Sandy Kemsley gets the Scoop on ISIS Papyrus

Scott Francis
Next Post
Previous Post

One of the invaluable contributions independent consultants like Sandy make to the field of BPM is cross-pollinating information between otherwise disconnected communities. One of the products I’ve been curious about for years – ever since I started participating in the BPM community online and reading Max Pucher’s contributions – is ISIS Papyrus.

Sandy’s posts on the ISIS Papyrus conference are the best outside information I’ve seen yet on the product and company.  I recommend reading the posts to get a different perspective on BPM (ISIS’ perspective), and to learn about a product you might actually want to use.

From her coverage, some of the best and worst of Max Pucher captured right here:

He maintains that you can’t start transforming your business with the process: you start with people, then planning, then programs, then projects and finally process. In understanding the systems of record, it’s important to start with business architecture to define objectives, map those to capabilities and end-to-end processes: the business language of process. Then, business information can be mapped to the underlying systems, and business transactions can be modeled as services against those systems. The true flexibility, however, needs to be in the systems of engagement: this is where business people need to be able to adapt processes to meet the needs of the customers.

Max has a knack for sweeping statements – but translating these into actionable / tangible action is difficult for most mortals. Not unlike certain other luminaries in our field of work.

It looks like the heritage in document management shows through in the handling of inbound and outbound documents (correspondence) :

Regardless of whether the document is created interactively or in batch, that single document can be rendered to multiple output channels as required, including hardcopy and a large variety of online formats. This can include functions such as pooling for combined enveloping (something that I wish my brokerage could learn, rather than sending me multiple confirmations in multiple envelopes on the same day), confirming that a printed document was sent, and handling returned paper and electronic mail. Supporting CMIS allows them to store the documents in other content repositories, not just within their own repository.

It sounds pretty robust.  And, as Sandy points out: “…it’s something that comes up in many of the BPM implementations that I’m involved in, and typically isn’t handled all that well (if at all) by those systems. In many cases, it’s a poorly implemented afterthought, performed in a non-integrated fashion in another system, or becomes one of those things that the users ask for but just never receive.” – Couldn’t agree more on that front.

Sandy’s coverage included a case study (China Trust Commercial Bank), and mobile capabilities:

They provide a mobile app that acts as a portal to any application developed on their platform; Forrester has recently identified this functionality as “mobile backend as a service”, where the application is defined on the server, not on the device, and accesses data and user interface components from the server.

This approach really fits ISIS Papyrus’ stated design goals (minimizing technical efforts once you get past the systems integrations).  Its the favored approach by BPM vendors to-date.  I did like some of the integrations that ship out of the box, like Access to LinkedIn contacts, that aren’t typical of BPM software packages.

 In another post, there’s also a good point about ACM– which ISIS Papyrus supports:

ISIS Papyrus stresses that ACM is just a capability of their content processing platform, and I think that this is part of the confusion around the definition of ACM: ACM is about how we do work, so requires a combination of activities, content, rules, user interface, and integration with external systems. However, there are a lot of application development environments that provide some or all of that without being defined as ACM, and more traditional BPM products are redefining themselves as ACM by adding some of these capabilities even if it’s not a good fit with their underlying infrastructure.

Thanks, Sandy, for bringing some of this content to light, and for really “sacrificing” for the BPM community by traveling to Vienna!

 




  • I am completely selfless in my goal to cover BPM conferences in interesting places. ;-)

    •  yes, i can see it was quite the sacrifice! :)