This post was written by Jacob Ukelson August 30th, 2010
Is Adaptive Case Management EQ while Business Process Management IQ?
I started to think about this while reading an article in the Harvard Business Review about “When Emotional Reasoning Trumps IQ“. When I think of BPM, I think of processes that have been analyzed and modeled – i.e. smart people have gotten togther to analyze, understand and model a process using their IQ. When I think about dynamic or adaptive case management (ACM) I think about processes that evolve as part of the negotiation, interaction and collaboration between the participants of the process as they strive toward a goal – of course IQ is involved, but so is a lot of EQ.
This aspect of ACM vs. BPM isn’t mentioned much. Maybe because most of the people in the discussion are from a techical background. From my experience, when people collaborate – they negotiate, which is natural part of the give and take of getting the job done. Negotiation and discussion may be the most important part of the whole process – and certainly key to understanding why the flow of a specific instance of unpredictable process emerged as it did. Emergent processes emerge just as much by EQ as by IQ.
A key aspect of ACM is managing and supporting negotiation. How does ACM link the negotiations and discussions back to the goals of case? Negotiation and discussion are a first class part of any knowledge process, and need to be supported, managed and integrated into the process flow.
ACM needs to support EQ just as much as IQ .
2 Responses to “Is Adaptive Case Management EQ while Business Process Management IQ?”
[...] This post was mentioned on Twitter by Lee Dallas and Tom Shepherd, ActionBase. ActionBase said: Is Adaptive Case Management EQ while Business Process Management IQ? – http://bit.ly/9LC3Mi #BPM #ACM [...]
Tweets that mention Is Adaptive Case Management EQ while Business Process Management IQ? | ActionBase Blog - Thoughts on Collaboration Process Management Unstructured Compliance and Audit -- Topsy.com, August 30th, 2010 at 10:35 pm
I agree that negotiation and discussion are important aspects of a process. When looking at process effectiveness and efficiency you will often find that the waste is in the task coordination (EQ) and not so much in the task execution (IQ).
Negotiation starts at the level of Task Coordination either you accept and execute the task or you reject the task. We support the feedback option where you can/must fill-in the reason for rejection. The process owner can then decide what todo and even re-propose the task with the comment that you are not allowed to reject. Obviously you can/must fill-in also the feedback when completing the task as not only the outcome of the task but often also the reason for decission taking is important for all involved in the process.
Furthermore during the task execution the user is able to negotiate in a structured and documented way by adding a voting-task or use the possibility to chat and add the chat-thread to the Case, same for adhoc wiki-pages.
Freddie, September 1st, 2010 at 10:17 am
Leave a Reply