[ad#imagead]
It is a trend to offer tooling that supports BPMN modeling together with model syntax checking and model simulation. For example see BPMN simulation and syntax checking in ARIS.
Model syntax checking can make sure, that modeling rules, that are statically checkable are kept. It is definitely a help. Especially beginners do not know all of the syntax rules and are guided by the checks. Also experts might find this feature helpful.
Model simulation can be distiguished into
- Interactive simulation of a single process instance and
- Cumulative simulation, where many process instances are created and throughput and latency are determined
Especially the ineractive simulation of a single process instance can also be a great help in understanding the model and even the modeling elements and it’s semantics.
The cumulative modeling itself is more like a determination, if the underlying business process is optimal or not.
Another category is thinkable: The verification. While cumulative simulation or single model instance simulation can not ensure, that certain attributes for a process hold, like the absence of deadlocks, verification can. Here it is decisive to find the right attributes of a process that shall be tested.
All of this are technical means to achieve better model quality, and all of these are useful. But none of these is so useful as a governance process. Just because humans can without all of these means do the same thing and they can do even more. They find problems, that even the most sophisticated syntax checker, simulator or verification routine will never find. Also what all of these methods can only find is the consistency of the model in itself (or with another model), but never can test the correspondence of the model with the real world process. This will still be left for humans for all times.
Therefore while all of these means of checking and testing are useful, because they are comfortable, they can or should never substitute a governance process.