An Audience With….Wesley Chung of Lombardi Software

To kick off the Audience series we spoke with Wesley Chung, Alliances Manager responsible for managing some of Lombardi’s relationships with external parties and also co-creator of the Charters for BPM Program Governance which is a collaborative effort to create a community driven BPM Wiki.

Wesley’s background is in professional services and delivery of enterprise software projects and programs.  While at Lombardi, he has served as Program Manager for several global customers and spent two years based in London as the Director of European Delivery.  After returning to the U.S. headquarters, Wesley spent time in Solutions Management working on BPM program adoption and transformation before transitioning to the Channels and Alliances organization.  These days, Wesley is focused on increasing the rate of adoption for BPM by leveraging the global reach of some of the world’s leading systems integrators. 

 

2009 was seen as fairly turbulent for most but towards the end year many kicked off major change programs focused on process transformation. How do you expect 2010 will unfold for the BPM industry generally and for BPM Vendors ?

2009 was definitely a turbulent year for many organizations and individuals.  In some cases, we saw organizations strategically select BPM as a means to improve their operating efficiency and also to position themselves competitively for eventual market condition improvements.  I think the major change programs you mention were the most visible indicator of that trend, but many companies had already been making positive strides in 2009 with individual projects.  Change programs were only a portion of the increased momentum behind BPM.

In 2010, I think the BPM industry will continue to meet increased acceptance as the overall market recovers.  Purse strings will begin to loosen, but there will be increased oversight and due diligence on how money actually gets spent.  There will be a refinement in the usage of the acronym BPM and associated terminology.  A more educated buying public will want to dig more deeply and talk specifically about business problems that can either be solved by commercial platforms, project implementations, or both.  And the solutions will need to be as much about approach as tools, each of which will need to complement one another. 

Do you think the lack of standard definition of what BPM is has confused prospective clients ultimately leading them to question its value? Many see BPM as a process improvement method, others believe it to be a holistic process management philosophy that cuts across then entire enterprise, and the techies see it as set of tools and ignore the business discipline completely. 

I suppose that the lack of a standard definition had people questioning the value, especially if they were hearing about all the great things BPM was supposedly doing for other companies and even competitors.  I don’t think we need a standardized definition per se, but I do think we need to get down to some tactical ways in which a BPM proposition can help solve some business problems that a company might be facing.

Taking it to the programmatic level, if you are only looking at a tool or only at a method then you are missing critical elements.  You need all of the pieces, and you need commitment from your organization to change how it does things and how it measures progress.

At the level where you are looking for tools, you need tools that support the methods you believe your organization can actually use, not just those they want to use.

On a side note, I used to teach a Program Management course, and in that course, I made a point to try different techniques and see which ones worked and which ones didn’t.  By controlling the experiment, each project or release would allow you to tweak the overall set of components you used as standard best practices.  Over time, you would be able to improve the delivery philosophy within your organization.  The important point was that you could not start from the outset with a radically new methodology AND new tooling and simply hope that the project would be highly successful.

Lombardi used to run workshop days for clients but the format was changed from a physical medium to online. Why was that?

I think you are referring to the annual Driven users conference that combined company updates with working sessions for customers to share experiences and ideas.  In some preliminary research, early in 2009, we found that most of our customers would have limited or no funds with which to travel and to attend a physical Driven conference.  So, we made the conscious decision to make the conference virtual last year.  That allowed more participation in the company and customer presentations than if we had kept the conference physical.

However, in terms of Training and Education workshop days for customers, we expanded our offerings for both onsite and virtual classroom-style skills enhancement.  We grew our extensive network of certified education partners, and added the ability to train a customer’s in-house trainers.  

Our philosophy is that a one-time, one-size-fits-all product training course does not adequately prepare people for real-world projects.  Lombardi University has assembled the right mix of BPM coursework and practical experience into “tracks” designed for each role involved in a BPM project team: analysts, developers, program managers, administrators, and executives. Tracks have multiple maturity levels, increasing in depth and skills testing. 

With growing budget constraints for external spend do you still see a need for the conference circuit to exist or could the results be achieved in the same way ?

We were tackling this very question going into the end of 2009.  I think customers definitely benefit from physical interaction, and it’s just hard to deliver a really immersive experience with virtual tools today.  With the budget constraints you mention, conferences will need to be geared towards practical application of experience and skills so that companies can justify sending team leads, program owners, process owners, and the like.  Conference organizers will need to be able to quantify the increased capabilities of participants who attend, not just talk in vague generalities.

bpmCamp is an example of such a conference (or unconference as they’re calling it) – focusing on real-world use cases and actual examples instead of hypothetical problems.  I’d like to see similar conferences for non-technical contributors and leaders too, and I think we’ll begin to start seeing that with communities like BPM Nexus and others focusing on ways to put shared knowledge into use. 

Do you expect clients to alter their buying criteria as a result of the downturn and concentrate on initial cost first rather than ROI or the need for BPM itself to support strategy ?

I think that the buying criteria will remain largely unchanged.  Customers still want to solve some current, compelling pain point, and they want to be able to leverage those investments as much as possible in solving other problems down the road.  While I don’t think this high-level criteria changes, I do believe that the processes in place to evaluate different products and
potential service providers will change to bet
ter highlight whether a product or a team can deliver upon that goal statement.

Customers will really focus on the how as much as the what, especially as the market consolidates the vendor options available to purchasers.  We are seeing some level of commoditization in the BPM product space, and that will continue.  Beyond features and functions of the products available, there will be increased attention paid to

 

  • The  ability for a set of tools to maximize the collaboration between business  and IT stakeholders, matching methodology, where necessary,  
  • The  ability to deploy staged releases quickly, to realize benefits from such  deliveries, and to repeat the cycle, and
  • The  ability to manage large, cross-project, repositories of assets without  overloading IT staff.

 

Even today, customers can structure their evaluations to defer some  initial costs until ROI is delivered or until they see tangible evidence of  programmatic success with BPM.  I think more organizations are getting  used to this idea that initial spend can be contained and written off if the  trajectory for success is unattainable, whereas in the past they might have  gone many years before shutting down a troubled  program.

Tell  me more about the Charters you’re involved with and Phil’s vision for  it.

Phil and I envisioned a community-led effort for  organizing best practices and identifying key obstacles in setting up a BPM  program.  These Charters for BPM Program Governance were intended to be a  way for practitioners to learn from one another and to adapt those learnings  to their own organization’s culture and mores.  Each Charter included  some patterns and anti-patterns that could be used as lessons.

The  project stalled due to some other priorities in 2009, but the ultimate  ambition would be to get it jumpstarted by the community and have it evolve  with or without us.

What’s Lombardi’s definition and philosophy for BPM ?

I’d say that at Lombardi BPM is;

  1. Understanding your current processes,
  2. Identifying ways in which to change those processes to better  meet the requirements of your end customers,
  3. Implementing those changes, and
  4. Instrumenting said changes such that you can determine whether  the processes have improved.

 

At the macro, program level this means that one process might be  improved enough for the time-being such that attention can be focused on other  processes.  After all, an organization has lots of processes they need to  optimize for the total customer experience.  With limited resources, you  need to be able to focus on the top priorities first, show progress, and  re-examine the priorities regularly. 

Our philosophy has long revolved  around making it easier for business people, those closest to the process  activities, to participate in this improvement and management.  Making  it easier has meant keeping them engaged throughout the cycle, enabling  quick and rapid prototyping, facilitating integration with technology  standards and other tools in the enterprise, and generally hiding some of the  complexity of using lower-level tools and technologies.  Underlying that  philosophy has always been a fundamental determination to make our customers  successful, including meeting the scalability and compatibility standards of  the IT organizations of our customers.

Lombardi has its own ‘University’ for BPM certification. With a lot of other  “BPM” courses in the marketplace generally but no commonly adopted method or  definition accepted how is your offering different ?

Lombardi University is markedly different from other  BPM courses and certifications in the marketplace.  First, I should  clarify that certification is an optional component in Lombardi University.   While a certification from us validates that a candidate has met a set  of standardized requirements, it is not required to get benefit from the  breadth and the depth of the courses available from  University.

Lombardi University covers all of the roles needed in a BPM  program and at all of the skill levels for the different responsibilities that  exist.  This includes BPM Professionals, BPM Program Managers, BPM  Analysts, BPM Developers, and BPMS Administrators from Level 0 (Trained)  through to Level 3 (Leadership and Architecture).  Each certification  requires demonstration of proficiency through examinations and of experience  in real-world projects and programs.  Additionally, certifications  require annual renewal through attainment of professional development  credits.

I think this is the only really comprehensive BPM education  and accreditation system available today.  As a practitioner, it’s the  stamp of approval from Lombardi, and as a consumer, it serves as the minimum  criteria for evaluating potential resources on your projects and  programs. 

You mentioned the Wiki being a collaborative effort with  the BPM community at large, do you see them being able to  influence how the University and course content is developed over time  also ?

Yes, I can see that happening, primarily in the areas of BPM program management and leadership that you would see in the BPM Professional and BPM Program Management tracks.  Knowing how to structure a BPM program for true, enterprise-wide change management, for managing a pipeline of projects, and for managing shared assets/resources that can be leveraged by everyone are critical skills.  A community of practitioners sharing that information and putting it into a format that can be easily digested would certainly be useful to Lombardi University students, even if it’s recognized solely for professional development credits.

Lombardi University also incorporates the notion of adjunct professors that can teach courses.  Recognized industry leaders who might contribute to communities like the Charters project might also be interested in teaching third-party courses in the Lombardi University catalog.

Blueprint has been met with some acclaim has it not, can you elaborate on any  particular success stories ? 

There are  quite a few case studies highlighted on our website and on the Process People blog.  Some of our customers have even presented their use of Blueprint  in webinars on www.lombardisoftware.com and  customer panels.  Without going into those specifically, I will say that  our customers are using the tool to improve their understanding of their  processes and to drive process changes.  What started out as a more  accessible process definition and collaboration tool has become a tool  for

 

  • Identifying  differences between operating branches or geographic units,  
  • Standardizing  on best practices and operating procedures, and
  • Managing  candidate projects across the portfolio of BPM  initiatives.

 

With a growing number of  Cloud enable BPM tools and services coming onto the market how do

you see  Blueprint staying ahead
of the game ?

Blueprint is still the only tool  that focuses on getting every process participant talking about process  improvement, visibility, and management.  With Blueprint, it’s not an  exercise in getting a small team of highly trained individuals to interview  subject matter experts.  Instead, it becomes an exercise in getting those  subject matter experts to share their knowledge and experience to make the  process better for everyone.  There are quite a number of features in  both the short-term and the long-term roadmaps that I think haven’t even  crossed the minds of our competitors yet, and we have a unique platform upon  which to build those features. 

Are you aware  of AlignSpace and Blueworks from SoftwareAG and IBM ? What do you think of  them in terms of how you’ve described Blueprint ?

Yes, I’m aware of those products at a cursory level.  I think we have limited data on how usable those tools are for actual process improvement projects and how easy it is to ramp-up a new team.  Whereas with Blueprint, there are more real customers using it today.

That being said, I think the notion of being able to start from a known state like an example process is a powerful one.  Even if you know that it’s not necessarily a best practice, the context provided by an example process is a meaningful one.  You can start moving boxes around to different swimlanes and connecting things in different order instead of starting from a blank canvas.  It can serve as a conversation starter to get discussion going on ways to improve your organization’s own version of that process.

IDS  have released ARIS Express recently, a free version of their ARIS Professional  modeling tool. Do you see a growing trend for BPM vendors to release free  versions of their higher end products ?

I think  customers are smart enough to realize that a free software product is going to  cost them somewhere down the line.  Question the vendors about how things  actually get done.  Speak with other customers of those products.   Find out what the true costs are with those supposedly free  tools.

With Lombardi’s tools, you’ll see a different approach and  hopefully one that you realize gets you results more  quickly.

Do  you see the meteoric rise of the Social Media platform as something vendors  should engage with as a development path, marketing purposes only or is it a  “watching brief” for now until it matures ?

Like other  hot buzzwords, there is lots of activity in different arenas but all latch  onto the term to attract attention.  As it relates to BPM, what we’ll see  with Social Media is that users will be able to interact with one another in  different ways that used to be limited to physical meetings or phone calls.   These new ways of interaction will allow processes to better incorporate  customer requirements and at a faster pace.

I think there is still a lot of learning and innovation to be  done with Social Media, but the vendors who sit and wait rather than lead some  of that innovation will always have to play catch-up.

The  mobile platform has taken off and a growing number of vendors are joining the  ranks to develop for the Apple, Blackberry and Android platforms. Do you see a  future for BPM in this area ?

In my  days running BPM programs, we used to always get asked whether approval tasks  could be routed to a user on their Blackberry, but we never heard a good  reason to do this.  After all, do you really want someone’s job  application or a mortgage loan to be approved on a screen where you can’t  easily review the details of the request?

I do see a future for BPM in  the mobile area, but I think it’s going to be focused on putting more  information in front of the people who care about a process or set of  processes.  Visibility into how an organization is improving its  processes and the execution of those processes will be more readily available.   I think this area is more likely to see real traction on mobile  devices. 

Mobile workflow monitoring and business intelligence  solutions perhaps ?

Yes, and I think we’re just scratching the surface.  With all the information being generated today, especially within process environments, we need better ways to deal with and to interact with that information.  Mobile devices keep us connected more often, and we will see some ways to make better use of those connections.

Obviously the question on everyone’s lips after the IBM acquisition is “how  will this affect Teamworks and Blueprint ?” What’s your vision for how  Lombardi’s popular toolset should be integrated with IBM’s suite ?

I think it’s still premature to really know how the integration  will unfold, and I’m not close enough to the actual details to know or to  share them anyway.  However, I’d like to believe that we fill a gap in  IBM’s current offerings – partly because of our philosophy and partly because  of the tools we’ve developed to support that philosophy.  I think  Teamworks and Blueprint will continue to exist for the foreseeable future, and  we will satisfy a set of use cases that other IBM tools don’t.

As you  know, our tools have long supported the Websphere Application Server and MQ  Series products, and now we can focus a much larger team on making sure that  our tools scale and function for every enterprise.  We’ve had a number of  constraints lifted, especially on the engineering and sales sides of the  house.  I’m sure other constraints will be encountered that we’ll have to  cope with too.

And  following on from this, do you think there will be more M&A activity in  2010 across the BPM space and do you think this will improve BPM solutions on  offer or weaken the market ?

I think there will be more  M&A activity in 2010 and beyond.  This will reduce the number of  vendors, but those vendors that survive will only do so by continuing to  innovate so that they can distinguish themselves.  Customers ultimately  benefit from these innovations, even if they have to wait for other vendors to  incorporate such innovations and to commoditize them.  One of the things  that are keeping people watching the Lombardi integration into IBM is whether  the innovation that has been associated with Lombardi will continue.  

What’s the next big step you’d like to see in BPM ?

I  would really like to see a resurgence of corporate citizenship associated with  process improvement, where individual contributors are motivated to improve  processes and have the tools to do so.  I can imagine a corporate  environment where people can make process improvements easily, share their  domain knowledge, and effect that change across an organization.  It  should be possible to reward those contributors, but it also should be part of  the corporate contract such that it benefits the employee inherently because  it benefits the company.  It should also be as easy or easier than using  standard desktop tools like Microsoft Office.  There are lots of things  that will have to change, and technology is o

nly one piece of &nbsp
;it.

Finally what next for Wesley Chung ?

Lombardi’s ability  to drive our philosophy directly to customers was always limited by the size  of our company.  Our focus on global partners and now with support from  IBM will enable expansion at a rate previously unknown to us.  I’ll  continue working with customers and with partners to drive the overall BPM  approach to drive business results.  I can’t even fathom what sort of new  opportunities will be possible now, so I’m watching expectantly as we kick off  2010.

 

Advertisements

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s