Confessions of a Vendor's blog

In a recent comment he posted, James McGovern asked me a question, and included in it was the statement: "... your particular product..." Likewise, Sandy Kemsley liked most of what she read in one of my posts but said one of my comments "... probably indicates where Lombardi is getting hit from a competitive standpoint".

So, I'm going to lay down what I guess are the the first principles of this blog... and discuss my role in Lombardi and the roles the company and our products play in this blog.

My Role at Lombardi Software
First my role. I am CTO of Lombardi Software. Lombardi competes in the poorly-named technology space called "Business Process Management."

As CTO I have broad impact on Lombardi's strategic direction. Unlike some CTOs, I also have direct responsibility for products and engineering. So when you read my views on something, it's very likely that those views also manifest in our offerings, because our products reflect, to a large degree, my priorities. As I said, at times I've been taken to task for putting forth views in this blog "because" of our product or our company. But the logic is wrong, it's the other way around: the product is what it is because of my views.

The Role of Lombardi and TeamWorks in this Blog
Having said this, the purpose of this blog isn't to discuss or promote (or defend) our products in the marketplace. Our sales and marketing teams do a great job of that. In fact, for most any technology statement I make, it will apply to many products on the market. But this forum is where I'd like to discuss bigger issues than a particular product's speeds and feeds, even ours.

As a response to the impact the internet is having on business and social culture, the best companies of the 21st century will have to be truly excellent in their operational capabilities. Of course, they will also innovate. But there are fewer and fewer blockbuster products, and more and more markets. Narrowcasting is the new business model, and that requires operational excellence to a degree very, very few have mastered. In every industry, from air travel to big pharma to software development, the marketplaces are becoming more distant and diverse, while at the same time products have become more numerous and specialized. Most of today's brands that survive will do so because they come to understand their core capabilities, and develop incredible insight into the execution and improvement of those capabilities.

The BPM vendor's goal, then, is to provide the tools - the technology disruptions - that can help companies go through that transformation quickest, with the best results. As CTO of Lombardi, my job is to understand what it means for our customers and prospects to become "process excellent" so that we can lead the industry in building those tools.

To that end, I'm engaged in conversations with many audiences around the world and on the net. This blog is one of those conversations. By participating in the debate about business process management [lower case], I hope to also understand it better. And these learnings go into our company and into its BPMS [Upper Case] product.

So while I'll address the technologies of bpm, and their implementations in BPMSs, I'll try to do so in a neutral fashion. My personal biases will come out (they already have, at times) not because "that's how our product works" but because I believe that's how a product should work. And because I believe these things, our product will probably work that way, too.

So Why Do I Do This?
So let's debate views not products... because we're all in a very young, rapidly changing business environment and no product today adequately reflects where this is going to end... that's why I'm here.

Comments

[James]

It is ok at times to take jabs at your competitors. Sometimes healthy tension benefits us customers. Of course, I would love to know when Lombardi will make its software open source and your feeling in on this topic in general. Maybe a topic for your next blog entry?

Anyway, did you see this blog entry: http://weblog.itredux.com/2005/12/why_buy_a_bpms_.html

[Phil]

Ha! You're probably right Sandy, Freudian slip no doubt... but the link is now fixed! Thanks, Phil

[sandy]

Don't get too defensive, I mostly agree with what you're saying. I can understand that the product is the way it is because of your opinions, rather than the other way around, but I felt that you were taking an unwarranted jab at another vendor's architecture. I wouldn't build a BPMS around a rules engine either, but I don't think that my opinion invalidates the concept.

By the way, your link to my site (in this post) is broken. The subconscious at work? :)

[Eric Anderson]

Phil,

Strong post; particularly the paragraph beginning: "So while I'll address the technologies of bpm..." Best wishes to you Lombardi--.