Anatoly recently posted on the future of BPM - replacement or extension?
Of course to me the answer is obvious at this point - it is extend, refine, deepen.? Replacement is, at this point, a waste of effort.? Anatoly takes aim at the analysts and vendors promoting iBPM:
Gartner, Pega and IBM are pushing new acronyms:
IBO = Intelligent Business Operations
iBPMS = Intelligent Business Process Management Suite
According to the experts, the concepts behind the acronyms aren?t exceptionally new - it?s evolutionary integration of related technologies: BPMS, BAM, BRE, CEP, ACM? Looks like someone decided it?s time to put new labels over the old BPM/BPMS.
I?m not personally convinced that the market will accept this labeling game. Attempts to announce the ?post-BPM? solution was made in the past (Intalio) and are made today (Metasonic) without much success. This time the heavyweights are in play however.
I would like to see the breakthroughs in technology and methodology, not acronyms.
With the last statement I'm in full agreement.? With regard to how this started, from the bleachers here in the US, it looks like Gartner started things rolling (and near the same time, Forrester started talking about "Big Process"), and one of the two big vendors jumped on the bandwagon for iBPM.? Naturally the other has to follow to help maintain their position(s) in the Gartner Quadrants, etc.
I would hope customers see through the relabeling of things (just as they do with extra special detergents, soaps, and other household products).
(Note: I attempted to comment on Anatoly's blog but was getting a form submit error, so commenting here instead! )