Showing posts with label pracademia. Show all posts
Showing posts with label pracademia. Show all posts

Wednesday, 7 December 2011

The Modesty of Writing

Blogging, e-books, and social networks have all increased the speed at which we communicate—or, from a Luhmannian perspective, how we share our utterances with the communication. For DIY publishers, the Internet is an infinitely rich channel for publishing their own content and making it available to readers and consumers at exactly the same premises as previously professional channels. And that is awesome: the Internet has democratised the way we make available and publish our thought and ideas. Recently, I have become involved in a book on cybernetics and enterprise architecture. The book was initially thought to be available through a DIY publisher and furthermore freely available as an e-book. However, due to increasing interest from traditional publisher, the book will now be published through a traditional publication channel. To me, both opportunities are equally exciting.
However, the rapid speed of immediate “publication” comes at the cost of lack of modesty, patience, and maturity. Some people use blogs to quickly fabricate and churn out trivial variations on the same topic over and over and flood the public sphere with their own opinions in a synthetic, insubstantial manner. Proof-reading is completely unheard of; proper referencing to prior art and information sources is considered almost arcane. Blogging is supposed to be a quick, responsive medium. However, when people post entire book chapters or even book manuscripts through the same source and under the same preconditions, the form and shape of blogging have certainly moved in the wrong direction. The fundamental problem is that people with blogs tend to lack the modesty of traditional writers, academics, and publishers. For blogging “pracademics”, this is furthermore caused by the lack of patience for peer-reviewed publications. Preparing a good paper can take months before it is accepted and published. For the average blogger with lots of intentions, it is, of course, a lot easier to churn out one blog post after another with incoherent fragments of argumentation and structure. If post-modernism had a place in the history of literary shapes and forms, blogging would certainly be its most significant incarnation.
Writers, researchers, and bloggers alike must return to the tradition of when pages were sparse and publication a controlled, rigorous process requiring discipline and modesty. Only through modesty have the most purposeful, unique utterances, be they peer-reviewed publications or news items, been created.

Friday, 18 February 2011

Quality Criteria for BPMS Programs

Recently, I have been initiating a Business Process Management System (BPMS) implementation for a major client in the financial sector. This made me wonder: how can I come up with a set of BPMS-specific, practical quality criteria for successfully implementing a flexible, repetitive, and fast BPMS platform? However, some people are not aware of the important distinction between BPM (Business Process Management) as a management philosophy discipline and BPMS as an enterprise IT program:
  • BPM is defined as the overall management philosophy, which frames the enterprise as consisting of a set of end-to-end business processes. These processes, in combination, deliver value to the organisation's clients. Improving the enterprise means architecting, improving, and managing these processes for better outcomes. 
  • BPMS is a collection of software tools and systems engineering practices based on process management thinking. BPMS realises the modelling, automation, execution, and monitoring of business processes on a common, single-instance runtime platform, often through the use of open, well-defined service contracts (such as web services). 
Some vendors equate workflow tools to BPMS, which is not necessarily the case. An enterprise BPMS often involves implementing a workflow. However, the key notion is that modelling and executing business transactions as processes yields predictability and transparency. 

My work has inspired me to pursue writing a pracademic paper on common quality criteria and heuristics for enterprise BPMS implementations, particularly concerning roles, values, expected outcomes, actual outcomes, pitfalls, and general performance improvements. What worked and why? What didn't work out as expected? What business criteria should the CIO and solution architect focus on when planning or building the business case for BPMS? How did can one ensure a higher quality BPMS? 
Granted, several IT governance frameworks already provide generic measures and KPI's. What I am interested in is the process- and IS-specific criteria and measures relating directly to BPMS programs.