The Process Quality Blog Rotating Header Image

taraneon founder on Who’s Who List

(A couple of weeks ago it was the certificate, now it’s official. I’ve been put on THAT list. It’s nice to sometimes receive a bit of recognition for what we’re doing, especially when it puts you in the same bracket as the experts you’ve followed for a long time. I would open a good bottle of St. Emilion, but I’ll leave that until next week, when I’ll see many of the other people on the list at the BBCCon2012.)


From todays OpenText press release:

MEDIA ALERT: Independent Study Reveals Who’s Who List of Dynamic Case Management Influencers

Study identifies the thought leaders who are shaping emerging market where content and process intersect

Waterloo, ON – 2012-10-25 – OpenText (NASDAQ: OTEX, TSX: OTC) today announced the top influencers in the field of Dynamic Case Management (DCM) as identified in a recent study conducted by Influencer 50, an independent market research company. According to the study, the most influential voices shaping the definition and direction of the emerging dynamic case management market include end users, industry analysts, consultants, systems integrators, academics and technology providers.
Starting today, and every Thursday over the next four weeks, OpenText will reveal the top case management influencers by category as follows at Case Management Influencers and via social media using the hashtag #DCMInfluencers:

Biographies, LinkedIn profiles, blogs, and educational content for each influencer will be available on the Case Management Influencer site following each announcement.
The study was conducted by Influencer 50, a leading influencer identification and engagement management firm, and involved a thorough analysis of the dynamic case management market, seeking candidates who guide, educate and advise decision-makers on this emerging space. Influencers were identified from an initial field of candidates and evaluated against six scoring criteria: market reach, frequency of impact, message independence, expertise, persuasiveness, and thoroughness of role in decision-making. For more information about the study, visit OpenText’s Because Process Matters blog.


Did you like this? Share it:

Leave a Reply

The BBCcon12 warm-up (II)

bbc_125_is‘Time is relative’ as a clever man once noted and processes provide further proof of this.

Browsing through BPM success stories, you are apt to get the impression that (with the right tools) it will take you no more than 6 months to have your new process up and running. Right? Well … nearly.

The median value from our survey into process quality tells us it’s more likely to be 39 months and even the top quartile only averages out at 21 months.

If you want to find out what the underlying reasons are and what best-in-class companies are doing to beat the average, join us for our survey presentation on ‘The Deceptive Nature of Process Quality’ at BBCCon12, Tuesday, Oct. 30th, 10:25 am, Room: Diplomat 5.

Did you like this? Share it:

Leave a Reply

Process is a team sport

Saturday afternoon, an hour to go before the game kicks off and the manager and players have gathered to discuss strategy and tactics. What you can and should expect to see is that every player – including the substitutes – knows about the overall game plan. The defenders understand the strategy the strikers want to follow, the midfielders know everything about the tactics the defenders intend to use. They all have a need to know. What this does not imply is that just because a striker knows how the defence is going to work he is in fact turning into a defender.

Contrast this with the often highly selective way in which we involve the ultimate users of processes. While keeping someone in the dark may be a good approach when planning a surprise birthday party, this should not be the strategy of choice when it comes to business processes. But what does our survey tell us about the real world?


There are two important aspects to consider here:

  • When, how and to what extend is the individual process user informed, trained and involved on the changes as far as they relate to his or her work?
  • When and how is the context, i.e. the whole process, communicated – if at all?

Imagine the team manager simply writing the days game plan down on paper and handing out copies without further explanation or refusing to answer questions from the players. Premier League goodbye. Actually: Manager goodbye. But that’s not how the game is generally played in the process world. If companies do in fact share information about processes with their employees, it’s mostly either by publishing process models on the intranet or by informing employees via email.

None of this is particularly result-driven. More often than not it’s simply discharging your information obligation by “having published something somewhere”. How much of that information actually reaches the intended recipients and what they can make of it seems to be of secondary importance – as those 13%+33% in the chart above tell us.

What companies should be aiming for is a mix of general process information coupled with engaging process users to such an extent that they UNDERSTAND what they should be doing and WHY. Note the WHY as this is where context comes into play: This is when the midfielder understands why this weekend he should be playing long balls into the penalty area instead of trying the delicate 1-2 passing game.

Football (or soccer to those more accustomed to wearing helmets and shoulder pads when walking onto a playing field) was never designed as a 4-4-1 or 4-3-2 game, that’s just the team-internal formation. Instead, it’s ONE team and not really that much different from how we should be looking at processes.

Having said that, let me improve on the heading of this article: Process is a team sport played by knowledgeable people.

By the way, the survey also asked about the importance of twitter, blogs, wikis and other channels to communicate about processes. I’ll leave that chart for the BBCCon12 presentation next week – we might have something to think about.

Did you like this? Share it:

Leave a Reply