Is Adaptive Case Management concept to be considered in a Business Intelligence strategy?

In your perspective, does ACM relate to Data and Process Mining in a way it makes sense to add it to Business Intelligence solution constellation?
Do BI players consider Business Unpredictability?


Opened by Antoine Fournier, Head of ECM, Input and Output management, Zurich Insurance
Oct 29, 2012.

Answer this question




Yannis Nakos President, Document at Work (non profit)
Nov 1, 2012

and 1 other, recommanded this answer

If BIG DATA is a cross-road between ECM and BI, ACM (whether you call it Adaptive or Advanced) would be a good candidate to be the cross-road between BPM, ECM and BI as of the moment process and content mining would allow proposing best routes on a specific step of a workflow/process, when a specific set of conditions are filled (in a kind of auto-learning feature) not based on previously process modelling and complex rigid conditions modelling.
Using Business Activity Monitoring or Business Operations Monitoring (basically investigating logs) allows to extract patterns which can compose your next best route for newbies.
In any case, when designing processes, deepening on who you speak to in an organization, you end up designing conflictual models for the same process.
Therefore, why not apply the same "forensics" as in C.S.I or House M.D., basing ourselves on the fact that "everybody lie". Facts speak louder than sayings and that's what ABPD solutions do. Hence, coupling a ABPD solution such as QPR Software ProcessAnalyzer (read a story here) to a ACM engine would allow for "auto-suggested" processes basing yourself on patterns which should be really relevant if you can couple content mining (applied by autolearning features of common content categorization engines) and process forensics through ABPD.

That kind of "social intelligence" where both content and processes can be pushed to a knowledge worker, based on a business context, was initially intended by adding up rules engines to BPM deployments, but remains often but of small flexibility as the main workflow remains identical (and therefore needs to be defined in a variable level of abstraction) requiring a balance through more scripting in the rules engine when the workflow is defined in a too abstracted shape.

Here we'd speak of the opportunity (through BI/Analytics algorithms) of reshaping more efficient routes for a process (or part of it) suggested by other's behaviours (not sayings and rational storytelling) when coming to similar steps and conditions in a flow. Winnings would be at process definition, process maintenance, full agility in constantly proposing more efficient routes.

Then it still remains a matter of governance for to decide when allowing or not to suggest such route or another (because at the end, it's not because most of your team does it that way that it's the best).In this "paradigm" (I'm obliged by the syndicate of Executive Consultants and so-called Experts to use "paradigm" at least once per discussion:-) business organizations will have to change/adapt their operational model and define "process curators" the same way social media require "content curators" as a new organizational function.

PS : by the way: "content curators" were called forum moderators in my BBS time...so new buzzwords, same needs ! ;-)
Add comment

Yannis Nakos 02 Yannis Nakos President, Document at Work (non profit)

Nov 1, 2012
For QPR...the given story (http://www.bloorresearch.com/blog/The-Holloway-Angle/2012/10/qpr-software-processgold-enter-strategic-partnership.html) is just an illustration of how ABPD solutions can change your view on how to design and maintain processes.

Antoine Fournier 67 Antoine Fournier Head of ECM, Input and Output management, Zurich Insurance

Nov 6, 2012
Thank you Yannis for this thoughtful and detailed answer.

I would just give a precision about my view on ACM :There are a lot of features that are part of ACM constellation (I've been obliged by the same syndicate to use "constellation" at least once every 5 posts :). One of the most important is the fact that knowledge workers should be designing a process by doing it.
It's somehow "bypassing" the long design stage by delivering processes skeletons to those users.

ACM implementation is also about delivering a tool for living processes, and giving back process design to process owners at business side.

How to you see then ACM being integrated in a BI strategy?

All your statements about social side (very important) and governance are true. Can it be then just sticked on evry cells of a regular department organization? Is process curator simply the process owner?