Ahmed Al-Olaimi on

For the past 10+ years, I've been very active in BPM on several dimensions which mostly are around "a client's specific requirements" based solely on "proper problem definition".

It is note worthy to mention that numerous projects were implemented in agencies that enforces their residential country languages rather English.

Through time I have encountered a recurring problems, whether it is caused by whatever reason; Three major issues never failed popping up in ever project terminal lessons learned:

  1. Client's (staff) Level of understanding of the essence of BPM importance or benefits for that matter. 
  2. Client's ability to "actually" take suggested final process maps to the next level and adapt to self-maintenance to their future needs (i.e. new business rules)
  3. Standard reference to BPM glossary & terminology beyond unification of internationalized English language.

Out of the three points above, the last one is truly giving me (on personal level at least) serious concern. Especially when communicating with several clients that have significant discrepancies in the their backgrounds, be it industry type, culture, organizational size, and the like.

To my surprise, although there is an Englishlanguage-based reference which is %95+ used in practicing BPM around the world, yet the lack of "dictionary" like made each locale use "English Literature" dictionaries rather than a relevant technical dictionary.

To demonstrate the case, here is an example:

Given that to achieve the ultimate translation result, the best practice is to redo the translation in revers, then you will have the original term becoming the result.

Example: Functions:

  • Function Arabic2English_Term(in Arabic_Term);
  • Function English2Arabic_Term(in English_Term);

Then the following sequence shall yield the same result:

 

  • Read (Arabic_Term);                               {Value is "Love" in Arabic}
  • Write (Arabic2English(Arabic_Term));  {Value is "Love" in English}

To validate the translation:

  • Read (Arabic_Term);                                                            {Value is "Love" in Arabic}
  • Write (Arabic2English(English2Arabic(English_Term))); {Value is "Love" in Arabic}

As we can see, both input and output are yielding the same result. In Theory; and since the BPM terms is a finite set of pre-defined glossary set, then the result shall be accurate all times(Semantically). But would that be the case always?

To answer this question, obviously we need to put this scheme in realistic testing. Therefore our choice of word was very obvious; The English word of "Process", with a 3 times run, the result was as follows:

  1. Read (English_Term);                               {Input:"Process" in English}
  2. Write (Arabic2English(Arabic_Term));   {Output is going to be in English}

Runs Results:

  1. Result of run 1: "Work"
  2. Result of run 2: "Procedure"
  3. Result of run 2: "Operation"

As we can see, it did not reflect that exact term ofreference in pursuit!

My assumption is; this is a very valid case in other languages too. However, this is not only limited on the linguistic aspect of the subject, it does involve both first and second problems as mentioned at the beginning of this article.

Level of BPM understanding (Comprehension): Since it is an imported science, certainly a word of a mouth (verbal) would put its best understanding behind pushing BPM from "Training & Education" prospective; yet what would happen once we involve Train The Trainer? or involve a written literature after Translation?

Maintaining BPM System post implementation: Having a BPM System implemented is conducted by almost %100 organization through outsiders, with exit strategy. Then we are back to square one, which is actual loss of understanding that is based on poor linguistic

interpretation. Ultimatly lose of BPM core advantages!

This is minor subject is becoming by time a significant reason for "actual" failures of maintaining BPM systems. Yes it does generate good revenues for us (consultants!), yet would that be ethical? in terms of taking advantage of the client's constant inability to maintain their own BPM!

For our marketing staff, they are found with the concept of "re-seeding" clients for future harvest!!  

As a ture believer in ethics; I am NOT SURE!

I would sincerely appreciate your thoughts and responses (Negative ones before positive and constructive ones!)

Cheers :)





 

 





 

 





 

English: Business Process Management





 

 





 

 or register to reply.

Notify Moderator