Aris vs EA for Process Modelling

[Ian Mitchell]

I have a client who is looking for some help evaluating Aris & EA for process modelling.
All of us, I'm sure, have a natural preference, but does anyone have any recent experience of these two? If it helps, my client is willing to pay money for someone with this experience.

[qwerty]

Well, from a price perspective the situation is clear. However, for modeling processes ARIS is miles ahead. On the other hand there's BPMN which is not only catching up. EA is not a native BPMN tool, but using the profile it gives a comparable product. Plus it has the object modeling part already included.

q.

[Richard Freggi]

Hello Ian
I think it would boil down to what methodology your client wants to follow and what they want to get from their process models.
We had similar discussions in my company and honestly sometimes it felt like people arguing whether baseball bats or tennis rackets were the best tool... the answer of course depends on what game are we playing?  (In that specific case it turned out that we wanted to play basketball, which made the 'tool war' argument even more ridiculous). 
So I would focus efforts on getting maximum clarity on what your client wants to achieve and how they want to achieve it - then the tool choice should be straightforward.

[Uffe]

... it felt like people arguing whether baseball bats or tennis rackets were the best tool... the answer of course depends on what game are we playing?

This is probably the best way of making this point that I have ever heard. I'm gonna steal it.

So I would focus efforts on getting maximum clarity on what your client wants to achieve and how they want to achieve it - then the tool choice should be straightforward.

Yeah... Good luck with that.

/Uffe

[Richard Freggi]

Hi Uffe - welcome to use my analogy!

Re. the discussion for tool choice, you can follow roughly the steps you would for an application fit-gap analysis in an enterprise architecture engagement.  It really is essentially the same thing. 

There are good methodologies explaining how to do this and one of them - TOGAF - is freely available (you can see all of it on the Open Group website).  Yes it can be done!

[Paolo F Cantoni]

So I would focus efforts on getting maximum clarity on what your client wants to achieve and how they want to achieve it - then the tool choice should be straightforward.

Yeah... Good luck with that.

/Uffe

Our EA Organisation now offers a "Clarification Service" to help users agree what they are talking about.  It's based on our Onto-Terminological Modelling and the few User Departments that have used it have been very pleased with the results.

Paolo

[Ian Mitchell]

So far, I'm getting best value from Q's response.
I realize that 'it depends' is the most logical answer, but, like most clients, they haven't decided exactly how they are going to do their process modelling.
And I think this is a reasonable approach.
But before you scream 'that's no way to choose a modelling tool', given that they have realized they WILL need a tool, then surely the smart thing is to tailor their approach to (1) their own requirements, but also (2) the capabilities of a tool.

It seems like a solution -> Requirement approach, but don't we need some measure of this? No point crafting a wonderful modelling approach, then finding there is no tool to which can do it without huge modification. And when maybe a small change to the modelling approach would make it fit disproportionately better with one or other tool.

As an example, just look how us EA users have adapted our modelling approach to the lack of any usable time-based modelling - we just skip around the idea of roadmap planning which lots of people say they need. (yes, I do know there is some time-based function in EA, and no, it doesn't come close to what most customers SAY they need). But we get around it with some baselines, a bit or branching and merging, and some fast talking.

So, Aris users: what's it good at?
 

[qwerty]

Aris' greatest plus is that it comes along with a methodology. For many years this was the only one. So Aris has (or had; see my BPMN objection) a monopoly here.The last time I was in touch with Aris it was to export (parts of) it's content to work with in EA (which wasn't straight forwards but feasible).

q.

[Richard Freggi]

Hi Paolo where can I learn more about this clarification service? Sounds interesting!

So I would focus efforts on getting maximum clarity on what your client wants to achieve and how they want to achieve it - then the tool choice should be straightforward.

Yeah... Good luck with that.

/Uffe

Our EA Organisation now offers a "Clarification Service" to help users agree what they are talking about.  It's based on our Onto-Terminological Modelling and the few User Departments that have used it have been very pleased with the results.

Paolo

[Glassboy]

So far, I'm getting best value from Q's response.

I've spent a bit of time helping ex-Aris users to get value out of EA after Aris has failed to deliver the value that was in the business case to buy it.  But I don't know enough about the actual reasons that it didn't live up to the promise to give you much of a steer.  I suspect - like any tool - you need "modellers" in your organisation, as nothing does it for you auto-magically.

[Paolo F Cantoni]

Hi Paolo where can I learn more about this clarification service? Sounds interesting!

[SNIP]

Our EA Organisation now offers a "Clarification Service" to help users agree what they are talking about.  It's based on our Onto-Terminological Modelling and the few User Departments that have used it have been very pleased with the results.

Paolo

Hi Richard,

It's not rocket science, we use a controlled language. Based on our Onto-Terminological model where we relate terms and concepts, terms and terms and concepts and concepts.  We have also developed some guidelines/rules about how language needs to work in order to reduce confusion.  As a result, we've created some special ontological relationships.  But, basically, it's sitting in on discussions and listening to how people are miscommunicating and helping sort it out when we see it.  We also hold facilitated sessions to explore the domain, principally from a data-oriented viewpoint.

PM me if you want to know more.

[Glassboy]

But, basically, it's sitting in on discussions and listening to how people are miscommunicating and helping sort it out when we see it.

More and more - when people ask me what I do - I say I am a therapist for technology.  :-)