Please share with the community what you think needs improvement with IBM Blueworks Live.
What are its weaknesses? What would you like to see changed in a future version?
It should have more automation abilities.
The movement is similar to Aris, and Praga, it's very difficult for the users. Because it is cloud there has to be a satellite, but when it comes to the process of implementing the world is leaning towards more complex documentation. With the building model, they want to see with the integrated workflow, and automation systems that can be managed and controlled. They have the automation machines but they need more attributes, controls, encryption, and more information because right now it's limited and needs to be improved. Better integration with specific systems. There is no BPMN documentation. Currently, they only have a tool offering of processing the BPMN Model. There are no choreographic models or they don't have models where multiple lanes or tools can be created. You can't specify a notation that is not BPMN and I would like to be able to use multiple lanes. It is BPMN-compliant but the tool needs to be more involved to get into a completely 2.0 oriented tool. It has a few things but it's not the complete BPMN model. Adding more BPMN modules to it is an important next step. While it is scalable, I don't see it being equal with other enterprise solutions. In the next release, what I would like to see added is more speed from an architecture perspective, adding more press information, such as controls, and adding KPIs for performance indicators. I would also like the ability to set that because the functionality is more important. A process is not seen in just the transformation of input, output, and scalability. There is a model that changes the way the client use processes.
The models produced are not sufficient to be imported and used by IBM Business Process Manager - the developers will need to use the IBM BPM modelling functionality to design processes. The user interface is quite easy at first but process analysts soon run into roadblocks of limited functionality, which is disappointing. For example, anything but a fairly simple 'happy path' workflow soon becomes tangled with the process flow lines being routed automatically and looking messy and off-putting for stakeholders. In the version I used (I'm not sure if this is different now), a modeller cannot move any of the model components and re-route the flows; this can be mitigate by using the 'milestone' functionality which enables you to 'stage' a workflow - but this has limited effectiveness and also has the side effect of introducing artificial stages into the 'milestone' view of the model. The workflow management functionality is so basic it was almost pointless. I was looking for some functionality and realised there isn't any - it is just a list of tasks which get sent as emails to users. Again, very simple 'happy path' workflow. If that is all you need, then this produce is fine but there are other similarly-priced solutions that have more extensive user forms, document and email generation etc. that can be configured closer to a full SaaS application. IBM had an alternative product that was more comprehensive in its functionality but this was discontinued.
In relation to sub-process links, the design is poor. On one process you can link back, but the system doesn't link it to the activity directly. It's not that obvious to people, and because of this, they have to read the different notes to find out more. The font size is really, really small and it's really not useful to print out process models because you cannot read what's written in different boxes. This makes it necessary for people to have access to the tool. We view licenses to see how the printing or output is. It's not very good. Process diagrams can sometimes be confusing. The starting point is at the bottom of the page and not on the top of the page where it actually should be. It would be good if the control points were visible right away on your progress map.
The solution is a very basic discovery product so it doesn't have that much modeling capability. This can be improved. The solution needs to be seamlessly integrated with downstream automation.
In the past, we have seen some projects not start on time. This is because we had some process gaps in our automation. By removing those and getting the right people involved at the right time, we were able to send notifications and make sure the information was in the right place. This has really helped to eliminate that risk. We would like the ability to add additional custom colors. We would like to color additional items to add notes to the blueprint. We would like to see more robust API access. We want it to be able to interact not just through the front-end, and have the ability to integrate with other systems more easily. The reporting and analytics features have room for improvement, as well as some of the management and governance. These should be done out-of-the-box, as opposed to being built manually.
We haven't yet been able to dabble in case management with Blueworks Live, as it is not yet offered with the product.
There are a couple of things which are not there right now: * The ability to create a very structured rule. With the capability that we have right now, Blueworks Live is more process focused. We should be able to enhance it to include a lot more of decisions as well. Right now, we can create a simple decision, not a complex decision, in tools like the business console, modeler, etc. * In the file management feature, we get 50MB of space. Maybe that needs to be given out as an option to customers who want to purchase the extra space. * While using the tool, it is a lot like creating a structure in BPM and Compliant, though not like 100 percent the same. The rule part as well becomes much easier when you are not using IBM BPM as a run-time engine, but Blueworks Live only for process discovery. If you want JBoss as a run time engine, it becomes a more compliant tool set and will help to increase your footprint.