Answered

Process flow level of detail

In systems analysis - the lowest level of detail must be described in a design.

All BIZAGI process models that I've seen are very high-level (almost manager level). (It seems that a thousand step process is combined into one, high-level descriptor).

Where is the detail entered?

Are what I've seen just simple demonstrations, where in reality - they should be much more complex at the process modelling level?

My company thinks that directors will be able to produce robust, elegant software with BIZAGI.

As an experienced analyst / programmer; I know that they won't.

The question really is: where I see something akin to: "Raise help-desk query", I really expect this to show 10's if not hundreds of process steps (in the process model itself).

Where is this level of detail defined, if not at the process model definition stage?

Any clarification welcome.

Best Answer
photo

Dear Darrylle,

According to your questions, Bizagi has been developed to work in a high level, however you can create business rules using expressions, widgets and custom libraries in order to make a very powerful tool. Bizagi Modeler is the tool to create bpm models, after that, you import those models to Bizagi Suite which is able to automate them easily. Bizagi Suite uses a carousel where you can follow step by step in order to create a web application according your business needs. I will show you some articles and videos to understand what is Bizagi and how it works:

Best regards

Comments (3)

photo
0

Dear Darrylle,

According to your questions, Bizagi has been developed to work in a high level, however you can create business rules using expressions, widgets and custom libraries in order to make a very powerful tool. Bizagi Modeler is the tool to create bpm models, after that, you import those models to Bizagi Suite which is able to automate them easily. Bizagi Suite uses a carousel where you can follow step by step in order to create a web application according your business needs. I will show you some articles and videos to understand what is Bizagi and how it works:

Best regards

photo
0

As a BizAgi consultant I will assure you that developing good applications in BizAgi will not de done by the average director.

I believe developing applications with a BPMS is a collaborative effort.

A lot of design (depending on the complexity of the required applicaton).

Data modelling is required and needs to be validated by experts

Scripts are necessary unless the process is VERY simple.

On the other hand...

BPMN is a communication tool as well as a "programming language".

Processes should look as simple as possible and one process with hundreds of steps is probably a bad design.

BPMN should model the process (not an application, algorithm or business rule).

Depending on cardinality and other factors a process can be decomposed in several processes or hide complexity using subprocesses, etc.

As an orquestation tool, you should invoke services that do work and return results (not only for system integration).

There are many companies managed in Excel... many of the very bad, some of them very good.

Some departments in many companies are managed in Excel... many of the very bad, some of them very good.

Personal work is also managed in Excel... many of the very bad, some of them very good.

BPMS systems probably have a similar future.

I believe the best solutions will be implemented with business and technology people working together in defining the process and the metadata and services around these applications.

These are my comments.

photo
1

Jaime,

This is a very late response to your post: thank you. You answered my actual question, you understood my concern.

BIZAGI is now back on my agenda (due to corporate hesitation), with a more concrete probability of my becoming involved with it.

The problem is (as always) that I.T. laymen see an Excel 'solution', and think: "anyone can do this', and 'look how pretty it looks'.

What they miss (seemingly intentionally), is the 'forever' maintenance costs of these 'quick, dirty and cheap' solutions.

Yes, very 'clever', complex solutions CAN be produced with say Excel, but, how robust is it?, How much manual 'hand-holding' / maintenance cost will it require for the life of the app? Also, how much more time did it take to produce the solution with Excel, than it would with a better suited (but higher skill requirement) tool? Another key question: how 'standard' is the solution - can EVERY Excel 'expert' immediatley understand the 'solution' and how it works? (There being no obvious 'standard' to complex Excel software development).

I (as a systems analyst / developer) view projects as having a finite 'development life-cycle'.

When I have finished production (and testing of course) - that's it, I leave. I produce solutions to be self-maintaining, with administration features that do not require software development skills.

There should be no further need for my skills - unless additional features are required.

I do not develop solutions with 'consumable' requirement - where the customer MUST depend on me to revisit periodically.

I have over the years seen many. many 'magic bullet' software solutions, where salesmen have proven their worth.

It seems that my belief that I.T. directors (with I.T. knowledge) are CRITICAL on the Board of Directors (but alas, this responsibility is always seen as a simple task that can be absorbed by the say Finance Director).

I have on too many occasions seen consultants produce a dazzling solution, only to leave it to be maintained / enhanced when it has not had a fundamentally 'robust' infrastructure developed underneath it.

Management then expect you (as an I.T. 'expert' with other tools) to pick up and start running, and fail miserably to be 'efficient' - because those basic fundamentals were ignored at the outset.

The original question was to confirm what I (in reality) already knew: BIZAGI is not a 'magic bullet', it requires high levels of I.T. skill to deliver a robust, efficient, optimal, business-critical solution, and can deliver only say 10% of that if a non-I.T. manager decided to 'do it himself'.

(That is, and always will be the fact of the matter - it's always nice however to hear confirmation).

Thanks,

Darrylle