Before we can determine pros and cons of the various BPM languages that we identified in the first post in this series, we need to understand why we might want to do modelling at all. At the Gartner Enterprise Architecture Summit 2013 it’s been interesting to hear from BPM practitioners of why they have embarked on a process modelling initiative. Two examples stand out

• A major UK banking organisation has built and is managing a huge library of process models which serve thousands of internal stakeholders. Their first goal is for training which means the models are intentionally kept simple, very limited shapes and colours and generally 1 process per role. Their second goal is to comply with regulatory requirements which mandate version controlled process documentation that can be audited by financial authorities.
• Second we have seen how process modelling can be used as part of an Enterprise Architecture that links business outcomes to capabilities which in turn are delivered through processes using applications on technical infrastructure! The process model acts as the glue in this scenario that shows how systems and infrastructure relate to business goals which is a powerful way to frame communication about the impact of changes or investments.

We also saw a keynote presentation from neuroscientist Beau Lotto which amongst a discussion on reality versus perception proposed that process management is useful as part of efficiency, which in nature is good in the short term, but is triumphed by agility when dealing with change. Interesting food for thought!