Talk:Process modeling

Systems Start‑class High‑importance

	Systems science portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Systems, which collaborates on articles related to systems and systems science.SystemsWikipedia:WikiProject SystemsTemplate:WikiProject SystemsSystems
Start	This article has been rated as Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
High	This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is not associated with a particular field. Fields are listed on the template page.

Regarding the proposed merge (of Business process modeling into Process modeling)

Please sign your comments with the Wiki code ~~~~ at the end of your comments!

"Process modelling" is also a term used by chemical/process engineers to refer to their efforts to model chemical processing plants. BPM should therefore be specified fully, not shortened as in the present article. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 129.94.6.30 (talk) 00:21, August 23, 2006

I do not see why, the chemical processing plant is still a business, and as such the modelling of its workings fits within the business process modelling paradigm. Ansell 07:04, 23 August 2006 (UTC)

Please note that the process modeling for process engineering refer to mathematical models which mimics the actual process. For example, a process model for a blast furnace (used to make steel) would capture all the physico-chemical reactions and try to predict the temperature and completion of various reactions during the charge descent. This is surely not a business process modeling. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 219.64.92.39 (talk) 12:04, September 13, 2006

If this is true, the article surely does not reflect any of what you said (no mention of chemicals, blast furnaces, steel making, or tempature) and only refers to how it's used in a business. Radagast83 20:18, 28 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Could someone please be more clear about "the possible merge [of what??]" above? It appears that this is a discussion that's been going on for a while but much of this history has been removed, making it more difficult for newcommers to follow.

There are currently two articles: Process modeling and Business process modeling. This is further confused by the entry for Business Process Modeling which redirects to Process modeling. I'd like to remove the exiting Business Process Modeling redirect. Does anyone object? Wikipedia:Naming conventions (capitalization) Karlhauth 13:03, 1 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

There should be no redirection. Process Modelling and Business process modelling are in some way similar, but they are no way the same. Please leave them separated. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.131.44.226 (talk) 09:25, April 11, 2007

Business Process Modeling or BPM is the currently accepted nomenclature for business-specific modeling exercises. While process modeling can be executed for anything, there are specific challenges present when working within in the business arena. It would be of benefit to the business community to address those specifics here. — Preceding unsigned comment added by VSJMortensen (talk • contribs) 13:08, April 18, 2007

It is not the same.' Keep the subjects separate. They are realy not the same. Telgeniaal 10:40, 7 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Keep separate. The Process modeling page is general, and this is one of only several meanings/contexts. In order to keep that page from becoming overlong, this article is best kept individual IMHO. David Spalding (☎ ✉ ✍) 16:36, 17 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Business Process Modeling (BPM) should be kept seperate. While there are obvious commonalities, BPM must take into account human factors and constraints. I, for one, have argued that BPM does not go far enough in taking human constraints into account. Anyone interested in this point of view should contact me directly for the recently releases white paper, "Improving the Business Process Model." --mlefcowitz 11:49, 10 November 2007 (UTC)