Skip to main content

BPM Tool Selection: The Case of the Queensland Court of Justice

  • Chapter
  • First Online:

Part of the book series: International Handbooks on Information Systems ((INFOSYS))

Abstract

This chapter reports on the experiences of an Australian government department in selecting a BPM tool to support its process modeling, analysis, and design activities. With the growing number of tools in the market that claim to support BPM, the variance in actual functionality supported by these tools, and the potentially significant cost of such a purchase, BPM tool selection has become an arduous task. While there is some independent guidance available on how various tools support different aspects of BPM initiatives, organizations still need to determine what their specific needs are and be able to establish how information gathered on tool functionality can be evaluated against these needs. The chapter presents the evaluation criteria that the Queensland Courts derived and used for their needs; the process followed to find and short-list candidate tools to evaluate; and a discussion on findings against the established criteria. While the requirements and evaluation criteria will differ for each organizational context, this chapter provides guidance for business managers on how they may structure and conduct a BPM tool evaluation from a business user perspective. In particular, it provides a score sheet tailored for a business process redesign initiative, which other organizations can use as a starting point and further refine to their specific needs. In addition, it provides suggestions on methods for identifying candidate tools for evaluation (i.e., via market research, on-site visits, gathering recommendations from experiences of others, etc.) from the multitude of BPM solutions currently available. The chapter also highlights the need for BPM tool vendors to invest more in understanding the varying needs of organizations across the BPM spectrum so as to provide accurate information to the right market in a way that potential business users/customers can understand.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution.

Buying options

Chapter
USD   29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD   189.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD   249.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD   249.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Learn about institutional subscriptions

Notes

  1. 1.

    http://qgcio.govnet.qld.gov.au/02_infostand/downloads/BPMN%20Process%20Modelling%20Guidelines%20v1.0.0.pdf, (date accessed: Nov 2007).

  2. 2.

    http://www.omg.org/

  3. 3.

    From Department of Justice and Attorney-General Annual Report 2007–08.

  4. 4.

    From 2008–09 Queensland State Budget - Service Delivery Statements – Department of Justice and Attorney-General.

  5. 5.

    http://www.telelogic.com/

  6. 6.

    http://www.prologic.com.au/

  7. 7.

    This report is not yet published.

  8. 8.

    see: www.bpm-collaboration.com

References

  • Baram G, Steinberg G (1989) Selection criteria for analysis and design CASE tools. ACM SIGSOFT Softw Eng Notes 14(6):73–80. ACM, New York. http://portal.acm.org/citation.cfm?doid=70739.70748. Accessed Feb 2009

  • Belton V (1985) The use of a simple multiple-criteria model to assist in selection from a shortlist. J Oper Res Soc 36(4):265–274. Palgrave Macmillan on behalf of the Operational Research Society. http://www.jstor.org/stable/2582412. Accessed Feb 2009

  • Blechar MJ, Sinur J (2006) Magic quadrant for business process analysis tools, 27 February 2006 ID Number: G00137850, Gartner Research

    Google Scholar 

  • Blechar MJ (2007) Magic quadrant for business process analysis tools, 8 June 2007 ID Number: G00148777, Gartner Research

    Google Scholar 

  • Blechar MJ (2008a). Magic quadrant for business process analysis tools, 23 September 2008 ID Number: G00161090, Gartner Research

    Google Scholar 

  • Blechar MJ (2008b) Consider eight areas of focus when selecting a business process analysis tool, 7 August 2008 ID Number: G00160260, Gartner Research

    Google Scholar 

  • Blechar MJ (2008c) Understanding vendor placement in the BPA tools magic quadrant, 23 September 2008 ID Number: G00161106, Gartner Research

    Google Scholar 

  • Davis R, Brabander E (2007) ARIS designer platform: getting started with BPM. Springer, Heidelberg

    Google Scholar 

  • de Bruin T (2006) Evaluating and advancing BPM using a BPM maturity model. In: Proceedings of IQPC’s business process management conference, Sydney, May 29–30 2006

    Google Scholar 

  • Griffith A, Headley JD (1997) Using a weighted score model as an aid to selecting procurement methods for small building works. Constr Manage Econ 15(4):341–348

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Harmon P (2007) Intro-1. Why the current interest in business processes? BPTrends 2007 Enterprise Architecture, Process Modeling & Simulation Tools Report 2.1. http://www.bptrends.com/reports_toc_02.cfm. Accessed Nov 2007

  • Harmon P (2008) Software tools for BPM. BPTrends Spotlight 1(6). http://www.bptrends.com/publicationfiles/spotlight_062008.pdf. Accessed Nov 2008

  • Hill JB, Sinur J, Flint J, Melenovsky MJ (2006) Gartner’s position on business process management, 16 February 2006 ID Number: G00136533, Gartner Research

    Google Scholar 

  • Hill JB, Cantara M, Deitert E, Kerremans M (2007). Magic quadrant for business process management suites, 2007, 14 December 2007 ID Number: G00152906, Gartner Research

    Google Scholar 

  • Hill JB, McCoy DW, Cantara M, Blechar M, Kerremans M, Lheureux BJ, Gilbert MR, Shegda KM, Schulte RW, Genovese Y, Olding E, Gassman B, Natis YV, Norton D (2008) Hype cycle for business process management, 2008, 9 July 2008 ID Number: G00159215, Gartner Research

    Google Scholar 

  • Keeney RL, Raiffa H (1976) Decisions with multiple objectives: preferences and value tradeoffs. Wiley, New York

    Google Scholar 

  • Peyret H, Tenbner C (2006) The forrester wave: business process modeling Tools, Q3 2006, 29 September 2006. www.proformacorp.com/Downloads/files/ForresterWaveQ3.pdf. Accessed Nov 2007

  • Peyret H (2009) The forrester wave: business process analysis, EA tools, and IT planning, Q1 2009, 7 January 2009. http://www.metastorm.com/news/analyst_archives.asp. Accessed Jan 2009

  • Rosemann M, de Bruin T, Power B (2006) Chapter 27 – a model to measure business process management maturity and improve performance. In: Jeston J, Nelis J (eds) Business process management. Butterworth-Heinemann, London

    Google Scholar 

  • Rosemann M (2004) Business process lifecycle management. Whitepaper, Queensland University of Technology, Brisbane

    Google Scholar 

  • Rosemann M, vom Brocke J (2014) The six core elements of business process management. In: vom Brocke J, Rosemann M (eds) Handbook on business process management, vol 1, 2nd edn. Springer, Heidelberg, pp 105–122

    Google Scholar 

  • Shyur H-J (2003) A semi-structured process for ERP systems evaluation: applying analytic network process. J e-Bus 5(1):33–48

    Google Scholar 

  • Stephenson C, Bandara W (2007) Enhancing best practice in public health: using process patterns for business process management. In: Proceedings of European conference of information systems, St. Gallen, Switzerland

    Google Scholar 

  • Weske M (2007) Business process management: concepts, languages and architectures. Springer, Berlin

    Google Scholar 

  • Wolf C (2007) Foreword. BPTrends 2007 enterprise architecture, process modeling & simulation Tools Report 2.1. http://www.bptrends.com/reports_toc_02.cfm

Additional Sources Used to Evaluate the Tools

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Islay Davies .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2015 Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Reeves, M., Davies, I. (2015). BPM Tool Selection: The Case of the Queensland Court of Justice. In: vom Brocke, J., Rosemann, M. (eds) Handbook on Business Process Management 1. International Handbooks on Information Systems. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-45100-3_16

Download citation

Publish with us

Policies and ethics