BPM Examples and Applications

When organisations evaluate business process management, they typically encounter lists of generic use cases: employee onboarding, expense approvals, customer service ticketing, procurement workflows. These examples describe what BPM can automate, but they don't explain why certain organisations succeed with BPM while others implement the same processes and see marginal improvements.

The difference lies in understanding which specific business problems BPM actually solves—and recognising when your organisation faces those problems versus different challenges that BPM won't address. Real BPM success stories don't just automate processes. They solve coordination breakdowns, compliance gaps, visibility problems, or scale challenges that prevent organisations from executing their strategy effectively.

The Coordination Problem: When Growth Breaks Communication

Organisations typically manage processes informally when small. Department managers coordinate through meetings and emails. Everyone knows who approves what. Exceptions get handled through conversations. This works until it doesn't.

The Breaking Point

A101, operating hundreds of retail locations across Turkey, faced a coordination problem that small-scale solutions couldn't address. Purchase approvals, inventory transfers, maintenance requests, and operational changes all required coordination between stores, regional offices, and headquarters. Email chains and spreadsheets worked for a few locations but collapsed under the complexity of hundreds.

The problem wasn't that individual stores couldn't process requests—it was that nobody could see the status of requests across the organisation, bottlenecks emerged unpredictably, and approval workflows varied by region creating inconsistency. Managers spent hours tracking down where requests sat in informal approval chains rather than making decisions.

BPM solved this by creating visible, standardised workflows that span locations. When a store manager submits a maintenance request, the system routes it automatically based on scope and urgency, tracks approval status in real time, and escalates exceptions without requiring managers to monitor email chains. The value isn't automation—it's coordination at scale.

This pattern appears across manufacturing operations: as organisations grow geographically, informal coordination mechanisms break down. BPM provides the orchestration layer that maintains consistency and visibility without requiring everyone to be in the same room.

The Compliance Gap: When Regulatory Requirements Exceed Manual Capacity

Heavily regulated industries face a different challenge. Their processes must demonstrate compliance—not just achieve outcomes but prove how those outcomes were reached, who approved what, when exceptions occurred, and why. Manual processes struggle to maintain this audit trail consistently.

The Regulatory Tightening Point

Financial institutions like QNB Invest operate under regulations requiring documented approval chains, maker-checker controls, and comprehensive audit trails for investment decisions. When processing involves multiple departments—relationship managers, credit analysts, compliance officers, portfolio managers—maintaining compliant process execution manually becomes error-prone.

The problem manifests as compliance violations not from intentional circumvention but from process inconsistency. Someone approves a transaction without required dual authorization. Documentation gets filed after the fact rather than during the process. Exception handling bypasses compliance checks that were meant to be mandatory.

BPM addresses this by enforcing process compliance automatically. The system won't allow a high-value transaction to proceed without dual approval. It captures audit trails by design rather than by discipline. Compliance checks happen as part of workflow execution, not as separate review steps that can be skipped under pressure.

For pharmaceutical companies, the compliance challenge extends to validated processes where every change requires documentation and approval. BPM platforms that support deployment flexibility—allowing processes to run on-premise when data sovereignty requires it—become strategic infrastructure rather than optional tools.

The Visibility Problem: When Information Silos Block Decision-Making

Some organisations don't have coordination or compliance problems—they have visibility problems. Processes execute, approvals happen, work gets done. But nobody can see where bottlenecks form, which processes consistently miss SLAs, or how workload distributes across teams until after problems emerge.

The Data Opacity Challenge

Insurance companies handling thousands of claims monthly face this acutely. Individual claims processors know their workload. Department managers see their team's performance. But understanding why certain claim types take three times longer than others, where approvals stall, and how workload distribution affects processing times requires data that spreadsheet-based processes don't capture.

The problem isn't automation—claims get processed. It's that improvement opportunities remain invisible because process data lives in email, shared drives, and individual work habits rather than structured systems that enable analysis.

BPM transforms this by capturing process data automatically. Every workflow execution generates data about cycle times, bottlenecks, exception rates, and resource utilization. Managers gain visibility into process performance that enables proactive improvement rather than reactive problem-solving.

This visibility matters particularly for organisations managing complex approval hierarchies. When approval processes involve multiple decision points with different authorities—common in manufacturing operations like those managed by Sonigo—understanding where approvals consistently stall identifies improvement opportunities that weren't visible when processes lived in email chains.

The Scale Challenge: When Manual Processes Can't Handle Volume

Volume eventually defeats manual processes. Organisations handling dozens of transactions monthly manage fine with email and spreadsheets. At hundreds of transactions, dedicated staff maintain control. At thousands of transactions, manual tracking becomes impossible.

The Volume Inflection Point

Consumer goods companies like Godiva managing global retail operations face volume challenges across multiple process types simultaneously. Store opening procedures, vendor management, quality control documentation, marketing approvals, and operational changes all scale with business growth. Each individual process type might handle volume manually, but the aggregate volume across process types overwhelms coordination capacity.

The challenge isn't that individual processes fail—it's that the organisation can't manage process portfolios at scale. Which processes are running on time? Where are exceptions accumulating? How does workload distribute across departments? These questions become unanswerable when every process uses different tracking mechanisms.

BPM addresses scale by providing consistent process infrastructure. Rather than every process type requiring separate tracking systems, BPM provides unified workflow execution, monitoring, and management. This consistency enables organisations to add process types without proportional increases in management overhead.

For multinational organisations, scale challenges include multi-language support, regional regulatory variations, and time zone coordination. BPM platforms supporting flexible deployment—cloud for global accessibility, on-premise for data sovereignty—enable organisations to manage global process portfolios without forcing all processes into identical deployment models.

The Integration Challenge: When Processes Span Multiple Systems

Modern organisations don't have monolithic systems—they have ecosystem architectures. ERP handles financial transactions. CRM manages customer relationships. HRMS tracks employee data. Industry-specific systems manage core operations. Effective processes span these systems, requiring data from each and triggering actions across multiple platforms.

The System Silos Problem

When financial services firms process customer requests—account openings, loan applications, investment transactions—the workflow touches core banking systems, CRM platforms, compliance checking tools, document management systems, and reporting databases. Manual integration through data export, email attachments, and system-by-system data entry introduces errors and delays while preventing real-time processing.

The challenge isn't individual system capabilities—each platform handles its domain effectively. It's that processes requiring coordination across systems become fragile. Changes in one system break integrations. Exception handling requires manual intervention. End-to-end process monitoring becomes impossible because data lives in separate systems.

BPM platforms with robust integration capabilities provide orchestration layers that coordinate work across enterprise systems. Rather than replacing ERP or CRM, BPM sits between systems, routing data, triggering workflows, and maintaining process coherence across the technology stack.

This integration architecture matters particularly for organisations with legacy systems that can't be replaced. BPM enables process modernisation without requiring wholesale system replacement—a critical consideration when core business systems represent decades of accumulated business logic.

The Adaptability Challenge: When Business Requirements Change Faster Than IT Delivery

Perhaps the most overlooked BPM application addresses organisations facing rapid requirement changes. Markets shift, regulations change, competitive pressures force operational adjustments. Organisations need to modify processes quickly, but traditional development cycles—requirements gathering, development, testing, deployment—take months.

The Change Velocity Gap

Retail organisations during market disruptions, financial services firms adapting to regulatory changes, or manufacturing operations responding to supply chain volatility all face requirements that change faster than IT can deliver process modifications through traditional development.

The problem isn't IT capability—it's that process requirements change so frequently that development backlogs grow faster than delivery capacity. Business units wait months for process modifications that markets demand immediately.

Low-code BPM platforms address this by enabling business analysts to modify processes without custom development. When regulations change approval requirements, compliance teams can adjust workflows directly. When market conditions demand different approval thresholds, business operations can modify decision logic without IT tickets.

This adaptability becomes strategic for organisations where process flexibility determines competitive response time. The question isn't whether your processes are optimal today—it's whether you can adjust them quickly when tomorrow's requirements differ.

When BPM Doesn't Apply: Recognising the Limits

Understanding where BPM solves problems requires recognising where it doesn't. BPM addresses coordination, compliance, visibility, scale, integration, and adaptability challenges. It doesn't solve:

Strategic ambiguity — When organisations don't know what their processes should accomplish, automating undefined workflows just executes confusion faster.

Unique creative work — Processes requiring novel approaches for each execution gain little from standardised workflows. Project management, not process management, fits better.

Simple coordination — Small organisations with straightforward processes often add overhead without gaining value from BPM. The coordination, compliance, or visibility problems haven't emerged yet.

Technical integration only — If your challenge is purely system integration without human workflow coordination, integration platforms or APIs might address needs more directly than BPM.

Strategic Implications: Matching Problems to Capabilities

The BPM examples that matter aren't generic process types but specific problems that BPM capabilities address. Organisations succeeding with BPM typically exhibit:

Clear problem identification — They implement BPM to solve specific coordination, compliance, visibility, scale, integration, or adaptability challenges, not because process automation seems like a good idea generally.

Appropriate process selection — They start with processes exhibiting the problems BPM solves rather than trying to automate everything.

Infrastructure thinking — They view BPM as orchestration infrastructure enabling multiple processes rather than individual automation projects.

Deployment alignment — They match deployment architecture to business requirements rather than forcing all processes into cloud or on-premise based on vendor limitations.

The question when evaluating BPM isn't whether you have processes to automate—every organisation does. It's whether you face coordination, compliance, visibility, scale, integration, or adaptability challenges that prevent effective process execution. If you do, BPM provides the orchestration capabilities to address those specific problems. If you don't, simpler tools might serve better.

Understanding your actual business problems—not generic use case lists—determines whether BPM delivers strategic value or just automates mediocrity more efficiently.

‍