Processes implemented inside the DMS system?

Question

Traditional categorization of processes is talking about integration, human centric and document centric processes, with the last one as a good candidate for placing inside the DMS system (of course, the prerequisite is that there is a built-in support for BPM).

But I was unable to find some concrete,more detailed explanation of the distinction between those options. Imagine a company, that have Enterprise BPM solution , and also a DMS system with quite good support for BPM (i.e. Filenet DMS). In both systems you can create user screens and workflows (process logic) as well. Also, most processes working with documents are also quite "human-centric".

I am perfectly aware of the fact, that choosing the target platform always depends on the requirements and specific circumstances, but I wonder, if there are some general rules, or principles, based on which I can better decide where to put the process layer of the whole solution.

Additional clarification:

I don't want to implement any new platform. As I indicated a little bit in the previous post, we already have BPM platform (Oracle) and DMS as well (Filenet with BPM support - Case Foundation). So the question is not about choosing the new platform...but more about setting the rules for using the existing products/platforms. There are a lot new projects in the queue...and for some of them (that are touching the area of working with documents) we need to decide the target platform/s. For example, when you have a simple process with a few steps, and in all steps there is some work with an existing document (the document - or at least his original version, is also input to this process), the requirements on the front-end are not very complicated etc...it would simpler to build the whole solution in the Filenet platform( mostly because of the cost). But I am wondering if there are some similar rules....Like you should think about that or that... when you want use only the DMS platform...or both platforms etc. You can call these rules the principles for development, references architectures or something like that....that is guiding you when designing the target architecture/s.

Thank you

Answer 1

I'm reposting the answer because I don't see a reason for deletion (by @Bohemian). I think it adds value to anyone asking the same question. @Bohemian could have at least specified why he deleted the post.

Here it goes:

You gave us rather small amount of information. And what exactly is the question? What do you mean by "where to put the process layer"?

You shouldn't constrain yourself to only those DM systems that claim to have BPM built-in. That's marketing speak behind which often lay two half-baked products. You should instead question which standards-based integration points the system has, so you can integrate effortlessly. And then invest in best-of-breed DM and best BPM separately. All-in-one solutions are often too closed, difficult to extend and above all, they bring free vendor-lock-in with them.

What are your business requirements, i.e. what do you have to do? Implement BPM inside organization that already has DM or not? Do you have some BPM platform already? Do you have any constraints/requirements when choosing either of those (vendor, technology foundation, Gartner quadrant...)?

What are the options you're considering for DM and which options are you evaluating (if any) as a BPM platform? Have you already settled on IBM or you can go elsewhere? Is open source an option?

What is your role/responsibility in this project?

EDIT - after the author's clarifications:
I have not worked with Oracle's BPM, but I can tell you that, although Case Foundation is more suited to Case Management, you can develop a complete Process Management solution with it (workflows, tasks, roles, deadlines, in-baskets, etc.).
If you go that path and later come across the business need to allow business users to define their own case templates, take a look at IBM Case Manager, as it builds on top of Case Foundation, but also brings additional WebUI features (built on IBM Content Navigator), suitable for business users (although, more often than not, it turns out the IT does that job).

A few IBM redbooks about Case & Content management that might help you make an informed decision:

Introducing IBM FileNet Business Process Manager - this is the former name for Case Foundation - the same product, new version.
Advanced Case Management with IBM Case Manager
Customizing and Extending IBM Content Navigator - you'll need this one for customizations, if you decide to go with CF (instead of Oracle).
Building IBM Enterprise Content Management Solutions From End to End - from ingestion to case/process management (contains Case Manager).

I agree with @Robert regarding integration, after all, before version 5.2 FileNet Content Platform Engine was FN Content Engine + FN Process Engine.

The word of advice I can give you is to first document all features that business requires from BPM. Then do a due diligence on both products, noting down which of those features each of those products supports. Then the answer, if not laid out in front of you, will at least be much easier.

You also have to take into account that IBM is oriented towards IBM BPM (former Lombardi) when process management is concerned. Former FN BPM is now more pushed into Case Management (but those two are very similar paradigms).

You should definitely post back about your experience, whichever option you choose.
Good "luck" :)