Business Architecture Patterns (BPM in Practice conference)


Published on

Several enterprise and process patterns. Some slides contain animation.

Published in: Technology, Business

Business Architecture Patterns (BPM in Practice conference)

  1. 1. Business Architecture Patterns A. Samarin “BPM in Practice” conference Vilnius, October 2013
  2. 2. About me • An enterprise architect – from a programmer to a systems architect – have created systems which work without me • WHY I do what I do – I believe that many improvements (“sooner, better, cheaper, more flexible”) in operational excellence and strategy execution are achievable with reasonable efforts and commodity tools • HOW I do what I do – architecting the synergy between technologies, tools and best practices for client’s unique case and transfer the knowledge • WHAT is the result of my work for clients – more coordination, less routine work, less stress, higher performance, higher security, less risk, higher predictability of results, better operations, and liberating the business potentials © A. Samarin 2013 “BPM in Practice” conference v2 2
  3. 3. A system of actionable patterns • Although core business processes in each enterprise are unique, they are constructed from typical business working practices • The system is aimed at formalising and perfecting these working practices as actionable patterns • Some of these patterns are expressed in executable BPMN thus making them available for businesses via modern BPM tools © A. Samarin 2013 “BPM in Practice” conference v2 3
  4. 4. Agenda • Strategy TO Portfolio (STOP) • Anisotropically Decentralised Organisation (ADO) • Maturity Of Process Systems (MOPS) • Customer eXperience As A Process (CXAAP) • Platform-Enabled Agile Solutions (PEAS) • Structuring IT Organisation (SITO) • Submission Interface (SI) • Decomposition in patterns (DIP) • Make Your Logic Explicit (MYLO) • Strategy Implementation Chain (SIC) © A. Samarin 2013 “BPM in Practice” conference v2 4
  5. 5. Strategy To Portfolio (STOP) • Business concern – dealing with the project portfolio during evolution of the strategy: intended, emerging and realised • Logic – explicitly linking strategic objectives, initiatives, business capabilities, IT capabilities, IT tools and projects – add priorities © A. Samarin 2013 “BPM in Practice” conference v2 5
  6. 6. Logic Business demand Business strategic objectives Governance Business initiatives (business-specific demand) 1 1 2 3 5 Manage Business business by capabilities (business- processes generic demand) 2->5 1 2 4 2 Business priority © A. Samarin 2013 Manage processes IT capabilities (IT-generic supply) 2->5 2->4 5 4 1->3 3 2 4 2->4 1->3 3 2 5 IT supply 3 4 1->4 Requested maturity 3 4 3 2->4 4 3->4 4 Maturity improvement “BPM in Practice” conference v2 Roadmap IT tools BPM suite programmes (IT-specific (from AS-IS supply) to TO-BE) 3->5 1 3->4 2 1->4 3 3->4 4 2->4 4 Programme priority 6
  7. 7. Implications and example • Implications – A formal way to discover points of the most leverage – The decision-making process is explicit and transparent – A strategy adjustment and validation becomes a routine on-going activity during its implementation (like functioning of the GPS navigator) © A. Samarin 2013 “BPM in Practice” conference v2 7
  8. 8. Anisotropically Decentralised Organisation (ADO) • Business concern: Branch Offices (BOs) with different level of maturity have to carry out similar processes; Central Office (CO) has to support them • Logic: any activity can be decomposed in four logical steps: – Plan: preparation for the work to be done – Do: execution of the work – Check: Control of how good and correct the work has been done – Validate (also can be called reflect or re-factor): analysis of the newly obtained experience and results to propose/implement some improvements to similar work which will be done in future © A. Samarin 2013 “BPM in Practice” conference v2 8
  9. 9. Logic • Possible combinations for each step are: – [C] fully centrally (i.e. no delegation) – [L] fully locally (i.e. complete delegation) – [LC] with central post-control – [CL] with central pre-advice – [CLC] with central pre-advice and post-control • Available combination for particular activities – Plan – C, L, LC, CL, CLC – Do – C, L (actual work can be done only at one place) – Check – C, L, LC – Validate – C, L, LC © A. Samarin 2013 “BPM in Practice” conference v2 9
  10. 10. Capability levels Variant Plan Do Check Validate Comments 0 C C C C No local capabilities are available for a particular activity 1 C L C C BO can do some technical work 2 CLC or LC C LC C BO can do some management work under guidance 3 LC L LC C BO can do some management and technical work under guidance 4 L L L LC BO can do almost everything 5 L L L L BO may do everything Implications • align with formal delegation of authority • consider dynamics in BOs capabilities © A. Samarin 2013 “BPM in Practice” conference v2 10
  11. 11. Maturity Of Process System (MOPS) • Business concern: You want to reach a particular level of maturity (in accordance with CMMI ) of a process-based business system - what BPM functionality will help you? • Logic: Levels of maturity are well-known 1. A performed process is a process that accomplishes the work necessary to produce work products 2. A managed process is a performed process that is planned and executed in accordance with some policies 3. A defined process is a managed process that is tailored from the organization’s set of standard processes 4. A quantitatively managed process is a defined process that is controlled using statistical and other quantitative techniques 5. An optimizing process is a quantitatively managed process that is changed and adapted to meet relevant current and projected business objectives © A. Samarin 2013 “BPM in Practice” conference v2 11
  12. 12. Logic • BPM (as a discipline) has 6 following functions: – Model / Plan / Simulate – Automate / Instrument – Execute – Control – Measure – Optimise / Reflect / Refactor • All functionality of BPM discipline is involved at each level of maturity. But, the nature involvement maybe different: “implicit” (informal or ad-hoc), “explicit” (formal or systematic) and in between (marked as “I/E”) © A. Samarin 2013 “BPM in Practice” conference v2 12
  13. 13. Correspondence table Functionality Performed vs level process Managed process Defined process Quantitatively measured process Optimising process Model I/E (black box) Explicit (locally) Explicit (globally) Explicit Explicit Automate Implicit I/E Explicit Explicit Explicit Execute Implicit I/E Explicit Explicit Explicit Control Implicit I/E I/E Explicit Explicit Measure Implicit Implicit I/E Explicit Explicit Optimise Implicit Implicit Implicit I/E Explicit Implications • Your use of BPM will facilitate the maturity increasing of your process-based business system © A. Samarin 2013 “BPM in Practice” conference v2 13
  14. 14. Customer eXperience As A Process (CXAAP) • Business concern: Improving the customer experience • Logic – Starting with "The reason customers use our products and services, is to get jobs done in their lives. " – Thinking about a hierarchy of embedded (in some sense) processes: • person's life-as-a-process • person's situation-as-a-process (e.g. expecting a baby) • person's job-as-a-process (e.g. buying a bigger car) • customer-experience-as-a-process (e.g. a person who is buying a car acts as a customer for a car dealer) © A. Samarin 2013 “BPM in Practice” conference v2 14
  15. 15. Logic and implications • Logic – If your products and services fit better into those processes (i.e. reduce the hassle for a customer) then they will be more attractive for customers • Implications – Ask right questions: not “now many floors do you want in your new house”, but "Do your parents visit?" "How many kids do you want?" "How long do you want to stay in this place? – May consider also “product-as-a-process”, “services-as-a-process” and “resource-as-a-process” Buy car 1 Sell 1 Buy car 2 Client Sell 2 Client file (resource) © A. Samarin 2013 “BPM in Practice” conference v2 Garage 15
  16. 16. Platform-Enabled Agile Solutions (PEAS) • Business concern: How to deliver many similar applications for various highly-diverse clients; define everything up-front is not possible (typical BPM project) • Logic – Developing individual applications will bring a lot of duplications – The provisioning of solutions should be carried out incrementally with the pace of the target client – Consider a platform 1. must standardise and simplify core elements of future enterprise-wide system 2. for any elements outside the platform, new opportunities should be explored using agile principles © A. Samarin 2013 “BPM in Practice” conference v2 16
  17. 17. Implications • Implications – The platform frees up resource to focus on new opportunities – Successful agile innovations are rapidly scaled up when incorporated into the platform – An agile approach requires coordination at a system level – To minimise duplication of effort in solving the same problems, there needs to be system-wide transparency of agile initiatives – Existing elements of the platform also need periodic challenge Delivery by applications Delivery by solutions Functionality A2 A1 © A. Samarin 2013 S 1 A3 S2 … S3 Platform Scope “BPM in Practice” conference v2 17
  18. 18. Example – replacing 23 electronic publishing applications • The users told us that their processes are unique thus they need different applications • We modelled their processes with the same modelling procedure • We found the same services and very similar processes © A. Samarin 2013 “BPM in Practice” conference v2 18
  19. 19. Structure IT Organisation (SITO) • Business concern: How to structure a business unit • Logic – Collect functions – Draw a matrix of mutual relationships between those functions – The relationships may be like “synergy” – The relationship may be like “prohibition”, e.g. SoD – Find clusters in the matrix © A. Samarin 2013 “BPM in Practice” conference v1 19
  20. 20. Example of rules • Prohibition rules: – P1 Separate doing and supervising/controlling – SoD – P2 Separate architecture/design and implementation – SoD and quality at entry – P3 Separate implementation and operation – SoD and quality at entry – P4 Policy vs applying it – legislation vs executive separation – P5 Specialisation • Synergy rules: – S1 Close work – S2 Architecture role to guide – S3 Synergy between technical and administrative activities (how you do something may be more important what you do) © A. Samarin 2013 “BPM in Practice” conference v2 20
  21. 21. Example of matrix • Matrix • Clusters © A. Samarin 2013 “BPM in Practice” conference v1 21
  22. 22. Submission Interface (SI) • Business concern: Interactions between two independent parties • Logic – Partner submits some documents (including forms) to administration – Administration checks those documents – Administration may request partner to provide more documents or to carry out some corrections – Administration checks those documents again – And so on © A. Samarin 2013 “BPM in Practice” conference v2 22
  23. 23. Animated diagram Click for animation © A. Samarin 2013 “BPM in Practice” conference v2 23
  24. 24. Decomposition In Patterns (DIP) Click for animation • Business case: typical “claim processing” process – claim, repair, control, invoicing, and assurance to pay SI PAR SI IPS © A. Samarin 2013 “BPM in Practice” conference v2 24
  25. 25. Make Your Logic Explicit (MYLO) • Business concern: Decision-making is perceived to be too personalised • Logic – Make you decision logic explicit as possible before approaching the decision itself – The decision logic must be understandable by all stakeholders of this decision – They should be able to execute this decision logic • Implications – The business logic will take the decision - not you or other person – The explicit logic acts as a “lubricator” © A. Samarin 2013 “BPM in Practice” conference v2 25
  26. 26. Strategy Implementation Chain (SIC) • Combining some patterns from other patterns © A. Samarin 2013 “BPM in Practice” conference v2 26
  27. 27. Thanks • QUESTIONS? • Personal website: • Blog • LinkedIn: • E-mail: • Twitter: @samarin • Book: © A. Samarin 2013 “BPM in Practice” conference v2 27