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
  • 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...

  • 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: )