Business Processes: How everything is started and confused. Chapter Two "Flies and cutlets"

The little son came to his father, and asked the crumb: - What is a good BPM?

Business Process Management. It is proposed to highlight the “purely engineering component” from the whole variety of “BPM-science”, excluding crafty marketing and high-level business abstractions, business superstructures and other “business husks” on BPM - engineering (as an engineering discipline), as well as brackets IT component. The concepts of process engineering, process system, process technology, Process BPM (Natural BPM) are introduced. Process technology are considered comprehensively: Operational activities - Development - Implementation - Control.


Introductory
The little son came to his father, and asked the crumb: - What is a good BPM?
')
The term BPM, Business Process Management is so “spoken” that it is not at all easy to understand “what is it”. The first chapter showed Business Process Management Marketing (PR-bpm). Chapter one could be developed for a long time, for example, the topic (problem) of confusing terminology around BPM and the thesis “BPM vs [of everything and myself]”:
Option 1 : “BPM vs BPM” , where the letter “M” = {Management vs Modeling vs Mapping}.
Option 2 : " BPM vs BPM ", where in one of the options "P" = Performance.

In the “modern” term “BPMS”, the letter “M” is generally “out of place” and that people should not be confused with the capital letter from “Management” to be replaced either with “A” (Automation) or “E” (execution) because it is based on the development of programs. The last one - the letter “S” can be read as you like and without loss of meaning: suite, system, software (even in different versions of BPM CBOK in different ways).

If you “dig deep” using google search “BPM vs”, you will find many different combinations, for example, iBPMS vs BPMS or BPM vs ACM (“Agile BPM”)
Other options: BMP versus OpX (Operational Excellence)

Many BMP versus in BPM review: Business process management (BPM) standards: a survey

We want to “dig in breadth” - we are looking at related global areas (but essentially the same “IT chips”), for example, “Enterprise Architecture”: BPM vs EAM, Enterprise Architecture Management
Some say that BPM is part of EAM (EA), others think the opposite and ask, EAM: Standalone or part of BPM?

Of course, it is “better” (in terms of sales solutions and consulting), when it’s “one and at the same time” both for business process management (BPM) and for business process analysis (BPA) and in addition for enterprise architecture management (EAM) and more Something "fashionable."
"Competent doctor", i.e. The alchemist, breaking one tablet in half, warns: this half will treat your head and this tail will do it for you, but look - don't mix it up! At the same time, different “fields” were created artificially, so as not to interfere with each other, selling the same thing, but under different sauces. Moreover, the more BPA eats up BPMS, the more actively BPA “enters” into the EA field under the sign BPM.

To put it in simple terms: BPM aka BPMS blatantly chose Brand-name BPM from BPM aka BPA, and the latter instead of fighting for it turned the front in the direction of Enterprise Architecture. Even books about ARIS (BPA flagship) are already called “Enterprise Architecture”

It’s hard to figure out where the “ordinary” BPM ends and the “Enterprise Architecture” (EA) begins. Therefore, in EA, too, everything is “not at all simple”, in the sense that it is confusing (under monetization, of course) and understanding “what is EA” is just as difficult as “what is BPM”: 10-definitions-enterprise-architecture

Often, reading about BPM (the one that is BPA-ARIS-EPC, etc.) we think about EA, and reading about EA, we recall that it was already read about this exact same thing in "some" BPM. And when Enterprise BPM, BPM Governance, Management BPM, etc. is mixed in, it begs itself: “the buried dog is one, only the nicknames and it is different.”
BPM Governance Framework
or "Enterprise-wide BPM", BPM as much as "enterprise scale", why not the universe? In addition to “Managing Governance” - BPM Governance, there is a “Business Business Process” - Business BPM (see first chapter).

The flood of “different” “same things” has a global scale. To make a delineation of areas of responsibility “with aliens” both around the perimeter and inside BPM, to exclude repetitions and just nonsense - tremendous work is required. I will cite a fragment with which I agree, and instead of a dot, many BOK-s organizations and related "guild sects" can be put:

... a fairly typical organization for writing and selling expensive books, developing regional offices and multi-level certification systems. All such organizations, it would be more correct to call them sects, are made according to one pattern. And they all have the same problems: the changes to the topics they cover occur much faster than the next releases of their main books are published. Adherents of such kung-fu are strongly at risk of detecting the absolute uselessness of acquired skills by the time they reach the black belt . However, everyone earns as they can.

Discussion on the topic of "modern alchemy" and "BPM-EA Herbalife" in the comments to the first chapter on cnews.ru
'Non-alchemysts' aller länder, vereinigt euch!

Modern alchemists in the monetization of their craft have become adept and have learned how to do everything “competently” - through abstruse terms: business words and “IT chips”. The term, which "shot", provides prestige and the right: Whoever stood up - that and sneakers!
Fashionable "chips" and their volatility illustrate the "candles" in the pictures of Hype Cycle for BPM (for 2011 and 2015, see the comments to the first chapter on habrahabr.ru). If it were not for the “omnipotent marketing hand”, then many of them would immediately and forever be covered with a “trough of disillusionment”. The correct translation of the Hype Cycle is not a “technology maturity cycle”, but a “cycle of deception”.

Below we will try to delve into the terminology, to show where the science is, and where is the rational grain (high-quality BPM-distillate, see the picture in the title). What is BPM and, in general, a “business process”?

2 General terminology and high-level classification. BPM environment

The first task of management is to choose the right names ... If the names are wrong, then the language will not correspond to the truth. If the language does not correspond to the truth, then things will not be perfect. ...
Therefore, the head should give only such names that can be expressed in words, and order only what can be done in practice.

Confucius

Calls for unity of terminology are increasingly heard in both the BPM articles (both those BPM and these) and the EA: Enterprise Architecture: Basic Definitions

Not for nothing this. Apparently, not all “so-called” BPM are “equally useful” (from well-known advertising). Let's see where the "ears grow" in the "common" BPM-terminology.

2.1 Fighting marketing for the term “business process”

The reason for the science in the “BPM world” is the desire to make “turbid water” and throw in “expensive” (very “weighty”) terms for more successful monetization in this case of BPM products and consulting. It is more profitable to sell “business processes” (BP) than just “processes” (too cheap).
The first - significantly "status", "steeper" and, accordingly, more expensive, although they do not differ from the second. Remove from BPM (S) - the first letter and sales will fall, both quantitatively and in terms of margins.

Monetizers "just and everything" go to power structures and there they model, analyze and optimize the "business processes" of the customer (troops and forces), although "what kind of business can we have" - ​​the siloviki are surprised? In the army, “correctly” understand the “business terminology” of consultants apparently only “leaders” of the type “Serdyukov / Vasilyev”.

Attempts are being made to say that “business” is generally not a business, but, for example, “people working together for something ...” - What is a business process, what is BPM: interpretation of ABPMP

This remains at the level of discussion, because the BPM gurus will not allow anyone to “cut the business jargon” by “living” (bringing status and profit) and land high-flown “business processes” and their ilk: “business management”, “business environment” , "Strategic analysis of business processes", as well as all sorts of Business Event Management, Business Rules Management, etc.

After such a “diversion” (to remove the magic prefix “Business”), the significance of the term and the “capitalization” of the whole direction will decrease (they will collapse like dot.com's once). Everyone has long been convinced that “modeling” (management, improvement, etc.) of a business and in general everything where there is a prefix “Business” is, by definition, not cheap. Unlike "simple" modeling, including mathematical models. “Cheap” mathematics is not a “serious” business process science. Whatever, in the end, “modeled” would not exist, but the main thing is to “under business”.

A couple of analogies
The word “business” is used only to separate processes that are directly related to the creation of economic value from all other processes: chemical, physical, mathematical, etc.

If in discussions about “company processes” there is a possibility that someone might accidentally think that it is a chemical process or a process of world wideness or Markov processes (the direction in the theory of probability), then you probably should be clarified: about “chemical-physical-mat-processes”, and about “business-processes”, which have no relation to business (in general), or simply call them “pe-processes” (English “P-” will be further used for association with “processes”).

A similar problem when discussing "networks": do not confuse telecommunication networks with fishing or Petri nets.
Approximately the same is reflected in the term “electrical structural circuit”, E1 (ESKD), on which neither discrete elements (transistors) nor microcircuits are applied, but simply depict “black boxes” with no signs of electricity.
E1 is also widely used in both 34.xxx guests and ESPD: the diagrams give a qualitative concept of the overall structure, therefore, “electrical” is just a convention.
The link above also correctly shows the essence: the functional approach versus the process approach.

In our case, the prefix "business" can be easily discarded (we are not going along the highway of monetization, but the "engineering path"), and then we will simply talk about "processes". Moreover, it is not so important to distinguish between: a process, a subprocess, a procedure, a work flow, a function, a task, an operation, etc. All this expresses a certain action (the buzzword "activity") for the purpose of any result. The black box “Function” that converts “something at the input” into “something at the output” using resources and some rules - algorithms. In the name of the square, briefly “what it does,” inside the square (during decomposition), “how it is done”.

The management function is not much different from a mathematical function. Initially, control algorithms, activity descriptions, interactions (roles, entities) were described by flowcharts as well as mathematical and other logical algorithms (algorithmic methods for describing the work process).
Then they added some event and some “bows” - and received “BPM notation”, for example, EPC notation, Event-driven Process Chain.

In the simplest variation (type) of the EPC notation - “function environment”, the function itself, the work contractor, the work tool (for example, the information system or mechanical abacus) and the associated set of documents or information are linked. Thus, in addition to the workflow itself (an action algorithm), elements from the organizational structure, automation tools (mechanization tools), document flow (docflow), and information are added.

So the process is “what you do.” Steps: do it once, do two, do three ...

Processes are “a series of sequential non-random actions (operations). This is a set of steps performed in daily work activities. I do not agree that “ Processes are some kind of meaningful grouping of activities (activities) of people ...”
Why is it necessary to have “people”, rather any “activities”, including “not people” and machines: e-performers with a “technical account”, demons (daemon), robots, etc.

When the processes are described, you can get a "process map", which is similar to an X-ray image of the enterprise's body, but where not only the organs (static) are visible, but also their interaction (who does what and what). Such a map (Process Map of the upper - medium - detailed processes), on the one hand, reflects the fact that it is difficult to "show by letters" (for example, in textual regulations), but at the same time it does not completely replace the detailed description of the process.

It is better to use the old term “reorganization” of BP (processes), which was replaced by “reengineering” of BP (someone needed a new incomprehensible, but fashionable and therefore more “convenient”). From the terminology used it is better to exclude the terms containing: management and control.
The use of “model”, “metamodel”, “modeling” is dangerous - they have too many meanings, and there is an ambiguity of understanding (complete misunderstanding).

For example, the Corporate Process Model simply reflects the idea that there is a certain set of models (and not only processes) where the “model” construction is used to represent an object (including a process) in different projections (views, view): process, data, documents, roles, tools, etc. in the form of diagrams of different notations and detalization. Therefore, a “Process Model” is simply a “Complex of Objects” (diagrams) of the “Process View” plane, usually with interconnections.

In addition to eliminating explicit marketing, in the “Process BPM” plane we will try to distance ourselves as far as possible from everything that is not related to ordinary logic and mathematics — such as business analysis, business goals, development strategy, etc., and we will try to consider BPM as an engineering discipline, not financial, marketing, philosophical, or alchemy, and not as part of IT.

In the word "BPM" you need to remove the first and last letters, because the engineering discipline is not directly related to “business” (like any scientific fields, such as logic, mathematics, etc.), and the term “management” = “management” is more likely to confuse rather than clarify. I would generally forbid the mention of these words when discussing the topic of BPM.

2.2 Process Engineering

We introduce the concept of "Process Engineering" (process engineering) - similarity or as an element of "System Engineering": "process engineering" as an element of systems engineering.
Enterprise process system, process technologies, process layer of enterprise architecture, etc. Not to be confused with the process approach. This is different. A process architecture also exists in an enterprise with a functional scheme (principle) of management, but enterprises without processes do not exist (for the time being).

Given the variety of “occult” BPM areas (terms), the main objective of the term “process technologies” is to exclude from consideration “BPM components” that are not directly related to the description of processes, such as: optimization, all kinds of not clearly formalized “management”, etc. p., and we will concentrate only on the description of processes and their simplest analysis (without the “business component”). Also exclude science, alchemy and IT component.

What is Traditional BPM - has long been a mystery (mysterious story), today we hear the terms BPM Governance and Management BPM, Business BPM and Technical BPM. See the first chapter or BPM comes in two forms: Business BPM and Technical BPM

Separating “flies from cutlets” allows the selection of “Process Level” (from something big and multi-level, apparently EA), it’s also “ Process BPM ” (also tautology, but ...) it’s also “ Natural BPM ” (to patent these terms and PTSM ?) Process BPM is not Business BPM and Technical BPM.

Beyond “Process BPM” we’ll leave a lot of Business BPM, including “high-level BPM”, “BPM Governance”, all sorts of “tricks” about return on investment (usually in IT) and all that “mega-efficient” As a rule, with the “Business”, “Performance”, “Enterprise” (BPM, Architecture, etc.), “Strategy”, “Governance”, etc. Mission, Objective ...

As a result, we should have a “clean” engineering discipline - “process technologies” or process engineering, through which the process system of an enterprise is created - as a process layer of an enterprise's architecture. “Cleared” from “jargons”: business jargon and IT jargon.

"Process Level" = Process View, process layer, process layer, etc.
The “business layer” will be located above, below - the infrastructure, including the information system (IS). Information technologies are the same “technological” elements as stationery technologies, economic technologies and other supporting (infrastructure) technologies for implementing the execution of the company's core and supporting processes.

Some explanatory pictures (fig. 1 and 2) from books:
- " IBM Redbooks ' Combining Business Process Management and Enterprise Architecture Outcomes"
- " Management Cybernetics and Business Process Management" (ERCIS)


Fig. 1. BPM drives business and IT alignment and responsiveness (IBM Redbooks)

IBM Redbooks says “BPM” to provide:
• Interaction to predict and optimize process results through modeling and simulation;
• Operational configuration of processes by business users using policies instead of code;
• Capture business events and respond to them automatically in real time or to support a person’s decision making;
• Rapid deployment of new solutions from reusable building blocks, which can be changed on the fly.


Fig. 2. Static view on BPM - „Level of concerns“ (ERCIS)

Something similar "three-level" can be found:
- The State of the BPM Market - 2014 (p. 10)
Strategy and Enterprise Level \ Process Level \ Implementation Level (Employee Level + IT Level)
- Combining BPM and EA in complex ERP projects (p. 2)
Business Architecture \ Process Architecture \ Information Architecture.
- Business Process Management (BPM)
Strategy \ Process \ Systems (also Management BPM)

However, we will depict the place of "Process Technology" a little differently, as shown in Fig. 3. The layer of process technologies - "Process BPM" - "Natural BPM".



Fig. 3. Layer "process technology" - "Process BPM" - "Natural BPM"

The picture in the title shows the same thing, but in a humorous form: a high-quality "distillation BPM-column" allows you to select "heads", i.e. acetone, in our case - Business Level (View), and "tails", i.e. "IT-booze" and other fusel oils - infrastructure in relation to the Process Level. () — " Natural BPM ".

, . , , , — - ( -), EPC ( ) , , .

«Natural BPM» , , «» « » ( , , ..).

« Process BPM» «BPM -», «Technical BPM» «SOA, ESB web-» ( BPM), (BPMS), , (BPMN). , (Design & Modeling) «Process BPM» (, «» ), – «Natural BPM».

Natural BPM () , .


Fig. 4. BPM

«Six Circles» ( Six Sigma) . , - , ( ). , (), , , .

« – » «», «» . , : « » « , », : « » « ». () . « – » — — « ».

2.3 First Step. PTSM a la ITSM

. , (, ). , « — ». ? ? - .
- ITSM — ITIL. « », ITSM. The IT Skeptic

ITSM (ITIL) , BPM CBOK EA . ITSM -, (ITIL) ?
, « » (business) . Those. « » . , .

ITSM PTSM , «» «ITIL Mgmt.» — , , workflow . «information technology» «process technology» (IT PT) ITSM-ITIL.

PTSM (Process Technology Service Management) . , « -» BPM () , : — « ». : .
BPM ( , ), ( ), .. , «Service» .

ITSM PTSM. , CMDB — \ BPM. , CMDB — , BPM , ( — ). . CMDB ( « »).

— «» , «» «» . - ITSM — « » (VAD), , , ().
«» (, ) « », «».

: (P-Demand Management — « », BTSM), PT- (process tech) ..
PTSM ( ), Ops-P.

«mon» (process monitoring), . ( ITSM) . , « »: -, -, , Middleware, , Hardware, , ..

Dev-P ( -). Dev-P : () , «as is» ( «as really is») () «to be». Process engineering ( Software engineering, ), .. PTSM.

PTSM Mgmt «P-»: Change management, Configuration management .., «» , ( ) .
vs & Open Source.

« » . « » .

PM-P — PMBOK, « », .. . -, .. , ( ), . , , , .
« » , «-» – . .
, , , , " . .." ().

— . - IT-, , «PT-», , Cobit. ISO 9000: ISO 9000 — « » « » (, , , MBA — ).

. BPM , «» () — -:
Vs Vs Vs .
— , .. « », ( Dev-P) Ops-P PM-P ( «» ).

2.4

, « » — « BPM» . , BPM aka BPA.

:
) BPM ( );
) ( ARIS Express ), , .

, ( ), (Natural BPM) : business — IT- («» «»), . , BPM — ( ), , : , , , () ( — ). , , .

- (, , , ..), - . A lot of them. - ARIS:

. , BPM , ()?

2.5 BPM aka BPA

, « » BPA – ( « ») (alBPM). .
« » «» BPM aka BPA, , - «» ( ?) BPM №1

:
— (, «»),
— -,
— « » — ( - , EPC workflow) (VAD, Value-added chain diagram) ..

« VAD – » BPM – c !

( ) : – . - , . «», « » – « » BPM- « »: «as-is», «to be», « », « » ..

« », Corporate Process Map, Business Process Map , () .

« -», « » — « -»

- — — ( ) …
, « ?». « — » – , «» ( ), , : « »?

, - , « » « » – . «3.2. »

, . « » « » «» : « », « , ». , « » , .

«as is» «as really is», . , , , :
, , , .

« » . () « » , « », « ».

« »: « » « » , . , « », () . - .

« » «, BPM». , «» , (- ) , .. , .
() «» , .. « » ( ).

« » 2016-, 2001- ( ). . «» « BPM» : «game over». « BPM».

, «» : BPwin « » — IDEF , «» « » «» «» (VAD) (EPC) « » .
( ).

«» , « » -: IDEF0 ?

, , . « , ».

«Natural BPM (process tech) vs alchemy» – .
« » , .. .

bipiem