Open vs. Closed

  • June 15, 2010
  • Scott
  • 3 Comments

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
  • May 24, 2018
  • Ariana
  • 0 Comments

How can C-level executives recognize problems within their operations Chairman, Lance Gibbs reveals how to cat...

  • May 9, 2018
  • Andrew
  • 0 Comments

BP3 now has a customer live with the next generation of task federation in IBM BPM. While the Brazos portal h...

  • May 3, 2018
  • Ariana
  • 1 Comments

RPA Business Use Cases from BP3. How do you identify where to use Robotic Process Automation (RPA) in you...

  • 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

  • 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: )