Installing Oracle BPMN (BPA) in silent mode

I have been asked this specific question about how to install the Oracle BPMN tool, BPA in silent mode. Thanks Paco for reminding me again! Here you go with a simple 2 step process on how to do this:

- Record mode & Silent mode: Step 1: Record mode - http://helpnet.macrovision.com/robo/projects/helplibdevstudio9/IHelpSetup_EXECmdLine.htm#rParam Step 2: Silent mode - http://helpnet.macrovision.com/robo/projects/helplibdevstudio9/IHelpSetup_EXECmdLine.htm#sParam

Multipool BPMN example

Enclosed is an example of a BPMN process in a pool interacting with another BPMN pool. Also noteworthy is the correct usage of event based gateway. I am using Oracle BPMN solution's latest version to model this diagram. The BPMN visual extension capability has been used to create the color coded human (green) and automated (blue) tasks. This will further enhance the readability of the BPMN diagaram in Oracle BPA Suite.

Compensation in BPMN

How would users model a compensation in Oracle's BPMN tool? Apologies David for the delay, here you go:
In this example, if the BPMN activity "credit check" fails for some reason, the process refunds the credit card charges.

Process Levels - Ask the basic questions

I was in a training class again last week. The quintessential question came up as to how many levels of processes should be there. Should we have one process that covers all levels of details? That would be akin to mapping your IT process using BPMN. How does it reflect the simplicity of the business users?

Answers ranged from 0, zero to 4 to 7.

This reminded me of an earlier discussion with Dr Naci Akkok - credit is due here.
He said think about what question is the model answering. Is it answering the "what" question or the "how" question. Users will need at least these two levels - one that answers what happens in my organization; the other level or levels that answers the how question.

Now its important to realize that its better to draw boundaries of how many levels of what questions and how many of how questions would we want to address. This will prevent proliferation of levels and will also mandate and facilitate common understanding. I would love to put a number out here as a recommendation but it would vary with the organization and the complexity of processes therein. I would recommend a number between 2 and 4 should be good enough to capture the details of business processes in your organization.
Oracle BPA Suite provides for multiple levels of processes. BPMN process levels can be further detailed.

Reminder - Disclaimer: The views expressed are entirely my own and do not reflect those of Oracle or a methodology of using Oracle BPA Suite.

Workflow Patterns

I looked at the control flow patterns as identified by WorkFlow patterns team here: http://www.workflowpatterns.com/patterns/control/index.php
The BPMN models published here refer to these patterns and you can visit the said website for semantic description of each pattern.

Synchronization pattern in BPMN

This is how one could model synchronization pattern using BPMN. I am using Oracle BPMN solution (Oracle BPA Suite) to model these patterns.

Structured Synchronizing Merge with BPMN

This is an example of how I would model structured synchronizing merge.
I am using Oracle BPMN solution (Oracle BPA Suite) to model these patterns.
Hers is a better example of the structured synchronizing merge.

Parallel Split in BPMN

This is how we model parallel split using BPMN; I am using Oracle BPMN solution (Oracle BPA Suite) to model these patterns.

Multiple Choice in BPMN

This is how one could model multiple choice in BPMN.
I am using Oracle BPMN solution (Oracle BPA Suite) to model these patterns.

Oracle BPA Suite Media coverage

There is a nice coverage about Oracle BPMN solution (the Oracle BPA Suite) in SD Times here:
http://www.sdtimes.com/article/story-20071015-04.html

Oracle BPA Suite Media coverage

There is a nice coverage about Oracle BPA Suite in SD Times here:

http://www.sdtimes.com/article/story-20071015-04.html

BPMN diagram updates - who owns Business or IT?

Talking to a prospective customer, the inevitable question cropped up what happens if IT suggests changes to blueprint. Should IT be allowed to modify the process definition at all. Since Business owns BPMN diagrams, should implementation be allowed to update the business process defintion.

In my opinion it should be left to individual implementing organizations. THe tools should support both options: allowing IT to update the Business process and preventing it. Lets give the control to business and IT users and let them decide what changes are allowed. Every organization will have its own dynamics.

• Some orgs, where IT is deeply entrenched and understands business for a long time, can definitely benefit from the flexibility.
• Other organizations may have a more strict guidelines and controls over the BP definition with business users.
• Some other orgs may identify process architects who can make the decision and controls / vets the process definition both before and after implementation.

Another interesting thing that was pointed out was the need for best practices and supporting trainings / tutorials / documents detailing how the tools should be used. I strongly think empowering customers with the capabilities of the tools is the key to successful adoption. I hope this blog is also contributing to the same.

At Office 2.0

Folks I was at Office 2.0 and I would try and sync up with the people that I met there.
http://www.o2con.com/people/vishal.saxena;jsessionid=A7F221E984F3858FB020958DF60AA229

Lanes and Pools

I was doing a training recently and the audience was predominantly technical. They knew WSDL, BPEL, JCA etc. One question that came up was why do we need lanes and pools. There is no implementation artifact being directly created based on lanes.
I could easily point that Pools are process boundaries, and I could see heads nodding. Even then questions remained about boundaries of pools. Then the question became why lanes?
At that point I realized that it is more important to emphasize the reason why people do BPM. It is not just to draw pretty pictures, it is :
to have a common understanding of processes;
to identify and document their processes as is;
to identify inter and intra departmental communications;
to find the bottlenecks;
to ensure that the processes as defined / documented is the same as implemented.

Once you see this value proposition of a BPM project, the value of pools and lanes becomes obvious. Pools help you identify the exact boundaries of your process. Pools will also show you inter-departmental communications - often the bottlenecks.
Lanes facilitate clear identification of roles and responsibilities within the organization. Identification of ownership of a given activity is at times the biggest reason why that activity will be performed in time. The intra communication points between various parts of your organization can be found using lanes.

That in summary is the value of using lanes and pools to document your process.

Business and IT views

I have been looking at the perspective of a business user and comparing that with one of an IT developer. Very interesting observation: let me begin with an example,
Business user view (BPMN):
1. Lets do a credit check. (Activity)
2. If good score do X, if avg do Y and if below avg do Z. (Gateway)

How does this get implemented by IT
Step 1: Credit Check.
1. How do we do credit check - automatic using a computer system or a human operator keying in values and getting the credit score?
2. Is it existing customer or a new customer?
--If existing and in good standing do we still need a credit check?

--- If not existing customer, lets get credit score from Experian.
3. Or should we get multiple scores and then average them out.
4. What happens if I dont get a response back from Experian in 2 minutes given a SSN? Should our IT system try multiple times - of course but then how many 5 -10 and at what interval?

These are SOME of the challenges that your IT staff will need to answer to implement a so called single step in your business process.
Does the solution you are looking at provide this ability?
Moreover, if Experian astarted charging you more $ for the credit check how easily can you move your business to start using scores from Equifax?
Will you need professional services from the vendor to make changes?
Or do you think the solution is standards based so you can have your IT staff make the changes internally?

How about a tool that lets the business user design their business process with the simplicity as outlined in the Business View and gives IT users freedom to implement this activity in keeping with organizational IT policies. Well does something like this exist? Have a closer look at Oracle BPA Suite. - Apologies for the product pitch but yes this tool does preserve the simplicity of BPMN and also gives the IT developer the power to implement the activity as a unit with all these intricacies.

What is BPM - a quest, a journey

I was talking to abunch of people at OMG's BPM think tank and there was a lot of confusion about what exactly is BPM.

Instead of trying to define what BPM is - lets see what is it that people are trying to achieve when they are talking BPM.

Cat 1 - Business users needing to document their processes
Cat 2 - Single project champions, take one process at a time, design and deploy it.
Cat 3 - Users seeking Enterprise BPM.

Cat 1 users can use any tool.
Cat 2 users may succeed in their specific project but then taking it to the next level is going to be a tall order. Reusing vendor specific components will be hard, if not impossible and definitely increase the TCO (total cost of ownership) manifold. Do you want vendor specific code etc to lock your enterprise wide components. Or do you want open standards based implementations.
This leads us to the third category of users who are starting small but thinking big. The components they build will be standard compliant, can be independently reused, change their specific implementation based on new business requirements / technological advancement and would therefore be an enterprise asset. The TCO will be lower if your solution uses industry wide standards adopted by majority of tool vendors, thus guaranteeing a wider skill pool as well.

Hopefully, based on the above there can be a better appreciation and common understanding of BPM but I am sure it is much more than just the categories of use cases. More later.

Blogware

I have coined this term - well there is a tool by that name but I can still say that this is term for "furthering your opinions under the garb of a blogger".
Now back to BPM - BPEL is not for humans- this is a thing I read on many blogs. However nothing can be farther from the truth. BPEL is extensible by nature, it allows a process developer to call out to any standard workflow service and create a Human Task. On completion the workflow server can update the process back / BPEL process can detect that the task has been marked complete and carry on the execution of the process.
Thankfully, there is a spec BPEL4People to answer all the acronym happy analysts and bloggers!

OMG - BPM - BPMN - ?

Spent three crucial days at OMG's BPM think tank. What I heard :
1. Standards are not important to business users. I heard this more than once - at an OMG conference thats interesting to say the least. My take - if standards dont matter than the analysts are going to make the same mistakes they did earlier. Custom made / built applications -> higher TCO (total cost of ownership) -> deal with costly Professional services folks :(
2. There is no common definition of BPM - among vendors, among anlysts and .... customers.
3. Field day for independent consultants to make even more consluting dollars while this conundrum lasts.
4. BPEL - the engine that executes your processes - I am surprised that the execution work horse is not being given its due.
5. ITP commerce had a good demo and were willing to show it to one and all - unlike other big name vendors and sponsors.
6. A new acronym BPDM was introduced. The spec does not have a XSD. Looks like a rushed attempt by one (or two) vendors - I may say. Even some of the (other) authors declined to comment / give more details.