In their new book, Smart (Enough) Systems^[1], Neil Raden and James Taylor kick off with a brief Manifesto.  I like a book that tells you up-front what its basic principles are in black and white.  By the way, I strongly recommend this book.  If you are looking for a fresh way to energize and motivate your business rule initiative, this book is perhaps just the ticket.  I congratulate Neil and James for their excellent introduction of "enterprise decision management" (EDM), a notion that should become central to every organization's thinking about its fundamental direction in computing.

But enough hand-waving.  As many readers may know, there is another Manifesto 'out there,' the Business Rules Manifesto (www.BusinessRulesGroup.org) by the Business Rule Group (BRG).  By the way, the BRG's Manifesto now has translations in eleven languages.  Is this a case of dueling Manifestos?  Not at all!

Here's an interesting fact. The Smart (Enough) Systems Manifesto never uses the word "rule", and the Business Rules Manifesto never uses the word "decision".  It's sort of hard to duel if you don't even address the other's main man by name.  So how can you be sure that the Manifestos are even in roughly the same space?

Here's some background to help explain the perspective of EDM.  Would you say "flow" when you mean "business process"?  (Well, if you do, you shouldn't.)  A business process is supported by flows (flows of work products, data and information, and hand-offs between tasks), but "business process" is the actual thing at the business perspective you want from those flows.  In other words, it's the business process that provides the actual value-add for the business.  So clearly that's the thing you should be talking to business executives about.

Similarly, the thinking in EDM is that you shouldn't say "rule" when you mean "decision".  In other words, it's some decision that rules can be used to make that provides the actual value-add for the business -- not the rules per se.  To say this differently, rules are simply the means to some important business end, some operational decision(s) to be made.  So the EDM message is that you shouldn't talk to business executives about the means (rules) when it's the ends (decisions) that really matter.  It's simply the wrong artifact.

It's an excellent point.  It's not rules per se that makes a company act smarter; it's enabling better decisions that makes the company act smarter.  Rules and rule management are simply a means to that end.  I'm very comfortable with that view and I think the message is a good one.

The table below presents some point-by-point evidence to show how well the Manifestos align.  I could go on, but I think you get the picture.  Do I think the Smart (Enough) Systems Manifesto is perfect?  No.  I'll talk about why in a future column.  But that's secondary.  The important thing is that EDM provides important -- indeed groundbreaking -- innovations for the practice and acceptance of business rules.  In upcoming columns, I'll be talking more about that too.

For more information on EDM and related ideas by the authors of Smart (Enough) Systems, access a free recent webinar at [URL to BRForum website access point].

Table. Corresponding points in the Business Rules and the Smart (Enough) Systems Manifestos

References

[1] Neil Raden and James Taylor.  Smart (Enough) Systems:  How to Deliver Competitive Advantage by Automating Hidden Decisions.  Prentice-Hall (June 2007).  ISBN: 0132347962.

# # #