Wyeth's prescription for BPM success

Define, Align, Optimize then Automate

While I may be reading between the lines with this synopsis of what Wyeth has done in their use of BPM it becomes ever clearer that the activities prior to the application of technology in BPM are the key drivers of success (or failure) in its use.

To point - you have to know what you want from the process, the desired or intended outcome, and that better be crafted from the perspective of the consumer of the process output point of view. If you know that you can align the process to that intended outcome.

And before you stick that process into any technology you better challenge it. Hand-offs are break points and the source of organizational white space. The less the better. Are all of the activities of the process value-add? If they don't contribute to the intended outcome then get out the hoe and dig 'em out of the process up front. Do business rules contribute real value? They better. Business rules are highly prone to obsolescence so if they are there they better be serving an important and meaningful purpose.

It sounds like Wyeth is doing at least some of this, and that gives them a relatively well-aligned process definition before pulling out that BPM technology and embedding their assessments (i.e. assumptions) into a software system that people must then use when doing the work of the process.

The thing you need to know more than anything else when "automating processes?" Garbage in - Garbage out.

Terry Schurter
www.ipapi.org