Sorry but I can't help but get involved in the debate being started (or maybe restarted) by Gartner's David McCoy where he says:
"I don't see Business Process Automation being used that much any more. Maybe I just don't read the right articles, but it seems that BPM is the preferred term."
My fellow IT Business Edge blogger Susan Hall has also joined the discussion.
The BPA vs. business process management (BPM) debate intrigues me because it is inconceivable to me that we cannot agree on what to call an information technology (IT) market that accounts for anywhere between $3 billion and $30 billion in software spending per year (depending on definitions) involving a term--as I researched in January 2009--that has been around for a century or more.
The debate also intrigues me because when I started doing BPM-technology-specific research at IDC in 2003 (after 10 years of doing BPM-related research, primarily on ERP), IDC had already decided to call the category BPA. But IDC did not care about the meanings of automation vs. management. The issue at IDC was that BP already stood for "business performance" rather than "business process." I sure hope I didn't keep this arcane argument going by not fighting harder for BPM six years ago. (NOTE: I left IDC in 2006 and am now an independent market researcher. My replacement at IDC wisely started using BPM to mean business process management.)
David McCoy says his comment dates to the beginnings of his BPM related research in the late 1990s. His point is a variation on my frequent statement that BPM is a value proposition not just software. You can do BPM with a pencil and post-it notes if you want. Similarly, fellow BPM in Action Live Panel panelist Derek Miers makes the argument that BPM is a management discipline not a technology.
However although it's great fodder for academic-like debates among industry and market analysts, BPA fails the WWTMS test. Ask yourself: "what would the marketplace say?" The answer is business process management, not BPA.
And the market will make this choice for the same reason that it has not wrapped itself around in knots questioning CRM, ERP, PLM, and so forth. None of those concepts requires technology either, all are basically value propositions or management disciplines, and all predate the IT era in some form.
Yet no one is suggesting that we change CRM to customer relationship automation.
And hopefully no one will suggest we rename BPM to business process re-engineering :)
-- Dennis Byron
















I found this article very interesting as we had this same discussion here at Interactive Intelligence. Recently we announced a new product called Interaction Process Automation (IPA) that, as Dennis described here, is the technology that actually automates the business processes. (http://www.inin.com/ProductSolutions/Pages/Interaction-Process-Automation.aspx)
For months up to our announcement, we tossed around the acronyms of BPA and BPM to describe our offering and settled on BPA because we felt that it was best in describing the technology that we offered with IPA.
So, what I would love to know, Dennis, what do you think? I'd love to get your thoughts.
Tim Passios
Director, Solutions Marketing
Interactive Intelligence, Inc.
I wonder if BPM has become more popular because many solutions don't support much in the way of automation so some companies are leery of the "automation" part of BPA.
It seems like customers should be evaluating solutions based on their ability to automate AND manage processes, not just one or the other.
Rick Chin
Interactive Intelligence
To debate efficiently, I would start from definitions of three different concepts under BPM "umbrella" (see also http://improving-bpm-systems.blogspot.com/2009/04/should-we-consider-third-forgotten-bpm.html)
BPM discipline, noun
discipline which allows you to model, automate, execute, control, measure and optimise the flow of business activities that span the enterprise’s systems, employees, customers and partners within and beyond the enterprise boundaries
Remark: At present, the BPM discipline is the best way to implement process-centric enterprises.
BPM system, noun
portfolio of the business processes as well as the practices and tools for governing the design, execution and evolution of this portfolio
Remark: Any process-centric enterprise has its own enterprise BPM system. The enterprise BPM system may not be perfect (e.g. some processes may be only documented on paper, some details are only “located” only in the minds of certain people, etc.), but it does exist.
BPM suite, noun
coherent set of software tools for facilitating the implementation of a BPM system
So, in accordance with these definitions, business process automation (BPA) is an integral part of the BPM discipline. We practice BPA within enterprise BPM-systems with the help of BPM suites.
Thanks,
AS
Hi Dennis
Great summary and analysis of the debate! Here’s some personal history on this. At Gartner in 1999/2000, I made the switch from talking about workflow-brokers (a term coined by Regina Casonato) as the next generation of ‘process engine’ and riffed on a term that Roy Schulte and the application integration team (which I managed) used. They had written one big tome that included a tiny section with the term “Business Process MANAGERS.” This was used to define a class of emerging software that correlated to Vitria’s Business Process Automation term. I took the “MANAGER” term and morphed it to Business Process Management, certainly not claiming to be the first to do that. However, I do lay claim to describing how the workflow and application integration worlds would merge to create BPM capabilities and how those legacy markets would transform. I went around the world a few times with that message and it played out exactly as expected.
At the time (2000), I refused to talk about a single BPM market, as BPM was also emerging as a feature (or layer) of ERP, CRM, application servers, etc. I even wrote a research note in December of 2000 called “Business Process Management: The Hot Non-Market.” I was right in 2000, but over time, I relented to market forces (ironically) and we began talking of the “BPM market” under Jim Sinur’s leadership of BPM. I had passed the baton to him as I was deep in working with Roy to drive BAM (Business Activity Monitoring) into the market. That term, of course, is all Roy’s.
Now, we at Gartner talk of BPM as a management discipline, BPMT (T for technology) as the software component of that market, and BPMS (Business Process Management Suite) as the leading example of BPMT. The world has changed a lot since the days when I was trying to explain that BPM was NOT Business Process MODELING. But in the process (ha!), I think we as an industry have muddled some of our terms. BPM is best described as a discipline, even more so than CRM, etc. So with that shift, I think we will see more linguistic confusion, even if a lot of it is academic hand wringing.
Net, net. I support your assertion that the market will define the term. Been there, and accepted that before :> In 1999/2000 the market was trying to digest terms such as E-process, E-workflow, and as I used to say, EGADS! However, as we move BPM more and more to mean the discipline, then using BPM to also mean a class of technology is more problematic. Since BPA (automation) was hanging around with nothing to do, I was wondering if there was any linguistic power to use it, hence the call for debate. But even there we are vexed! BPA also means Business Process ANALYSIS. So we have more overloading than a bad programming language.
Thanks for taking this up and who knows where it will go. What I do know is that I was with a client who was struggling with BPM work. When I determined that they were really just talking the automation portion of the puzzle, their efforts became a lot clearer to them and to me. BPM is a rather broad term. We may have to live with that at this point, but that is why I started the debate.
Cheers!
Automation is not required for Business Process Management. I am not alone in standing by the definition of BPM as Business Process Management - the Business Process Management Institute, now a part of the Object Management Group, considered to the THE standards body for BPM, agrees. Please check them out at "http://www.bpmi.org" for the complete Metamodel, Notation, and Maturity Model.