HighOrbit

BPM Standards Update – The Cost of Compliance

Prohibiting Competition and Restricting Industry Growth

The value of a BPM system lies in the added productivity and decrease in errors it brings to an organization. While that seems like the logical, most functional criteria for selecting a BPM system, many vendors are beginning to add another layer to the conversation – BPM standards (BPEL, BPMN, XPDL). They applaud the standards for how they reduce cost, simplify integration and support of a BPM system. To outsiders of the industry, that sounds just right. But BPM standards are anything but what they appear to be.

The truth is BPM standards are their own stand alone industry and the proof is in the results. After years of discussion, there is still no single and universally agreed upon set of BPM standards. There are organizations competing against each other and promoting “their” preferred standard.  Organizations like Object Management Group (OMG), Workflow Management Coalition (WfMC), BPTrends, and BPM Institute; most backed by the big named players in the industry.

As a member of the BPM community, my biggest concern lies in the fact there is money to be made submitting, managing, publishing and promoting standards. This activity isn’t focused on the customer and their needs, but rather, is focused on the creation of guidelines that will require upgrades, services and more expenditures. It seems that the standards organizations and BPM vendors are always on the verge of releasing new revisions that will leave customers non-compliant, unless they pay for the new standards. In effect, “standards” are marketed as a cost savings benefit, when in reality, they often end up doing the opposite.

The problem with the business model behind the BPM standards industry is that it is restricting growth for the industry. By continually moving the mark, large companies are the only customers able to afford to play the game. But even they can be financially and physically unable to keep up with the ever-changing standards.

If growth is to come to the BPM industry, providers must be able to bring real value to smaller markets. Our organization is a perfect example of the “standards versus system cost” assessment. We chose to defy the standards and invest in developing a cost-effective workflow automation system any organization can justify, offering SaaS and Self-Hosted options.

We believe that our growth over the last five years is the direct result of bringing our system to a larger audience. If we had chosen the standards compliance route, our technical staff would be at least three times larger, with their focus on standards compliance development, instead of feature enhancements. That means the cost of the system would skyrocket, making it inaccessible for smaller organizations and departments.

My recommendation is to not place too much value on a BPM vendor that promotes compliance with standards (BPEL, BPMN, XPDL). Often their systems will be cost prohibitive and overly complex for a small to medium sized organization. Consider what is really important to your business. Is it the (unfulfilled) promise of possible integration with yet-to-be built systems, or is it tangible functionality that solves your business requirements. No matter your size, buy the system that best suits your requirements and budget. For now, forget about the so called standards.