Quick Review of "Social #BPM"

Scott Francis
Next Post
Previous Post
Richard Hirsch of Siemens IT Solutions and Services has a post in the SAP community network about “Social BPM“.  Richard states that the goal is to present previous research, opinion, and analysis, before going on to present his own view in a future post. Based on his ability to synthesize the current buzz around BPM and Social network features or community/collaboration features, I’m interested to see what conclusions he’s drawing of his own. I’ve recently had my eyes opened to a theme within the Austin startup community, where companies are attacking the markets defined by the intersection of enterprise and web 2.0 ideas – applying community and social features to enterprise software, and applying cloud/SaaS business models to these software packages.  So perhaps my view on “Social BPM” is colored positive by that exposure.

Related Posts

  • Pingback: Tweets that mention Process for the Enterprise » Blog Archive » Quick Review of “Social #BPM” -- Topsy.com()

  • I also view Social BPM as a positive development but I’m reluctant to say that its usage is always appropriate. I’m trying to discover exactly when and how such technology should be used. If used incorrectly, Social BPM could cause more harm than good and lead to inefficiency based on time lags, etc. My blog series is an attempt to examine these issues in more detail.

    Dick

  • I also view Social BPM as a positive development but I’m reluctant to say that its usage is always appropriate. I’m trying to discover exactly when and how such technology should be used. If used incorrectly, Social BPM could cause more harm than good and lead to inefficiency based on time lags, etc. My blog series is an attempt to examine these issues in more detail.

    Dick

  • Dick –

    I think you’re right that it isn’t always appropriate. I think for the collaborative/consensus-building phases of defining the process, it is very appropriate – but during execution, it isn’t clear that the “social” aspects add more value, rather than adding more risk. And yet I can still come up with some interesting mashup use cases there – for example, interview feedback on a candidate; post-mortem on a sales process or other non-structured process; capturing tips-n-tricks for future users.

  • Dick –

    I think you’re right that it isn’t always appropriate. I think for the collaborative/consensus-building phases of defining the process, it is very appropriate – but during execution, it isn’t clear that the “social” aspects add more value, rather than adding more risk. And yet I can still come up with some interesting mashup use cases there – for example, interview feedback on a candidate; post-mortem on a sales process or other non-structured process; capturing tips-n-tricks for future users.