We all know the “process” for opening a banana, yes? Sure. Well, that process is not optimal.  Check out this video and ask, “Who was the original process owner for ‘opening a banana’?”

I’ll give you a hint.  It wasn’t us.

Next time, find the original process owner and see how he or she does it. Then you won’t look like a monkey when you craft your own process from scratch.

P.S. Monkeys open bananas in lots of different ways.  I already know that. 

Scenario 2: At the doc’s.  You know the drill.  Fill out the paperwork and swear that you have read the copy of the HIPPA rules they gave you.  Only, they didn’t give you any.  So, you ask for the rules and get a strange look like you are from Mars.  Who asks for HIPPA rules?  What was I thinking?

Analysis:  Stop lying with processes, ok?  If you create a process to protect children, the process has to be followed from end to end. It’s no good to do the front-end “aren’t we the careful company” stuff and then skip the part that really matters.  And if you mention a process step in your documentation – “I certify I have read the provided forms” – then don’t freak out when someone actually asks you to provide the forms… the ones you said you already provided.

It’s things like this that could drive me to drink.  Only, I would probably drink too much and then have to go to the doctor’s and have to pretend to read some regulation they didn’t give me.  That would add insult to injury.  Instead, I think I’ll just go grab a pizza, get a UV stamp, and run in and out the exit door, just for fun.  No one will notice.  That’s because some people build processes without any regard for whether they actually work.

No one will respect your agile moves if you are knocking down his entrenched walls as you go about your actions.  So, if you thought success with agility was mainly hinged on technical brilliance,  you are only about four percent correct. The remaining 96 percent is just plain old politics.  Just like most of life, agility is easier to talk about than it is to deliver.  Remember – agility does not excuse you from doing change management and change management is at the heart of business process excellence.  So, don’t divorce your agility efforts and your process efforts.  They are too highly intertwined.

Have you seen this too, or do I just have a jaded view of reality?  Not that those are the only two options…

Scenario 2:  Van marked “Police” races past me and runs a full red light while I stop.  This was a “work detail” van – roadside trash collection with prison labor. No burglary in progress.  No crime to prevent.  Just a red light to run.

For whom are rules, laws and processes created?

Are they only created for those of us who are ruled, governed, managed or directed?

Or, are they created for all of us?

Think of this the next time you in management create a rule, process, directive, mandate, etc.  Are you to be subjected to this same set of policies?  Are you part of the picture?  Or, are you just a glorious ruling body, passing down dictates that you don’t have to follow and won’t follow?

Never trust a disembodied ruler.  Never trust someone who pours medicine down your throat while they keep their own teeth clinched behind tight, pursed lips.

1. Do you do project-level investment analysis of any kind (payback period, ROI, IRR, etc)?
2. Do you calculate a predicted ROI or IRR for your BPM projects before they are started?
3. Is a formal, predicted ROI or IRR a requirement for approval/funding?
4. Do you measure post-implementation ROI or IRR?
5. As you calculate the present value of your net benefit stream for your investment measures, do you cap the number of future years you will project out?
6. How long (number of years) is the typical benefit stream that you feel comfortable calculating?
7. What discount-rate ranges (interest rates, cost of capital, etc) do you use for your NPV calculations?
8. What investment levels (e.g., IRR levels) do you consider borderline for project approval?
9. What investment levels make you dance with glee?

Well over a decade ago, we determined that workflow projects met or exceeded ROI expectations about 90% of the time.  A BPMS is not a workflow tool, and this is 2009 – a lot of the low-hanging fruit is gone.  Are you seeing the same level of investment performance?

Let me hear from you, and thanks!

No concern for rules, regulations or compliance – The Stooges never let the law get in their way.  They never worried about legality, best practices, rules, regulations, compliance or anything that smacked of proper protocol.   Think of how much time that mentality would save on your process efforts.  No need to address someone else’s concerns or requirements.  Never mind that The Stooges were constantly being arrested or threatened with arrest.  Look at the time savings if you just shoot from the hip! “Nyuk!”

No concern for change management – The Stooges were masters at the quick change, but terrible at change management.  Their view of change was simple: “Put on a dress and sneak past the bad guys!” I bet they would bring that mentality to the BPM world.  Just change it.  Do it! Do it now!  Don’t worry about the impact, you knucklehead!  “Nyuk, Nyuk!”

No concern for quality – The Stooges never really cared about the final quality of their products or services.  They would pretend to be fine waiters, or service station attendants, or pest control experts, but they invariably failed.  They would serve old shoes to their diner patrons, blow up a car by pouring gas in the radiator, or tear all the plaster out of a house as they chased a single mouse.  They pretended to care, but really didn’t.  Anything to get the job done – that was the motto.  That was the heart of The Stooges’ comedy.  “Nyuk, Nyuk, Nyuk!”

The Bottom Line?  The Stooges would have been great as BPM experts in a comedy short, had the actors lived long enough.  There would be nothing funnier than seeing Moe smack Larry with a copy of Steven and Derek’s BPMN book.  And imagine Curly taking a crowbar to a business rule engine!  Priceless.  That’s fine comedy, regardless of your genetic structure.

But the real bottom line is this: “Are some of your process efforts reminiscent of the work of The Stooges?”  Have you overlooked rules, regulations and compliance? Have you skipped the change management details?  Are you serving up old shoes instead of process innovation?  Are you running a comedy show and calling it a Business Process Competency Center? 

If you look at your current process efforts and a little voice in your head goes, “Nyuk, Nyuk, Nyuk!”  you might want to rethink what you’ve done so far, before you get a poke in the eyes or a 2×4 across your backside.  Leave the classic Stooge’s comedy shorts to the DVD player.  This isn’t the 1930s and you’re nowhere near as skilled at comedy as the late team of Howard, Howard and Fine, rest their brilliant, silly souls.

1. Complexity – How hard is it to use one of these techniques? How much work do I have to do to make it work for me?

1. Linguistic Power – What do I get in return for my hard work? How close can I come to representing the real language dynamics that real speakers use when talking about business rules?

The research analyzes each alternative approach and advises on how users and rule developers can optimize the complexity-versus-linguistic-power dichotomy.  Watch for the research, and if you have any comments, fire away.

Business Rule Representation: A Tradeoff of Complexity and Linguistic Power

Source: Gartner

I lunched with an architect a while back at one of our BPM conferences. She made it clear that process invisibility is not accidental in her organization.  In her case, process invisibility is a design center.  By introducing a random element to their processes and by keeping the exact steps secret, outsiders attempting to learn the next step in the sequence will be out of luck.  Process invisibility is an asset, especially when criminals want to learn just how your operations work.

Process visibility is like gold.  It’s always valuable – intrinsically so – but when in the wrong hands, it becomes an asset for the wrong people. 

When considering process visibility, consider the following maxim:

1. Process visibility is an asset
2. Some stakeholders deserve access to your assets
3. Some stakeholders (and interlopers) should never be allowed access to your assets

Your job is deciding who falls under item 2 and who falls under item 3.  We’ve all seen too many bad movies where the criminal learns how the security guard makes his rounds, how the armored car always does X, then Y, then Z, and how the bank president always follows the same route home.  These are cases of abusing the asset of process visibility.  Don’t let your BPM vision turn into a bad movie.  And don’t hold that cheap pun against me.  It’s late and I didn’t see it coming.