Keith Swenson, in his best Sandy Kemsley impression, captured really good notes on Jim Sinur's keynote at iBPMS Expo a few days ago:
It used to be that a business model would be in effect for many years. But now executives need to be on top of it, because there is no such thing as a static business model. [...]
Processes evaporate in an agent world. Full cycle is observe, orient, decide, and act. (Reference to John Boyd) Processes are only the ?act? part. It is going to work like a fighter jet. Every two years someone says ?BPM is dead?. Jim doesn?t buy that. There are plenty of healthy BPM vendors. However, BPM is not dead, but they need to be more responsive in real time.
Couldn't agree more with respect to BPM being dead.? If BPM is dead, business sure is good.? And my favorite part:
People fight about ?should I model or should I not model?. In the future you will have models that show what happened. There is nothing wrong with planning by starting with a model. What is wrong is turning that into a theology. It is a starting point, and that is all. Do it, try it, fix it. Ok to start with a model, but not OK to try to make it perfect.
Great discussion/approach to be pragmatic.? And finally, a way to measure intelligence:
If we want to talk about intelligent agents, we need to find a scientific way of measuring intelligence.? Jim introduced the Cumulative Process Intelligence Quotient. There are five dimensions: (1) raw intelligence, (20 social intelligence, (3) agility, (4) autonomy, and (5) visualization. Autonomy is the thing that made him think that distributed agents is the right thing.
This might not affect your next BPM project, but it gives you a sense of what people are thinking about in our BPM marketspace / headspace.? And I love getting the different perspectives on the subject that someone like Jim (or Keith) brings to the table.? Now I have to go think about the convergence of quadcopters and intelligent agents in processes...!