the overall progress of the process' -- some processes may use implicit coordination. For example, a process pattern http://improving-bpm-systems.blogspot.com/2010/03/practical-process-patterns-caap.html

    Thanks,
    AS     2 years ago Reply
    Are you sure you want to Yes No
  • mjpucher mjpucher Alexander, to see process as a consequence of content state is as valid as seeing content as an artifact of a task. The task is no more than the externalized content method. Process is really an abstract entity that does not exist, while content (structured data and unstructured text and the mix of both) does. Therefore it is much more plausible to users to work with content state that is progressed by external events. Execution boundaries are defined by business rules. In such a process environment, there is no discernible flow and all those negaitve sideeffects of flowcharts with variants and exceptions disappear. THe explicit context and relationship that you mention is really a limitation of flowcharts, because the content is the only thing that counts. State/event driven models are more flexible in dealing with events than flowcharts. Even with BPMN events, any event appearing at any point in time disrupts the current execution flow. Complex recovery and syncronization flows are needed to resolve that. State/event models do not suffer from this limitation.

    Typical content vendors deal with simple states and usually focus on the creation process or on the archive (storage) state, while with Papyrus we always allowed for content state to represent business process relevant states as well. So it is understandable that you have not seen this with the usual ECM vendors.

    I am still surprised that you mention content as relevant to the process in your presentation but do not see the necessity for state/event/rules handling. Flowcharts are not suitable to deal with content state changes by events. This is what I meant in another comment I made on your writings that I lack the real-world aspects of executing the concepts that you present as solutions.

    Maybe you can explain how you feel a flowchart will deal with ten different inbound and outbound content elements that are created/used/worked on by different actors and that in summary set the overall progress of the process. I also feel that a similar problem exits with SOA services and therefore the idea that each sub-process is a service is not really practical in a flowchart paradigm.     2 years ago Reply
    Are you sure you want to Yes No
  • samarin Alexander Samarin , Chief enterprise architect at This planet Max, thanks for the comment. Can you elaborate 'The process becomes an artifact to the content and not the other way around', please. For me, process is important as they provide explicit and executable relationship between other artefacts. I work with the electronic publishing since 1980 and with DMS/ECM since 1996 but I found no similar functionality in typical content.

    Thanks,
    AS     2 years ago Reply
    Are you sure you want to Yes No
  • mjpucher mjpucher Alexander, in my co-authored book 'Mastering The Unpredictable' I also wrote about the essential role of records management for process management. You are makring the same suggestion here about which I am very glad. Our Papyrus Platform has offered this integral link between BPM and RM since years and businesses have not realized the importance. Obviously, for the ECM marketplace -- that we come from --- this is absolutely normal. The process becomes an artifact to the content and not the other way around. So this is obviously all not very new. But as you propery point out in your book, BPM people are usually blind to the needs of content and fail to see the connection. Thanks for enlightening the BPM crowd to something we 'content people' have promoted as necessary for the last ten years. 2 years ago Reply
    Are you sure you want to Yes No
Post Comment
Edit your comment Cancel

Creating a synergy between BPM and electronic archives — Presentation Transcript