The 2×2 chart of BPM Niches
- March 22, 2011
- 1 Comments
Jacob Ukelson’s post about extending Data Loss Prevention through ACM took time out to list out four areas of “process” work if you will:
- BPM (Business Process Management) – The focus is on structured data (forms) and structured flow.
- ECM (Enterprise Content Management) – The focus is on unstructured data (documents) and structured flow.
- DCM (Dynamic Case Management) – The focus is on structured+unstructured data (forms and documents) and semi-structured flow.
- ACM – The focus is on structured+unstructured data (forms and documents) and unstructured flow.
Sandy Kemsley commented on Twitter that she sees these four ideas as more of a spectrum from more structured to more unstructured, rather than four distinct areas. I agree. In fact, she later wrote a detailed post about it, including the following depiction:
Sandy’s working on a whitepaper on the subject, which I’m looking forward to reading, as I happen to agree with her starting point thesis (and her visualization is better than mine, in this post!)
Another visualization is with two axes, however- “Data” and “Process” – which can exist across some wide spectrum of how much structure is there. The standard 2×2 chart comes to mind. One might draw it like this:
This would likely make everyone outside of the BPM “purists” happy. But it isn’t quite representative, as it makes it look like the four boxes are really distinct, rather than blurry. And the placement of ACM and DCM isn’t right on this chart, but bear with me.
But as Sandy noted, it isn’t clear that the other three things aren’t also “BPM”. The chart many BPM practitioners would draw for this looks like the following, with BPM dominating the landscape and covering a wide spectrum, and the other ideas covering rather smaller areas of the spectrum.
I think this is how many BPM practitioners see the world (whether we agree or disagree with this view, we can agree some people hold this view). Note, the spectrum is not weighted based on the number of processes – the density of processes in each pixel, if you will. I think most people would agree that there are more unstructured processes than structured ones in the universe today.
A third view that I’m seeing emerge: It is all BPM and we’re just talking about the definitions of different branches of the main tree. Some would argue, reasonably, that this dilutes what “BPM” means too much, and some would argue that arguing that something that walks like process and talks like process should be considered “in scope” for BPM.
Jacob and I agree that the differences are largely one of focus – of the vendors and of the practitioners, rather than technical capability. Keeping in mind that the differences in focus might make it much easier or much harder to deliver a solution in the sweet spot of one of these approaches to process.