Process for the Enterprise
«
»

Open vs. Closed

June 15th, 2010 by Scott Francis

Interesting article and followup discussion on the nature of Open vs. Closed, by Chris Dixon.  It would be interesting thought experiment to characterize BPM in a similar fashion into dimensions and open/closed plotted against product offerings.  You could imagine this chart from Chris:

OS vs. platform (originally from Tom Elsenmann, et al)

We could list on the left column, database, appserver, etc.  But perhaps the most relevant items would be:

End User (browser-based, likely)

Authoring User (BPMN visualization)

Authoring User (BPMN data)

Engine (BPM engine)

Solution Provider (SIs, value added software resellers)

Platform Sponsor (BPM suite supplier)

…

At least, its interesting to think about the BPM space and what open means- each vendor is open and “closed” in different ways, which has an impact depending on the consumers of that solution.

Related posts:

  1. Will Open Source Software Meet the Challenge? Activiti Enters the Ring
  2. The March of Open Source
  3. Universal Translators, Open Source, and BPMN 2
  4. jBPM supporting BPMN2
  5. Alfresco/Activity Contributing to BPMN 2 Effort

Tags:

This entry was posted on Tuesday, June 15th, 2010 at 8:48 am and is filed under News, Technology. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site.

  • Pingback: Tweets that mention Process for the Enterprise » Blog Archive » Open vs. Closed -- Topsy.com

  • Bruce Silver

    Scott,
    So don't stop there. Where is your chart of BPMSs?
    –Bruce

  • http://www.bp-3.com/blogs sfrancis

    ok Bruce, you caught me – I didn't finish the job. I started to go down this road and realized there are so many BPMSes out there it might be impossible :)

    However, if you're interested in collaborating with me I'll tee it up and populate as many as I can think of, and then we can let various vendors tell us if we have them mis-characterized: )