« business and a boring brain-dump | Main | sea, sailing and selling »


Balaji Sowmyanarayan

Sexing up enterprise software? Full marks for that.

Yes the parallels are interesting. But there is a huge differences between the social setting and the business setting.

In social setting, the thinking/attitude is whatever I get out of the social interaction is a bonus. Serendipity is the operational word.

In biz setting, solving specific problem/pain point is the basis of interaction. Precision and Certainty are the operational words. A social object, if it just connects it is much celebrated. Whereas a biz object will have to enable assembling of right competency with relevant information that delivers results with stringent success criteria.

My question to you, thingamy is, why bother with all the complex, difficult precision biz modeling? Why not apply Social Software 'lipstick' to the good old ERP pig? That way there is no rocking the boat and excursion away form comfort zone involved. ;)



won't divulge too much about my younger days in bars, but must admit to sometimes having been rather focused on the outcome sometimes! LOL

As to the ERP pig and social lipstick - little problem, the way current transaction and resource centric ERP systems are architected they cannot do the BRP part, otherwise they would have done it a long time ago given the need (today run by email, Monday morning meetings and sheets with rules & policies).

ERP is linear and transactional -and event driven/capture as in "what things happens", while BRP is like passing the bucket around, conditional for each step with a large number of alternatives each time - and is object driven/capture as in "what happens to things" (mostly virtual things).

Rocking the boat... well, if you replace nothing (A4 sheets with written rules & policies say) there would be not much rocking. Thus thingamy focus is on BRP - ERP is up to user, we do not rock that boat at all, later one day it might become a natural progression. And yes, ERP is a subset of BRP and not the other way!

alan p

Interesting...I suspect that all network links - from a social network, an internet hub, or a bill of materials etc- have an objective for that link to exist (aka a XXX Object).

And take that further, there is probably an 80/20 of details in any transaction that are critical to complete it.

And - looking at setting up data accuracy of a BoM or communicating with the client above, its not always quite clear what the key details are.

Gifs thoughts....


Alan, interesting that you mention BoM - certainly an example of a "mashed up object" consisting of many objects and how they relate to the end-product-object, but very little information about how they relate to each other or even how they become and end-product.

Thus the BoM and more could be replaced by two methods that are quite natural and actually gives the complete picture of absolutely all around the end product:
1. The relationships - "part xxx is part of products yyy" and "part xxx is created by firm zzz" etc ad nauseum.
2. The sequence framework - step 1 add part xxx to part ttt, step 2.... etc. - the whole workflow where the objects are manipulated in an orderly fashion leading to the end product.

And if you need a BoM (or whatever else) printed out for whatever reason, slap a query on the database using a template displaying it in good old BoM fashion :)

The comments to this entry are closed.

My Photo


  • Phone: +33 6 8887 9944
    Skype: sigurd.rinde
    iChat/AIM: sigrind52

Tweet this

Thingamy sites

  • Main site
  • Concept site

Tittin's blog


Enterprise Irregulars


Twitter Updates

    follow me on Twitter


    • Alltop, all the cool kids (and me)


    Blog powered by Typepad
    Member since 01/2005