Re: [Fwd: Re: [bcm] [Fwd: [bcm-comment] Public Comment]]

[David RR Webber <david@drrw.info>]

Shawn,

I think I can answer this one.  The idea behind BCM is to exploit the 
layered approach, so
that you postpone decisions to as late a point in the process as 
possible.  So making a
decision about using web services, or some IT specific approval process 
would not
feature in the layer deciding the business goals and the semantic detail 
of the business
processes, and so on.

The traditional IT approach is to have the tail wag the dog - so the 
engineers make
decisions to use say - UML or SCRUM - and then force that on to the 
business facing
part of the process.  We are seeking to avoid such conflicts.

The aim is to provide an environment that the business layer decisioning 
can find comfortable
and familiar, and to defer pure-play IT Q&A stuff to the implementation 
layer detailing.

By way of example - an IT engineer may ask "are we going to use digital 
certificates with our partners?".
Whereas at the business level this would be off the table - instead the 
question would be - what level
of business validation and security do we need for participants?

Similarly in an XML world - engineers may ask - "do we have XML schemas 
yet?" - whereas the
BCM views that as the very last step to occur - when all the other 
business determinations have
occurred relating to what business reporting and use of information and 
process flows is understood,
domain vocabularies identified, and how those deliver on the overall 
business goals.

I guess that's why we call it a business-centric methodology!

Thanks, DW
==========================================================
Maynard, Shawn wrote:

>All,
>
>Thanks for your prompt reply.  
>
>Mike said....
>    
>"In the concept layer of the BCM, you address what standards you wish to
>follow (internally) as part of you architecture type.  If they choose CMM
>process, they then apply the CMM method, as one facet of the policies,
>performance standards, portfolio, etc. they intend to follow in going
>through the 4 levels."  
> 
>From this comment I have the following main clarification question.  Is the
>idea behind BCM that in the course of developing your business process (i.e.
>the services or products you need to do business) you also define the
>underlying development infrastructure you need to develop those
>products/services??  
>
>For example if I want to develop a new web services product suite will BCM
>help me create a process that uses Agile best practices (like XP or SCRUM)
>to create those services or products?  Furthermore, will BCM allow you to
>define your business processes in such as way that CMMI standards (like
>approvals or QA checkpoints) are integral to the steps that developers take
>in creating and maintaining those services or products. Is there an example
>of how one best practice for sofware development (lets say getting
>requirements approved before you start design or coding)would fit into a BCM
>designed business process?
>
>If Mike, Neil or others are forming (or have formed) a forum or committee on
>CMM/CMMI and its integration into BCM I would like to be part of that
>effort.  
>
>Thanks for any input you can provide.
>
>
>-----Original Message-----
>From: David RR Webber [mailto:david@drrw.info] 
>Sent: Thursday, October 07, 2004 1:31 PM
>To: Shawn Maynard; BCM Comment; BCM OASIS
>Subject: [Fwd: Re: [bcm] [Fwd: [bcm-comment] Public Comment]]
>
>
>Shawn,
>
>OK - enclosed and attached are notes from the list responses.
>
>Let us know if there is more input and if this is enough to get started with
>BCM from your perspective.
>
>You may also find useful the full PPT on using BCM that is available
>from:
>
> http://www.businesscentricmethodology.com
>
>As Mike notes - if there is more - we have bi-weekly calls and that might be
>a useful next step to call-in on.
>
>Thanks, DW
>==============================================
>
>Hi David,
>
>This is my take on the question posted.
>
>In the concept layer of the BCM, you address what standards you wish to
>follow (internally) as part of you architecture type.  If they choose CMM
>process, they then apply the CMM method, as one facet of the policies,
>performance standards, portfolio, etc. they intend to follow in going
>through the 4 levels.  
>
>Is that good enough for you or do you need additional stuff.  The PowerPoint
>slide addresses what type of topics are addressed for each of the cmm levels
>and what you consider from a BCM level.
>
>If yes to additional stuff, we have to address it over a telephone call.
>
>mike
>
>
>==============================================
>
> Yes,  Mike and I started on a CMM for BCM.  Apologies that we didn't push
>it forward as we might have.  
>
>A couple of thoughts.  
>
>The agile software movement deals with the problem that it is impossible to
>anticipate requirements up front, and so emphasizes adaptability in the
>development process.  It follows that testing has to be tightly integrated
>into design and development, short cycles, small teams, etc.
>
>
>BCM and related service oriented approaches take an additional step. Not
>only can requirements not be anticipated, but systems must be built
>to adapt to variable and unanticipated requirements on the fly.   The
>CMM for BCM addresses more than the software development process.  It
>addresses that ability of the operational (reusable) service components to
>adapt to multiple semantic environments (where business requirements
>and capabilities vary in unpredictable ways).   
>
>The capability tracks  in the attached CMM matrix address the different
>aspects of adaptability.   Mike and I believed this need some additional
>thought before we circulated it more widely.  
>
>Neil 
>
>
>
>**************************************************************************** 
>This email may contain confidential material. 
>If you were not an intended recipient, 
>Please notify the sender and delete all copies. 
>We may monitor email to and from our network. 
>****************************************************************************
>  
>