This is where to come if you have a question that you would like me to answer or a hint or tip that you have found useful and would like to share.
Just enter your question or tip in the the “Leave a Reply” box below. Hints and tips will be moderated and then published.
I look forward from hearing from you.
John Owens
Hello Robert
In the normal course of events, the
Robert Suzic
How do you see on business rules originating from
John Owens
Hi John
Thank you for including this reference.
John Antos
APQC has following Process Classification Framewor
Ify
Hello John
I must confess that you have presented
Subscribe to our e-mail newsletter to receive updates.
Multi-Dimensional MEM (MDM) Online Course $397
Online Mentoring From: $80
Information Flow Modelling eBook From: $20
Business Process Modelling eBook From: $20
Data Structure Modelling eBook From: $40
Hello John
I must confess that you have presented a powerful argument that makes a lot of sense. I’m very keen to explore this technique especially on the project I am currently working on.
I’ve got some questions:
i. How can I apply this technique in designing wireframes, prototypes etc?
Function and Data Structure Modelling are the the essential starting points when developing any system, no matter what development technique is bing employed. One defines WHAT the system OUGHT to do and the other the elements and structure of the data required to enable it to do that.
ii. How does this technique differ from value chain analysis?
It is totally compatible with value chain analysis, the concepts of which can ve applied to both the Function and Process Models. By default, most experienced partitioners would produce a Function Model that fully aligned with Porter’s Generic Value Chain diagram.
iii. How does this technique fit with requirements discovery and documentation?
It totally fits into any good SDLC. The techniques enable you to unambiguously establish and model WHAT it is that the enterprise OUGHT to be doing, the ORDER in which it OUGHT to be done and the DATA ELEMENTS and STRUCTURE needed to support this. The ebooks on each technique detail what information needs to be captured and documented. The SDLC will define how to capture the non-functional elements.
iv.Do you offer discounts for purchasing the 4 e-books available i.e. functional modelling, process modelling, info flow and data structure?
I am happy to offer you a 30% discount off the set of 4 eBooks. They are available in both printable and non-printable format. When you make your purchase of all 4 books I will immediatly issue you with a 30% refund to your Paypal account of credit card.
I hope that all of this helps.
Hope to hear from you soon.
Dear John,
although I am familiar with the concepts you have packaged together, but I believe it will be interesting to read through all of your books for complete understanding of “what,where,when” and most importantly “how” questions in the course of complete System Analysis.
I have a few questions;
1. In case of process mapping for creating a new system or refining a current Information System, Can one ideally start a process with , lets say, profiling the customer by marketing team then going through different stages of business maturity and moving in different departments and finally delivery the product to customer – Can this process be termed as the Master processes (which of course includes sub processes from different departments)?
2.Mapping processes is huge task which gets complicated some times when done in detail. In your opinion, what should be covered and what should be left while mapping Business Processes for the System Analysis purpose. Should the manual activities performed by the users be the part of process Map?
3. I happen to join in a project where they have started with mapping business processes and later planning to do conceptual modeling/logical data modeling based on the mapped business processes, then to start with system architectural and development activities. What do you think is missing which can create problems later? I can see IMM already helpful in this approach as some how the same things are done but of course I need to read complete IMM package to fix whats missing and to know the correct order, form and time of doing things.
ps: The system serves around 100 employees which means its not very huge.
Hello Armie
Thank you for your detailed question. Let me try to answer it in the structure in which you asked it.
Question 1
It is a very unsafe to decompose Business Processes – I explain the reasons for this fully in the ebook IMM Process Modelling. The only safe starting point for business modelling is to model the Business Functions. These are the only contsants in a business and transcend both process and organisation structure.
This is definietely the only safe place to start when developing a new system, as it removes completely the duplication of programming procedures and ensures that these will be implemented once and only one, thus ensuring uniformity across the business, no matter what its size.
Question 2
Mapping Processes is indeed a huge task. That is why it should be avoided!! Process modelling should never be used as the primary modelling technique for business modelling. It produces about three times more diagrams than are required, introduces many logic faults and misses up to 30% of the key Business Functions. Function modelling is very much faster, eliminates logic errors and covers all of the business.
Question 3
Once again, Process Modelling is the wrong place to start, for the reasons listed above. In order to build a Logical Data Modelling (LDM) you must start with Business Functions as it is Business Functions, rather than Business Processes, that create, use and transfrom all data in a business.
The Business Functions in the form of the Function Hierarchy (or Function Catalogue) is the most powerful starting point for systems development because:
I hope that this helps. However, reading the IMM Books will make it all very clear.
I can also offer consultancy support to you and the project team in order both to accellerate your learning and speed up the system development.
Regards
John
hay John!
Thank you very much for the detailed reply. I will for sure go through IMM Package for better understanding . I will definitely suggest my team about your proposal.
Thanks
Mr Owens:
I applaud your direct and concise approach to modeling and agree with the “What” and “Ought” prioritization. I am particularly interested in your advice on how best to sort thru the myriad “requirements” (both internal and external) that are levied (and in any cases layered) onto the bsuiness processes of government agencies.
cheers
J
Hi James
A good question. The main reason why so many requirements come in so many forms is that different people think about and perceive the enterprise in so many different ways. Few, far too few, actually see the “what” or the “ought”.
Most people see the enterprise in terms of what they do on a daily basis, operating a system or following a procedure. I put what in italics as it is not a “what” at all. All systems and procedure are in fact “hows”, mechanisms for performing a “what”.
So, when so many people come with a list of their requirements, analyse, sort and rank them. The highest rank will, of course, be the real “whats” then the “hows”.
For each “how” that is requested, ask “why?”. The answer will most times reveal an underlying “what”.
For example, I was once told that three essential outputs of a system must be three key reports. I asked “why?”. Because they are essential to the business. I dug deeper, “Why” What do you use them for?”. “We take the figure from the bottom of the first one, add it to the figure at the bottom of the second one and divide the sum by the figure at the bottom of the third in order to get our sales performance index.”
“So what you want to do is to ‘Calculate the Sales Performance Index’? If I did this and presented it to you on a screen would you still require the three reports?” “No, of course not!”
By this and similar questions you can arrive at lots of new “whats”, i.e. business functions. Identifying the underlying “whats” will eliminate most of the requirements that are merely “hows”.
What is left will be requirements regarding performance, e.g. “we need to be abel to process 3,00 items per hour”, “we need online availability for at lest 16 hours per day”.
Many requirements will really be peoples perceptions of what they think the solution ought to be, they are trying to design the solution themselves.
Take them back to defining what it is they want and assure them the design phase of the development cycle will arrive at an elegant solution – if you have a good systems development cycle.
I hope that this helps. If you have any further questions, please do not hesitate to contact me.
Regards
John
Hello,
Currently I am studing Business Process Modelling,one thing I want to know is that,suppose I want to integrate BPM into software engineering process then on which point should I focus,and what can be the different challenges of BPM in software engineering process?
Thank you for your comment.
Systems development has five distinct stages:
BPM is integrated to Software Engineering at the the design stage.
The main challenge is to always remember to start with Business Functions, as every other element comes from these, all the way through to systems modules and database elements.
I hope that this helps.
Regards
John
Dear John,
Yesterday I have bought all the books of IMM and although I have just “scanned” them only but still I found them very clearly written, well structured training materials on business analysis. Thank you for your great effort in putting it together!
The answer to my following question might be obvious but please bare in mind I have not read books thoroughly.
Question: If you are in a project where a the Process models were given before you joined the project how would you use IMM to “reverse engineering” it to Function models? Simply list all Process steps (e.g. steps of a given process group) and handle them as candidate Functions and evaluate them by deciding which is a real Function and which is “mechanism” hiding one or more real Functions?
Regards,
Miklós
Hi Miklós
Thank you for your kind comments.
The only safe thing to do is to (initially, at least) ignore them and model the functions as following the method described in the book on Function Modelling.
This is the only safe way to ensure that you are truly modelling WHAT the enterprise OUGHT to be doing. Any other approach would seriously compromise this.
It is tempting to try and reverse engineer the processes, to say “we have made this investment and we cannot abandon it”. I can understand this temptation but it could to be a costly error – in all cases where if seen it done it has failed.
After you have built the Function Catalogue, you can cross check and validate the existing business process steps against it.
In this way, none of the effort done on valid process steps (functions) is wasted and the erroneous steps can be replaced.
I hope that this helps.
Regards
John
Thank you for your answer, a will think over its implications.
Regards,
Miklós
Mr. Owens,
Does it in your opion to make sense to use IMM in combinatie with SCOR in an ERP-driven (SAP) implementation of business processes?
Hi Albert
It is essential to use IMM, because the core of any effective business model are the Business Functions. So, if you are using SCOR and going to define the supply chain processes, you must FIRST model the Business Functions, because each step in a Business Process is a Business Function.
Also remember that an ERP only supports the Business Functions and Processes it does not define them. Evrey business should have , in order of priority:
I hope that this helps. Do not hesitate to contact me at any time.
Regards
John
Mr. Owens, I enjoyed your article that’s the reason why I am soliciting your advice.
There’s a position available at my company title “Analyst Business Consulting”. I am contemplating applying for this position but I do not have any experiences as an analyst, but I feel that I can learn the skills to do this job. What do you recommend I should study to get the fundamentals to prepare for the interview?
Hello Vernadine
I would suggest that, to begin with, you read my book IMM Function Modelling. This will tell you where to start, how to proceed and how to end up in the right place.
After that read IMM Process Modelling and IMM Information Flow Modelling.
Finally, because every good business should fully understand and be able to do data modelling, you should read IMM Data Structure Modelling.
If you want to get a taste of these books before buying the full version you could purchase the Rapid Guide version of each one.
The full versions go into far greater detail and have comprehensive exercises and detailed solutions that will be invaluable in your learning.
Regards
John
Hi John,
How Use Case Modelling fit in your methodology?
Hi Adolfo
Use Cases are part of Systems Engineering / UML. In my opinion they were an unfortunate development as they try to span the activities of analysis and design and, because they were badly conceived, fall into the crack in the middle. They suffer from all of the shortcomings that existed 20-30 years ago in the world of Systems Analysis and their (mis)perception as a modern technique perpetuates the shortcomings of that outmoded approach to systems development.
They are most closely aligned with the Process Model. Once again, this builds in all of the shortcomings of using Process Modelling as the main business modelling technique.
Unless you are working in an organisation that forces you to use Use Cases, my advice would be to avoid them like the plague. If you are working in such an organisation, my advice would be to find an new job!
Regards
John
Please, advise on the software that could support your Integrated Modelling Method.
Thank you.
Hi Taras
Corporate Modeller from Casewise supports all aspects of the Integrated Modelling Method. Look at http://www.casewise.com.
Regards
John
Thank you!
Can you please comment on the role of physical data modelling in your methodology?
Many people don´t realize the value of logical data modelling, they would just like to see their actual databases documented with some order and clarity in order to do some data cleansing. This resembles the “as is” versus “to-be” discussion.
Thank you.
Hi Adolfo
Physical data modelling is essential.
Every enterprise must have a model of its physical database (often called a Database Schema) showing the tables, columns, primary keys, foreign keys and indexes (or indices). This is essential in order to be able to determine how best to build queries on the data. It is NOT and analysis tool.
However, what this Schema should look like is dictated by the Logical Data Model, or Entity Relationship Diagram (ERD).
No quality building can be built without first producing a quality architectural plan, likewise no quality database can be built without first building a quality Logical Data Model.
Moreover, no existing database can be improved without a Logical Data Model. Any changes that are made to a database without having a Logical Data Model are simply changing it from what it is to something else. Are they moving it closer to what it ought to be? Impossible to determine. Those who make these changes would argue that they do, but the truth is that they cannot tell!!
Regards
John
Thanks for your comments regading physical data modelling.