Recently it was released a proposal for creation of Body of Knowledge for BPM. http://www.processknowledge.org/BandaraHarmonRosemannOctober2010.pdf?attredirects=0
Some professionals argue that it is necessary to normalize the existence of BPM practice, taking into account the increasing (?) difficulties on what BPM really is, what are the techniques and how BPM should be implemented, what are the different BPM disciplines Modeling, Analysis, Implementation …
In the last decade some organizations have tried to create certification programs for BPM professionals and after reading the document I have this idea:
- BPM is an evolving concept and should not be restricted to a dominant concept;
- In my experience from the time I worked in manufacturing industry, standards that are developed by a committee tend to be complex and difficult to understand (BPMN for example) unlike those who are thought by few people or even by a single person who tend to be simple.
- With so many resources available about BPM concepts: tools, improvement techniques it’s difficult to reach a consensus on what is the best way to define a concept, because in some cases the professional experience makes the difference or other organization already devoted effort to define what such concept is (eg Lean or UML).
- I clearly see BPM in constant evolution where new disciplines such as Outside-In, Advanced Case Management, Semantic BPM, Social BPM are pouring in It difficult these days to say what belongs to BPM or not. Everyday professionals discovered new approaches that are not even considered valid by the community.
I wait your comments. In my opinion this project is not necessary.