I once suggested on Twitter that simulation in the BPM world is a non-starter. I don't remember my exact words, but the gist of it was, "Nobody uses simulation." A famous and influential analyst called me out, asking me if I thought that his clients were "lying to [him]". Twitter's not a great place for that kind of argument, so I'll respond here.
Yes, Mr. Widely-Quoted Analyst, they are lying to you.
I am almost never asked by a prospective customer about simulation. Even when the subject arises, it is generally expressed as a checkbox item, and never as a core requirement. In fact, other vendors have told me that customers who buy the simulation modules they offer eventually, and without fail, exchange them for credit against some other component. Moreover, in my own career as an IT executive, I have simply never encountered a process that made me think, "gee, I wish I could simulate this bad boy".
Simulation delays automation, and I don't like to wait. There is an instant benefit from automation, even if the underlying process is not very efficient. To put it another way: I'd rather automate a poorly designed process today than spend six months analyzing, simulating, and optimizing it before automating. A decent BPM solution should make deployment easy, and then provide you with plenty of data on the behavior of your process--the perfect input for optimization. I'll take real data generated from actual process executions over simulation results every time.
Do BPM technology customers tell their analysts that they are using simulation? Sure: their employers paid a lot for it (sometimes at your recommendation, Mr. Analyst). The cognitive dissonance arising from the discovery of its limited value must be intense.
Are you a BPM customer? Has simulation yielded substantial benefits to you and your company? By all means: show me why I'm wrong. There's a space provided for just that purpose below.