We were shocked by a number of inaccuracies in "IT Detours on the Road to BPM" (August 2005). Author Lori MacVittie wrote "With the exception of the Pegasystems and Oracle products, every product we tested ... provided report and portal views of operational statistics. The Pegasystems and Oracle products collect the statistics but don't provide an interface or canned reports for viewing data. Pegasystems specifically requires Microsoft SQL analysis services for BAM...."
Pega's PRPC product has dynamic business activity monitoring (BAM) and provides numerous canned reports out of the box, as well as a wizard to customize and create reports. The key performance indicators that drive PRPC's BAM are available in real time, therefore reports are always current. Microsoft SQL Analysis Services is only required for Pega's simulation product, which wasn't reviewed.
In another inaccuracy, the "Bottom Line" of the BPM Suites chart states that Pega "relies on proprietary Pega language." Pega has no proprietary development language, supports all standards and works on any platform our customers require. Pegasystems uses specialized terminology to describe some of its unique functionality, but this terminology has nothing to do with programming.
Unfortunately, our Process Simulator wasn't included in your analysis. Analysts using Pega's Process Simulator can use wizards to quantify and compare the potential for increased service levels as well as time, error and cost reductions. We'd be happy to share this software for a future comparative review. As avid readers of your publication, we appreciate your effort to include us in your ongoing coverage of the BPM market, but we feel you should correct these mistakes for your readers' benefit.
Director of Product Management
Lori MacVittie responds: Regarding the issue of canned reports for BAM, the statistics I was able to easily find out of the box were functional, not operational. That is, they detailed information regarding work queues by participant, for example, but there were no process-specific operational statistics such the number of processes per minute/hour, average duration of the process and so on.
As for the need for Microsoft SQL analysis services, there was a bit of miscommunication on this issue, but we stand corrected: there is no requirement to use Microsoft SQL with the PRPC product.
The word "language" didn't refer to any requirement for a different programming language for rules implementation and application development—indeed, Pega adheres to standards. Rather, this referred to the meta-language that surrounds Pega's rules and application implementation. We agree that "language" is a misleading term, but Pega, too, should move away from object-oriented programming terms such as "class" to describe parts of the PRPC rules and development paradigm.
Finally, the decision to withhold the Process Simulator from this review was Pega's. We would be glad to test it as part of a future review.
In our review of Nsite (Put to the Test, August 2005), we incorrectly stated that the product needs multiple sign-ons in order to access reports.