No Ambiguity, Only Surprises

  • April 1, 2013
  • Scott
  • 0 Comments

There are some interesting observations I had coming out of bpmNEXT that didn’t fit neatly into the summary blog post.

During ITP Commerce’s presentation at bpmNEXT, they talked at some length about the notion of style in BPMN, and a key issue being vagueness – the hardest to determine.  When you’re modeling for business-user understanding, there’s often a fair amount of vagueness in the model – of ambiguity.  And that’s not entirely bad- because it simplifies the explanation of the model.

But it occurred to me – when you’re modeling for execution, there’s no ambiguity, only surprises!

Because at execution time, a BPMN engine will always resolve in a deterministic way – the model isn’t “ambiguous” to the execution engine, it is specific.  So what’s left?  Surprises – the difference between what the execution model does, and what the modeler thought it would do.

So if you’re modeling BPMN for execution – keep that in mind.  There’s no ambiguity when you’re done – but if you aren’t careful, there may be surprises!

 

Related Posts
  • June 15, 2017
  • Krista
  • 0 Comments

We are excited to announce our first customer speaker for Driven 2017. Quang Ton, leader of Schlumberger's pro...

  • June 12, 2017
  • Scott
  • 0 Comments

We had the pleasure of presenting Brazos CX Insights to the bpmNEXT 2017 conference in April.  As we've previ...

  • June 11, 2017
  • Scott
  • 2 Comments

Anatoly does a great job of explaining the event types and why you really only need 5 or 6 of them to fully ex...