!Process Cafe Process Cafe

Bowling and BPM - All style, no skill

I went to the local bowling alley this weekend to celebrate a birthday with a couple of friends (not my birthday, don't worry you haven't missed anything). This alley is quite small (20 lanes) and only half the lanes were being used.

Those lanes that were being used were populated by a rather motley group of folks from an uncertain demographic - although our group was by far the oldest.

What I found interesting to watch was the different styles and approaches to bowling.

I think it's safe to say that most people were trying their best to throw the ball down the lane and hit the pins at the end. But within that criteria there were a number of diverse methods of doing this.

1) All style no substance.
The young guys in the lane adjacent to me were trying to impress their girlfriends. They had chosen to use a ball that was far lighter than one they should be using in order to be able to throw it a great deal faster than was necessary. However they were obviously working under the impression that throwing the ball hard and fast was enough to guarantee a strike. As it happened throwing the ball hard and fast was enough - in their case - to guarantee the ball ended up in the gutter quicker and with a loud bang. They had no talent for the game whatsoever. But their throwing action looked good to the girls.

2) Trying hard but ill equipped.
In the lane on the other side were a group of girls who were amongst the demographic which would best be described as 'overweight or obese' They were obviously out to have fun but were constricted by the fact that they were unable to move fast, nor were they able to bend down to release the ball along the lane. As a consequence they would shuffle to the foul line, swing the arm back and - as the ball reached their thigh on the follow through - release it towards the pins. It would arc through the air for a metre or two before contacting the ground with a crack. Invariably it would bounce off line and roll rather forlornly down towards the target. Occasionally this would result in two or three pins being knocked over, but generally it would fall into the gutter.

3) Just starting out. Using all the aids.
In my own group we had Doris. Doris (not her real name) is a women of a certain age who likes to attend our evenings out and remind herself what she's missing. Doris has leg and back pains and knows she can't bowl well. But she insists on stacking the cards in her favour when she plays. She always has the lane bumpers raised and she usually uses the learners frame to release the ball initially. As a result she can score quite well. She never has a gutter ball and the ball never bounces off line the way it would do if she were to drop it onto the lane like our friends in the adjacent lane.

4) Theoretically good. Needs practice.
I fall into this group. I know the theory of ten-pin bowling. I know the best angle of approach to use to get a strike. I know how to use the markings at the end of the lane to help with the aim. Indeed on several occasions I can score strikes and spares  almost with impunity. But in amongst that I know that in order to be any good at this game I need to play more often than once every eight or nine months.

5) All the gear. No idea.
In this group we have one of my co-players from last night. He has his own bowling ball - which he brings out whenever we invite him to play. He has a rehearsed routine for each throw. He can score quite well when his luck is in. But at the end of the day he has no finesse, no style and looks just plain silly when he bowls. This usually reflects in his score. For a guy with his own bowling ball he should be scoring strike after strike and leaving the rest of the amateurs behind. Unfortunately he never does.

So what has this got to do with BPM?

As I was watching the various people attempting to put up a good score with their different styles it occurred to me that there are great parallels with the folks who are attempting to implement BPM in their organisations:

1) All style no substance.
This would be the organisation who have seized upon BPM and process management as something they can do to try and impress senior management. They've obviously spoken to folks who have done this successfully and know what a good implementation looks like. Unfortunately knowing what one looks like and producing a good one themselves are two completely different things. They try different things, look professional and cool while doing it but end up throwing gutter balls all the time.

2) Trying hard but ill equipped
This group encompasses the organisations who have had BPM thrust upon them when they were not wanting it or not ready for it. They are trying hard to do things 'the old way' and cannot get their minds around the fact that things will need to change before they are able to make the most of this opportunity

3) Just starting out. Using all the aids.
Personally I like this group. They know that they don't know a lot about this. But they're willing to learn. They take advantage of any support they can get from the toolset, vendors or outside agencies. They attend the full training classes and learn whatever they can about BPM. Then they take small steps.

4) Theoretically good. Needs practice
The theoretically good group include those companies who have probably progressed from the previous level ('Just starting out. Using all the aids'), but have - for some reason - not continued on. They know that they can do this. They have the knowledge and experience to produce good quality BPM work. But they are rusty or lacking in practice.

5) All the gear. No idea
Finally we have what - to me - is the bulk of BPM customers. Usually they are large entities who have 'seen the light' and managed to wangle a significant budget from senior management to implement BPM. They've studied what needs to be studied, bought what needs to be bought, have attempted to implement the right things but are working from a position, basically, of ignorance. They don't really understand what they are doing with BPM. They don't understand why they are really doing this but they know that with the money and expertise they are throwing at it they should be able to produce something world class. Unfortunately that never seems to be the case.

Obviously some of the above statements are generalisations. But it did strike me as significant that something like ten pin bowling would have a number of parallels in the BPM world. Can any of my readers say with any authority that they don't agree with at least some of the classes I have mentioned above?

More to the point can they recognise themselves (or their clients) in any of the classes I have listed?





Reminder: 'The Perfect Process Project Second Edition' is now available. Don't miss the chance to get this valuable insight into how to make business processes work for you. Click this link and follow the instructions to get this book.


All information is Copyright (C) G Comerford  
See related info below

Why so few women in BPM?

I wrote recently about some of my favourite BPM bloggers. One of the comments I mentioned within there was the fact that only 2 females made the list.

It got me thinking: "Why is BPM a male dominated domain?"

In reality it shouldn't actually be so. There is nothing specifically masculine about BPM as a concept. In fact I've worked on projects with lots of females who were particularly well suited to the role and were able to grasp the concepts much easier than some of the males in the group (as with a lot of things....).

Throughout my years of blogging and following BPM I have only really come across two well known female BPM bloggers and they are Sandy Kemsley and Connie Moore. Both of them have deep industry experience. Sandy is an independant and Connie is currently with Foresster Group. Add to that list Elise Olding who is a well respected Gartner analyst who has only recently moved into the blogging sphere, and you can see that the field is very small indeed.

Why is this?

Is it because there are - in fact - a huge number of talented female BPM practitioners who choose to work below the radar and not publicise themselves?

Or is it that BPM does not attract a large female following and is predominantly a male discipline?

It can't be the blogging itself because there are literally thousands and thousands of really good female bloggers out there. It can't be the BPM because - as I mentioned earlier - there are many females involved in the practice of BPM itself.

So what is it - any thoughts...?

Do you know of good, female BPM bloggers I should be following? Let me know in the comments.




Reminder: 'The Perfect Process Project Second Edition' is now available. Don't miss the chance to get this valuable insight into how to make business processes work for you. Click this link and follow the instructions to get this book.


All information is Copyright (C) G Comerford  
See related info below

10 BPM Blogs you should be following

One of the things I like about my role as a BPM blogger is the fact that I get to link up with (and to) so many excellent BPM bloggers in the field. Some of these are specific industry bloggers, some are general Architecture/BPM bloggers, and some are vendor specific.

What I wanted to do today was to give you a list of the folks I read on a regular basis to make sure you are linking in to the best

  • Bruce Silver: Bruce is the daddy of BPMN, has been in the business for years and knows BPMN like the back of his hand (he should do - he helped write it)
  • Jim Sinur: He's been with Global360 and Gartner and he is the industry analyst for the BPM sector. His writing is often formal and rigid, but that doesn't take away from the value of his contents.
  • Theo Priestley: He's the Process Maverick, always ready to try and upset the applecart when it comes to BPM. When he talks it pays to listen to what he's saying
  • Adam Deane: Witty, sometimes caustic, but always on the money.  Posts quite regularly. Always worth a read, especially his weekly roundup of the best BPM quotes.
  • Sandy Kemsley: One of only two women on the list (which is a discussion point in itself). She attends and presents a lot at BPM conferences around the world and always has some useful insight into the latest movements in the BPM market. Her blog is 'Column 2'
  • The Process Ninja: He's Australian based and blogs about real-life applications of process. I look forward to his posts.
  • Connie Moore: The Forrester analyst for BPM and the other woman on the list. Finger on the pulse, covers the industry and the general BPM environment.
  • Bouncing Thoughts - Jaisundar from Stanford on BPM, CRM and CPM.
  • Thomas Olbrich. A German who blogs in English and German and who wrote my favourite BPM blog entry ever.
  • Ashish Bhagwat - Posts on BPM at The Eclectic Zone

Now remember this is just my list. You probably have your own. That's fine. But if you add these guys to your RSS reader you're guaranteed to be kept in the loop

Enjoy!








Reminder: 'The Perfect Process Project Second Edition' is now available. Don't miss the chance to get this valuable insight into how to make business processes work for you. Click this link and follow the instructions to get this book.

All information is Copyright (C) G Comerford See related info below

Top posts for the month of July - Process Cafe

Usually at the beginning of the month I send you through a list of the most popular posts from the blog over the last thirty days. I'm still going to do that. But what I found is that there appear to be regular posts that come up every month. I think the reason is that by highlighting what the popular posts are for a given month more people will check them out during the month and hence they will remain popular over the following 30-or-so days.

What I therefore wanted to do was to give you a list of some of the more popular posts from a response or feedback point of view. This will broaden the possibly base of information you can look at and, maybe, highlight a couple of posts you might want to read.

So here goes. The top five posts for July 2010

1. My thoughts on Gartner's BPM Magic Quadrant

2. Silo Thinking and why it is bad


3. Your Criteria for choosing a BPM tool

4. Review - Lombardi Blueprint modeling tool


5. The Tao of on-line processes (Or how Amazon are doing it right)

You might also want to check out the following posts from last year:

Process inconsistencies hit the customer .. again
Why we aren't Storming The Bastille of processes
Health checks for processes: Treat them like you would your own body
It's a TRAP: Documenting processes rather than managing them


I'm also going to be tweeting some blog posts links from the last couple of years over the coming weeks. If you wish to follow me on twitter you can do so at @gaz4695

Thanks to everyone who visited the site last month. I hope you keep coming back and finding interesting articles to read and comment on.




Reminder: 'The Perfect Process Project Second Edition' is now available. Don't miss the chance to get this valuable insight into how to make business processes work for you. Click this link and follow the instructions to get this book.


All information is Copyright (C) G Comerford  
See related info below

What tools should be in a BA's toolbox for BPM?

There is a great little discussion going on in the BPM Nexus forum at the moment.

The topic is 'What tools should be in a BA's toolbox for BPM?'

Instinctively (As a BA and process analyst myself) I replied "As I've said many times before both in forums and my blog 'If all you have is a hammer then every problem is a nail'. By this I mean that trying to solve your problems through the use of tools alone is inappropriate unless you have the right tools."

The discussion itself has actually moved on a little since then with the introduction of a clarifying statement which basically says that 'Most tools that are currently out on the market are too expensive for a consultant to use themselves (i.e. without being part of a large project)'. I'm not sure I agree with that completely, knowing, for example, that there are consultants out there who have complimentary licenses for some BPM tools as a result of work they have performed with vendors.

It is true to say, though, that as a single consultant with your own company it can sometimes be difficult to get any traction with some of the larger vendors (and there are examples in the forum which illustrate that).

It would be interesting to get the thoughts of some of the readers of this blog on two questions:

1) Are there any tools you absolutely must have as a BA for BPM?
2) Do these tools come easily to you or is it a struggle to get any sort of interest with the vendors?

Either reply in the comments section below or - if you are not already a member, go to the BPM Nexus, join up (It's free of charge) and add your comment to the forum

Here's hoping for a good discussion.




Reminder: 'The Perfect Process Project Second Edition' is now available. Don't miss the chance to get this valuable insight into how to make business processes work for you. Click this link and follow the instructions to get this book.


All information is Copyright (C) G Comerford  
See related info below

Is there a single point of failure in your process?

I'm a big fan of shows like 'Air Crash Investigation' on the National Geographic channel. As the show dissects the reasons behind some of the biggest and most famous plane crashes that have occurred since man started to fly, one thing that always seems to crop up is that an accident is usually never the result of a single thing.

The worst crash in aviation history between two 747's in Tenerife in 1974 was a result of pilot impatience coupled with bad weather and unclear communication between the pilot and co-pilot.

When a small commuter plane crashed on take-off in Charlotte, North Carolina it was a result of inaccurate maintenance coupled with outdated weight computation methods.

The crash of an Avianca plane into Long Island after it ran out of fuel was a result of one of the pilots not having good English coupled with the second pilot not clarifying the emergency nature of the fuel.

With all these accidents any one of the issues in isolation could have been dealt with, but add them all together and you get to a situation where an accident is bound to occur

This got me thinking about processes and single points of failure.

Will a process on the whole fail as a result of a failure at one point in the process? Sometimes the answer is 'Yes' (In my last post about the use of procedures by NASA, missing a single step in a procedure could quite easily jepoardise the whole shuttle flight), but in many situations a single failure will not be catastrophic. An earlier post I wrote referred to bad process design in airline web-sites. In the example quoted, a bug meant that addresses with punctuation in them (such as the period in 'St. Leonards' would be rejected) but this could be bypassed by removing the offending punctuation and the booking could continue. But remove the punctuation, omit an expiry date on a credit card payment and put an incorrect email in the relevant fields and the booking is doomed to failure.

How many of your processes have a single point of failure? Should they have one, or more than one? Or none?



Reminder: 'The Perfect Process Project Second Edition' is now available. Don't miss the chance to get this valuable insight into how to make business processes work for you. Click this link and follow the instructions to get this book.


All information is Copyright (C) G Comerford  
See related info below

NASA is process based: Is that good or bad?

Did you know that every single step in the life of a Space Shuttle is run through documented procedures? That's right, from running the countdown clock to how to repack the parachutes that stop the Solid Rocket Boosters from crashing into the Atlantic Ocean fast enough to destroy themselves, everything is procedure based.

This means that everything can be guaranteed to be identical every time something happens.

Of course there is a downside to this. We all know that there have been two massive Space Shuttle disasters neither of which was a result of a procedure issue but both of which resulted in procedure changes. After the Challenger disaster in the 80's the procedure for Solid Rocket Booster assembly was changed to add an extra O-Ring between the sections. After the re-entry disintegration over Texas the lift-off procedure was changed to ensure that ALL footage of the lift-off was reviewed during the mission to identify potential damage to heat shielding from falling debris.

So if one of the most procedure driven organisations in the world is forced to modify their process and procedure as a result of issues and incidents, does this make you think that you should be looking at things like that too?

How many procedures does your company have? When was the last time they were reviewed? How often do you check that they are all followed exactly? Do you allow shortcuts?

Watch the footage of the Challenger exploding over Florida in 1983 and ask yourself if this could have been prevented through a procedural change.



Reminder: 'The Perfect Process Project Second Edition' is now available. Don't miss the chance to get this valuable insight into how to make business processes work for you. Click this link and follow the instructions to get this book.


All information is Copyright (C) G Comerford See related info below