The First "BPM in Review" Post of 2010
Alberto Manuel’s excellent blog takes on the “year in review” post before anyone else this year! He’s clearly a fan of the emergence of the ACM meme, and not a fan of the Social BPM meme. He takes issue with BPMN2’s complexity:
BPMN 2.0: Well the new standard finally hit the cloud doesn’t it? I hate BPMN for the following reasons: – It takes more time to draw a process with BPMN that other process notation language; – Never provided 100% compliance with BPEL and XPDL, providing data loss when importing the never ending, complicated, difficult to understand flowcharts (read my previous post on Antiamba about this). Anyway despite all the clutter provided it’s becoming a standard, because BPM community never cared about how processes should be mapped.Well, I don’t fault BPMN2 for not complying with BPEL – that argument has been fought and won – BPEL doesn’t represent everything BPMN can represent without losing data/information – that’s a deficiency of BPEL’s representation more than BPMN’s. I wouldn’t impugn the intent of the BPM community to having “never cared” about how processes should be mapped. Bruce Silver, for example, is part of the BPM/BPMN community and he clearly cares (and has the classes and writings to prove it! ). I’m also more optimistic about the PKBoK effort than he is (although, the name seems horribly circular and redundant…. ). These types of efforts take a long time, however, so it isn’t like anyone should be waiting on the output of PKBoK to get started on their BPM initiatives! I’m not quite ready to look back on 2010 and sum it up. That’ll have to wait til a bit closer to end of year.