From process knowledge to organisational intelligence.

Michael White: I guess you guys can actually hear me.

Gareth Collishaw: Yes, yeah. Good afternoon. Just going to hold on a couple of minutes just in case anybody else joins and then we will begin. Thank you very much for joining us today.

Trevor Moore: Just a quick check, can everybody see us and hear us? Yes, Katrina, did you want to say something or are you just letting us know you can hear us? Perfect. Thank you.

Gareth Collishaw: Should we crack on and then we can recap as needed if anyone else joins later on?

Michael White: It's being recorded, right?

Gareth Collishaw: Yes, it will be. So thank you to everyone that's joined. Thank you for taking the time to join us. As a brief introduction, my name is Gareth. I work in client services for IGX Solutions. We are a UK-based consultancy, have been in operation for over 17 years now. We focus on long-term relationships with our clients and can boast relationships in excess of 15 years with a number of our clients across a variety of sectors, including some more notable ones in global consultancy and national lottery providers, to mention a couple. We partner with a few BPM providers and are very focused around a business model as opposed to business documentation. So we take that approach in the work that we do. We're also an AI-first entity, practice what we preach. And just to introduce the other two gentlemen who are sitting there quietly in the background, we have Trevor Moore and Michael White, who will be speaking to you shortly to take this presentation forward, who were the founding partners of IGX. So without further ado, I'll hand over to Michael, who will take you further through the presentation.

Michael White: Okay, thanks Gareth. Appreciate that. Right, we don't want to do death by PowerPoint, but what we do want to do is actually just do a little bit of a scene setting to help in the understanding of why IGX360 Insights exist. Why did we actually develop this and what problems does it solve? So if we go into that. So for over 30 years, business process management has evolved from quality management systems and process documentation into sophisticated BPM platforms. Yet, despite all of that evolution, the perception in many organisations hasn't really changed. BPM is still seen as the necessary cost of doing business, something driven by regulation, governance, audit and compliance, rather than something that creates measurable business value. Every year, organisations invest more time documenting processes because regulations increase or change, technology becomes more complex and operational risk continues to grow. Yet executives still ask a perfectly reasonable question: what value are we actually getting from all of this effort? The reality is most organisations have already captured an enormous amount of knowledge — and I don't mean just data, I mean knowledge. The problem isn't that they don't have enough information, it's that they can't unlock the value hidden inside it. Traditional reporting tells us what happened. It rarely tells us why it happened, what it means or what should happen next. That leaves BPM teams working incredibly hard to maintain repositories whose value isn't always visible outside the process community.

Michael White: I believe, and the IGX team believe, that we're entering a new phase in the evolution of BPM. The role of the BPM team is changing. Historically, success was measured by how well we documented and governed processes. Tomorrow, success will be measured by how effectively we help the organisation make better decisions. That means moving beyond creating diagrams and repositories to become providers of organisational insight. Imagine a leadership team asking questions such as: where are our greatest operational risks? What happens if we change this application or process? Which transformation initiative delivers the greatest return? Where should we invest in AI? Those aren't process questions, they're business questions. And the people best placed to answer them already possess the underlying knowledge — it's the BPM team. The role is changing from custodians of process documentation to providers of organisational intelligence, helping every function across the business understand how the organisation actually works. That's where BPM moves from being perceived as a cost to being recognised as a strategic capability.

Michael White: Every organisation today is talking about AI. The conversation usually starts with 'which AI platform should we use?' I think that's the wrong question. The experience of organisations like BNY, that's Bank of New York Mellon, demonstrates that successful AI isn't simply about choosing the right technology. It's about ensuring AI has access to trusted, governed and contextual organisational knowledge. AI doesn't magically create understanding. It amplifies the quality of the information it's given. If knowledge is fragmented, incomplete, disconnected, AI will simply produce faster but potentially less reliable answers. If, however, AI has access to trusted digital operating model information, it can help accelerate expertise, improve productivity, and support better decision making. This is why BPM is becoming more important in the AI era, not less. Your process repository is evolving from documentation into the knowledge foundation upon which enterprise AI can safely and effectively operate.

Michael White: The second lesson comes from IKEA. There's a common perception that AI is primarily about reducing costs or replacing people. IKEA demonstrated a different approach. They used AI to automate repetitive low-value activities while enabling people to focus on work that created greater value for customers and the business. That's an important distinction. The objective wasn't simply to deploy AI, the objective was to improve business outcomes. That raises another important question: how do you know where AI should be deployed? The answer isn't found inside an AI platform. It's found in understanding your organisation — its processes, dependencies, risks, and opportunities. Before investing in AI, organisations need confidence that they're solving the right problems in the right places. That's why AI readiness begins with organisational understanding rather than technology selection.

Michael White: This is where IGX360 Insights comes in. We don't see IGX360 as another BPM tool, nor is it a replacement for BPM. Instead, it sits above your existing BPM investment as an organisational intelligence layer. Your BPM repository already contains an extraordinary amount of organisational knowledge. IGX360 Insights unlocks that knowledge and transforms it into something the whole organisation can use. It takes existing data and creates information. It interprets that information to generate insights. It then combines those insights with organisational context and AI to produce intelligence that supports better decisions. This progression from data to information, insights and intelligence was a central theme in our positioning discussions. Most importantly, it demonstrates that intelligence — instead of remaining within the BPM team — becomes available through role-specific business lenses for executives, ops managers, risk and compliance, enterprise architecture, transformation teams, and many others. The people consuming that intelligence don't need to be BPM users, they don't need a BPM licence, they simply need answers to business questions. That fundamentally changes the value proposition of BPM. Instead of serving one specialist community, it begins serving the entire organisation.

Michael White: Okay, now I've set the scene. I will now hand it over to Trevor, who can get on with the demonstration, which is what you all really want to see. Are you ready, Trevor?

Trevor Moore: Absolutely. Thank you all for taking the time out this afternoon, this morning, wherever you are in the world, thank you very much, which is appreciated. We're going to go through something here, which hopefully you'll see the connection between document-first and a data-modelled repository.

Trevor Moore: I'm starting this off by saying, well, if you're using a BPM platform, then the chances are you may be using something similar to iGrafx. And if you're an iGrafx user, you'll see this interface and you'll probably know the difference between creating diagrams and then being able to see diagrams and understanding how they connect into the model. And when you look at models, what the difference is there — you're modelling the relationships. It's already got the connections and intelligence inherently built into this platform. That's why we've been a long-term provider and supporter of this particular technology piece.

Trevor Moore: But the part where typically clients struggle to articulate back to the wider business audience, not the process specialist team, is the so-what — what does this tell me? So where's the data, the information? How many of this? What's the value of that? Who's responsible for this? Where are my gaps — the quantitative and the qualitative data isn't intuitively available in the platform. But more importantly, if you're looking to leverage this technology to support the growing demand of the organisation from this data, then you need it in a format that you can actually interact with and democratise that knowledge across the organisation. And that means not everybody will see information in the same way. Not everybody wants to look at a diagram view. Some people just need the data points. And if you want AI to help you with this, it's very good at leveraging the data points to give you some intelligence that is currently buried within a repository.

Trevor Moore: So what we're talking about today is something that extends and complements that knowledge that's already captured and built into a repository such as iGrafx Process360 Live. And if you were in Munich recently, you'll have seen and heard how this really underpins the agentic process foundation, and the agentic process orchestration capabilities — there's a vision here where all of this comes together, and this is our contribution to helping those visions come together.

Trevor Moore: So I'm not going to show you anything new if you're using iGrafx, and we're going to do an iGrafx demo. We're going to go in and look and say: right, if I'm responsible for the content of this information in my repository, then just some basics. How many objects do we have? How reliable is the information I have in here? Where are the gaps in the knowledge we have in here? Where do we need to focus to improve this? If I'm trying to justify to my line management and executive leadership team that we have invested not just in the product, but the time it takes to create this information, how can I demonstrate that this is actually being used and being maintained? How can I tell the business that the value of this is actually improving and is actually growing, rather than sitting there and becoming a decaying document repository? It's those sort of questions that started driving us into IGX360 Insights.

Trevor Moore: So it comes from a place of knowledge and understanding of where clients have a pain point, and it comes from a point of view that has been our long-term view: data-derived models are of greater visibility and value to an organisation than purely a document repository. And iGrafx has always had this here. So what I'm going to show is just very quickly our interface into IGX360 Insights. On our homepage, if you're a platform owner of IGX360, it just gives you a quick, easy dashboard and interface to say, right, what do we have here in our box? It's just a welcome screen. The idea really is we want to know how our organisation is using the knowledge in iGrafx, so we can look at things like our overall repository maturity level.

Trevor Moore: So we've got in here a ready-built mechanism, an algorithm to take the information in your repository and start giving you some sort of scoring parameter to say we're currently at stage two, we need to get to stage three, and it can tell you a little bit more about what you need to do to achieve that. We can see the total number of objects we have in our repository. We can get a full breakdown of what's in the box. This is intended for tracking usage over time and seeing an organisation's growth and maturity in the knowledge that they put into their repository. So we can see information around what our process owner coverage is. If you're looking to drive improvements into an organisation and you're looking to drive transformation and change, then you need to have ownership within the organisation to be able to speak with the people who actually are accountable or responsible for these areas of the business. If you're using a demo data set like ours here, then I do hope your score would be better than ours, which currently is showing 2.8. That's not a reflection on our own internal use case, it is just a demo data set. We also have the ability to view an automated grade, so over time, as an organisation, if you want to prove to your team and your management that you are improving the validity and maturity of your captured knowledge, then this is how you do this. It's a simple grading mechanism, a bit like when you're at school — A, B, C, D, E, F.

Trevor Moore: So this is just a very quick summary that is used to track over time how information is being captured within our repository. Now, the information in our repository is coming from iGrafx, and you'll see here very quickly all of the information within iGrafx is entered into our model. And in here we see the mapping for analysis perspective. We don't need every bit of data, so we kind of map things into a canonical model, which is just a fancy way of saying rather than just bringing 45, we get down to 20 model objects. And that gives us the ability to then say, right, in our assessment, this is the value that we're using from our database. So we've taken everything that was included originally, collapsed it down for the purpose of analysis, and then we end up with a complete set of information here.

Trevor Moore: So what's in the box? Straight away you have an assessment and an idea of what's in your repository. And this assessment is something that we offer free as part of a 48-hour trial. So if you're an existing user of iGrafx, then you can collect this information for free. You can come in — we do offer a free onboarding for your 48-hour trial with a call — and you take away information that is relevant to your organisation that speaks to four different owners or four different domain views, and each one of these is designed to show that.

Trevor Moore: Sorry, did I drop out there for a second? Apologies, it came up just saying 'on hold', so apologies for that. Going back to the presentation Michael shared, the idea of taking the same data set and being able to share it across to a wider audience — people who need to understand the process data, but not necessarily the process models. So it's a different audience from your traditional BPM team and the compliance teams, but it speaks to the executive. It tells them exactly where the inventory is, how your organisational repository knowledge is structured, what's in there. And it comes out with some examples of areas where you might want to improve the knowledge so you can trust it more over time.

Trevor Moore: So, description coverage: if you've got information in there but you haven't described what that information is for, then that's actually seen as a gap. So automatically, you're getting some value out of this. It's a complete value play of connecting, and it will identify your gaps. And that's all available in the 48-hour trial. Assigning missing ownership, again another mark of quality and whether you can actually trust and count on the information you have in your repository — this is something users will have as part of that 48-hour trial, and it will tell you where you might need to fill that gap.

Trevor Moore: The same narrative is written specifically for a process owner view. This is all code and rule based — there's no AI in this element that we're sharing with you, but AI does play a part in this, and we'll get to that in a moment. We can take reports and export them — you will have full access to these assessment reports as part of a 48-hour trial. And if I click on that, it gives me the whole report, the grade, and everything I've just seen, but you have that to keep as a line in the sand.

Trevor Moore: There's also a compliance view and an architect view. So again, out of the box, it's giving you more than what you have already. You're not having to create new reports, you're not having to reinvent things. This is available — just plug your key in and away you go. So once you've got this architecture, once you've got these reports and assessments generated, what can you do about that? So we have several different viewpoints in the interface here. The first one I think we will look at is our lenses. We've already talked about how you segment the data into different domain cases. So in here, a domain view would be potentially something like a risk view. And a risk view — I'm interested in the information from the model perspective in terms of the risks and controls. So straight away I'm talking to an audience and a domain view based on things that are relevant to their role.

Trevor Moore: So these metrics are coming from the same data set. It's not something that somebody else is creating, it's something that's already in the model. But what we're able to do is provide some analysis and we can also provide some feedback on the context — so where's the linkage strong, where does it need to be improved? And with that, we also have the ability to say: these are risks that currently have no controls connected to them. So it's almost your to-do list. If we've got risk but no control, then there's an exposure and liability to the organisation. We can go straight into the control and see that in iGrafx if we wish, come in and start putting in some controls or anything else we might need to do.

Trevor Moore: We go to our operating model — again, just looking at who owns what in our organisation. So we have 206 roles or units or teams or groups who own something, they own roughly 208 objects. Unknown ownership is 182, so we've actually got gaps in that and we need to fix those gaps, since we want to see where we've fixed them. Again, a simple click on our actions and we can identify the areas where there's gaps of who owns what or what's missing.

Trevor Moore: If we go into compliance, same thing — it's taking a slice of the data set of the model and it's presenting a view and actions and analysis based on what that domain would expect to see. So we can see the controls, standards we talk about in iGrafx policy, your requirements. Further analysis, heat maps will show you where there's weaknesses or strengths. And actions again, if we want to go through any of these actions.

Trevor Moore: I'm going to switch a little bit here because this feels quite static. But if I was to take what was initially data — we've converted it into information, which is what I'm sharing on the screen — how do we use that for intelligence? So if I open up Iggy, our voice assistant...

Trevor Moore: Could you please explain to me what I'm looking at on my screen?

Michael White: Clever.

Michael White: If Iggy's speaking, we can't hear her.

Trevor Moore: Sorry, I should have changed that, yes. We'll try that again. I asked if everybody could hear me before, but I forgot to ask if you could hear Iggy. Let's try that again.

Iggy, via Trevor’s mic: Welcome back, Trevor. What would you like to explore today?

Trevor Moore: Could you please explain to me what I'm seeing on my screen?

Iggy, via Trevor’s mic: I'll take a look at what's currently displayed for you. You're on the risk lens. The page in front of you shows a summary of your risk landscape. You have 43 risks in total and 24 controls in place. Right now control coverage sits at 19%, which means 35 of your risks are currently uncovered — they don't have controls linked to them yet. The lens has flagged the top uncovered risks as findings: business continuity risks, forms too complicated, unsatisfactory customer service, incorrect pet classification, and data leak.

Trevor Moore: Okay, so the same data we've transformed into information, and now we've gleaned further information using intelligence. And we can also, in that interactive manner, get further intelligence from the actual conversational agent itself. What I'm going to do now is just get it to take us into a different part of the app so that we can see how some of this information might look in a visualisation. Let's just see.

Iggy, via Trevor’s mic: Welcome back, Trevor. What would you like to explore today?

Trevor Moore: Could you please take me to the Claude Code LLM object in my graph view?

Iggy, via Trevor’s mic: I'll search for the Claude Code LLM object first to find its identifier. Let me try a simpler search with just the main term. I didn't find anything named Claude or Claude Code LLM.

Trevor Moore: No problem. Is there something else you'd like to explore in your repository? Yes, can you show me my order replacement card process please?

Iggy, via Trevor’s mic: I'll search for the order replacement card process and take you there. Let me try a broader search. I didn't find a process named order replacement card in your repository. Could you double check the exact name or give me a...

Trevor Moore: Yeah, we'll come back to you, Iggy. Thank you. So let's go into our order replacement.

Trevor Moore: So we have an order replacement card object here. Now the key thing here is what we are seeing is the actual order replacement card that exists in our iGrafx repository as a process object. But in the context of this one page, this one image here, we're seeing all of its relationships associated with that object, and what we're also seeing is the actual information that we have in our repository in that context. So we can see the ownership, the hierarchy, and we can see when it's created. Everything we've already put into iGrafx is available in our graph view here. Now, one thing we can't do as easily in iGrafx is actually understand what the potential impact would be if we were to change or make changes to that object. Whereas here we can see, in a visual manner, if we were to make a change to this particular process, where that impact would land — not just in the immediate vicinity of that change, but also across the next ripple, or as many ripples out as we wish, as we call it, hops. So we can do a full analysis here.

Trevor Moore: And now we can see all of the summary information around changes that might be made to the order replacement card process. So we can see who would be notified, what activities or processes will be impacted, and all of this information is presented in a way that is more intuitive, if you like, than trying to find it across multiple screens within a process repository itself. So we can actually interact with this and find out the information we might want to understand or inform, if we were to make changes to this type of process or technology or anything else.

Iggy, via Trevor’s mic: I'm ready whenever you are. Just ask me about your processes, risks, controls, applications, people, or anything else in your repository. What can I help you with?

Trevor Moore: Can you please identify the processes where we have process owners?

Iggy, via Trevor’s mic: You have two processes with owners assigned. IGX Test 3 is owned by Trevor at igxsolutions.co.uk, and Recruit Onboard is owned by michael.white at igxsolutions.co.uk. Both are shown in the panel below. You can click either one to open it in the graph if you'd like to see more detail.

Trevor Moore: So she's not wrong, it's definitely owned by me, and I can see all the information around it. If we go back into the graph view, we'll be able to see all of that information by simply expanding our graph. So all that information in a simple image available to us, and we can now change this image or save it for future reference if we want to track changes over time — and the next level out. And all the time you can see all the information. It just shows you the business connections across the information we already have in our repository.

Trevor Moore: Let's just clear that for a moment. So if we wanted to look at our business on a page, this is effectively the entirety of our organisation's model. We have areas in here that are orphaned. Now, if you're modelling an organisation, having orphans would mean you've captured the fact that they exist, but you've not actually done anything with them yet. So I would argue that in a mature organisation you would probably have fewer of these, if ideally none, because you would have understood exactly where they fit in your organisation, so you would have them more in this connected environment.

Trevor Moore: Now, if we want to just go through the filter view here, we can say, right, we're only interested in looking at our process hierarchy. So at this moment in time we've got all of the processes on one page, and at the moment it's showing everything that's connected. Just click all and go to hierarchy — then we have a process hierarchy view directly available in our navigation here. We've not created or recreated this as a static diagram. As the data changes and gets updated, it's automatically updated in the graph database, and every time you run it, it will automatically pick up changes. That in itself is a huge manual task removal from maintaining the visualisations that you have in your organisation. And that is one of the hidden costs of doing BPM in a document way — if an organisational change happens, you then have to go in and update all your documentation to reflect that. Using a data-derived view, which is what we're looking at now, you don't have to do that.

Trevor Moore: If we wanted to see the process hierarchy with our activities also included, then now we're getting decomposition down to a much lower level. So, our order replacement card process, if I scope to that, then I'm seeing specifically the viewpoint for the order replacement card — I'm seeing the hierarchy, I'm seeing all the activities that compose that particular process. If I want to see more information, we can add it by adding it on the filter. So if we want to understand any applications that work alongside that, we can now see the applications that enable activities and the process itself. So we can see everything — we can see the immediate context and we get all of that available to us. It's maintained from the data perspective. You're not having to recreate or update countless documents or diagrams. It's there as part of the tool out of the box.

Trevor Moore: The other thing you can then do — we just clear all of that — we go into views, we can actually go and open defined views. So here we've got a strategy view, understanding how strategies are underpinned or supported through our processes or even our overall strategy mix. So we can see what's measuring what, how it's all being utilised. We can move these around, and if I save that, that will be like that for the next time I come into this. So with the ability to create these data visualisations, you will save a lot of time over creating these manually and then having to update them again later on when the next change comes in.

Trevor Moore: We also have the ability to just seamlessly track between the repository and the tool set, and again we can also go back directly into the tool. Trying to think — was there much more you wanted me to cover on here, Michael? Just remind me.

Trevor Moore: Ah — automation. Let's talk about automation. So a lot of work going on in automation, especially with all the AI approach. One of the things I think is really important when we're talking about how do you leverage what you already have is to understand and be able to identify within your existing knowledge base what candidates you have that you might potentially leverage AI to support going forwards. So we have, in our tool set, an agentic readiness assessment tool. And what this is doing — this is six different algorithms working in the background to analyse the information in the repository, the processes and the BPMN diagrams themselves, to actually identify and validate potential opportunities.

Trevor Moore: Now, it's really easy to go with the flow and say everything's going to be AI'd. But I think if you were to expose an organisation to be completely AI-enabled, then you always risk the fact that some third-party LLM provider might turn around and suddenly drop a model or withdraw a service, or a government might say you can't use this because it's too powerful, and suddenly your organisation would be left unable to function. Or even worse, you consume that many tokens that you can't afford to operate as a company anymore. I think there are many scary stories out there at the moment about companies who have spent their entire budget in just three or four months. So there's a lot of concern around this. So we would advocate there's not always a need to go AI-first. So when it comes to evaluating opportunities, then we would say you probably want to consider all available different types of solutions to deliver improvements — agentic AI, hybrid AI, RPA, or human workflow. Having a view of where you might focus next is a key part of how your organisation transitions from a document-based approach to a data-derived information approach, and then making intelligence work, having something that does that ranking for you. I know for a fact there are many consultants who have been paid handsomely to try and put something like this in place.

Trevor Moore: Here, it's part of the package. You get an automated suggestion and promotion of this would be good. So, for example, if we look at higher-to-retire or loans, we see here we've got the potential to implement an agentic-first workflow. So it's breaking down all the information that we have in the repository, and then you can simply talk to us about how you design an agentic workflow. If it's saying that you need to validate with operational data, then it's saying, well, this could be, but we need to see the data. If there's no data in the repository around how the workflow or the process works, then perhaps this is an opportunity to leverage something like process mining or task mining, just to establish and validate if this actually is a candidate for a workflow.

Trevor Moore: Just checking if there's anything else we need to cover off on here. We did talk about governance, did we? So we talked about the actual governance of the repository, the content that's in there — how can we track over time whether we actually are continuing to validate, refresh and maintain the accuracy of the data in our repository. So here's a governance hub template that's already established. It will automatically track any approval rates for your model objects, for your document objects. It will tell you where you've got some sort of maturity established across the governance perspective of your repository. And it will also allow you to then say, right, in our document world, what do we have — approved, or in review? So it gives you a simple overview, and the same applies for your model world — how many of my model objects have actually been approved, or been rejected, or are in review?

Trevor Moore: And this I see as being a really important part when we look at how you use the objects in iGrafx. So there is an agent object in iGrafx — you could actually build out from that. Let's just go back into my relationship view, put that in here.

Michael White: I think just on that particular point — first of all, this is a very, very powerful tool, right? So it's difficult to cover everything. But when we're talking about governance and standards, you've got the ability to specify your standards and governance around not just your process diagrams, but also in terms of, if you've got ISO standards, other requirements that you want to have, then you can effectively build those within the tool and it will automatically evaluate your repository for compliance to those standards and to that governance. Obviously we haven't put a whole load in there because there's so many.

Michael White: I think the other one is AI. We talked quite a bit about AI, but one of the fundamentals about this, about 360 Insights, is it does have some AI capability already built in. But when we're talking about taking data to create information that then is used to produce insights — the next layer, the intelligence layer — is where you can actually, and it's an open connector, so you can connect in whichever AI you choose to use to actually basically put 360 Insights on steroids and really produce some incredible kind of information. So we've not made it in such a way that you have to use a particular AI, we've made it very open. The whole architecture is very, very open. So even to the extent that, you know, we've already, for a number of clients, actually embedded within Insights very particular requirements that they wanted to get from the data.

Michael White: And we're also seeking feedback from other potential clients as to what they would want to see as well. At the moment, what you see is based on our experience over multiple years, tens of years, with various different clients. We'd like to actually take more feedback from you, so please do get in contact with us, because we'd like to actually make this even more relevant, not just to the people that actually use BPM, but also to those layers above that don't use BPM, that actually want access to that kind of information. I think one of the other demos that — I know how Iggy is feeling today — let's try out a second.

Iggy, via Trevor’s mic: Welcome back, Trevor. What would you like to explore today?

Trevor Moore: Could you please give me an overview of my repository, please?

Iggy, via Trevor’s mic: I'll pull up the overall governance and adoption scorecard for your repository. Here's your repository overview. Overall health: F grade, with a health score of 13. This indicates significant governance gaps that need attention. Scope: you have 925 total objects in the repository, including 71 processes.

Iggy, via Trevor’s mic: Governance coverage — here's where the main gaps are. Only 9.1% of your objects have any RACI assignment at all. Just 2.8% of processes have an owner assigned. Only 5.4% of objects carry an accountability assignment. 58 objects are marked as responsible, 50 as accountable, 7 as consulted, and 8 as informed. Visual documentation: 22.5% of your processes — 16 out of 71 — have diagrams describing them.

Trevor Moore: Description complete. Thank you. Could you please tell me what that actually means? What would your next recommendation be for my organisation?

Iggy, via Trevor’s mic: Let me explain what this means and what you should prioritise. What this tells you: your repository is built but largely ungoverned. You have the objects catalogued — the processes, applications, risks and controls are there — but you haven't yet assigned clear ownership or accountability. This creates risk: nobody formally owns decisions, there's no clear escalation path when something breaks, and compliance reviewers can't trace who's responsible for what. The low approval rate (45%) and sparse diagrams (only 16 of 71 processes visually documented) mean stakeholders can't easily understand how work actually flows. My recommendation — start here. First priority: assign process owners. Right now only 2.8% of processes have owners.

Trevor Moore: Okay, could you help me do that, please?

Iggy, via Trevor’s mic: Absolutely. To get started, let me show you which processes you have and help you pick the most critical ones. Let me pull up your process list. Good, you have 71 processes — I'm showing you the first 10 here. Looking at the list, I'd recommend starting with these high-impact candidates for process ownership: compliance-critical, compliance management, corporate control, check efficiency of controls. These touch regulatory risk and need clear ownership.

Trevor Moore: Okay, could you please help me with the compliance management?

Iggy, via Trevor’s mic: Of course, let me pull up the details on compliance management so we can assign an owner to it. Perfect, here's the current state. Compliance management is a process created on November 21st, 2022, with no owner and no RACI assignments. It has no description, and it's not in any approval or review cycle. To assign an owner I'll need to know who should own this process — give me a name or title, for example 'Sarah in compliance'.

Trevor Moore: Could you please recommend the most appropriate role or person to assign as owner?

Iggy, via Trevor’s mic: I can't recommend a specific person from the raw data alone. Let me try a different approach and look at what organisational structure and roles you have. Great — based on your structure, here's my recommendation: assign the compliance management process to the compliance organisational unit, that's the natural home for this process. Now, within compliance, would you like me to assign it to a specific role — for example a compliance manager or compliance officer, if you have one — or to a named person in your organisation? I can see you have people like Diana Lee, Amelia Jones, Hans Meier, and Gareth Collishaw in the repository. Do you know who in compliance should own this process, or would you prefer to assign it to the compliance unit first and we can drill down to a person later?

Trevor Moore: Can you assign it to Gareth Collishaw, please?

Iggy, via Trevor’s mic: I'll search for Gareth to confirm I have the right person, then set them up as accountable for compliance management. I found Gareth Collishaw in the system — is that the person you meant? The spelling in the repository is Collishaw.

Trevor Moore: Yes, please.

Iggy, via Trevor’s mic: Now I need to find the compliance management process to link it to Gareth. Perfect — I'll make Gareth Collishaw accountable for the compliance management process. Shall I go ahead?

Trevor Moore: Yes.

Iggy, via Trevor’s mic: I'll make Gareth Collishaw accountable for the compliance management process — is that correct?

Trevor Moore: Yes.

Iggy, via Trevor’s mic: Done. It will appear in the graph after the next sync.

Trevor Moore: There we go.

Iggy, via Trevor’s mic: Great, is there anything else you'd like me to help with in your process repository?

Trevor Moore: Could you please explain my repository health position to my colleagues in Japanese?

Iggy, via Trevor’s mic: Here's your repository health in Japanese: [spoken Japanese summary of the repository's F-grade health score, process owner coverage, accountability, and documentation completeness].

Trevor Moore: I've just silenced her there because I want to just articulate what's happening here. We have demonstrated, in the space of the last five or ten minutes, the ability to traverse and discover information regarding the data in our repository. We've enabled the intelligence to flow by actually making some form of recommendation or suggestion. There was also a guardrail in place to make sure that we can't just force through changes through Iggy — there's a double-layered approach to approving any creation. There is the democratisation of the knowledge by being able to articulate it into multiple languages, same data set, but being able to explain and talk directly with people in a language they're familiar with. I do hope the Japanese was accurate, I'm not proficient in Japanese, so I do hope that made sense. We could do exactly the same thing in German, French, Italian, Polish, I think even Chinese is there, but it just means that the knowledge that you have doesn't require manual augmentation with languages to make it truly accessible to global organisations. You suddenly have, from the same data set, the ability to communicate at local, regional, national and international levels. So I think that's a real time saver, and I think that's a real advantage.

Trevor Moore: We also demonstrated the ability to create knowledge from the same interface using Iggy. So I demonstrated the idea that there was a gap, Iggy helped us find that gap, she helped us to identify potential roles or potential people, and we were able to select and enact and create a relationship directly from this IGX360 Insights layer. I think that's a real watermark, if you like, that many companies probably can't even envisage right now. But I'm proud of what we have here, and I really would encourage and implore anybody who's on this call to actually engage with us, so we can help you understand what you have already, but also engage with us if you can see a value for this, for your organisation or for your clients themselves, and helping them to have this available on tap with a simple connection of an API key and a repository ID — we can then plug your data into this so you have this ability to see this information for yourself.

Trevor Moore: Got five minutes left. I don't know if we want to just — if anybody would like to have any questions, any initial feedback, we can open up the floor, we can have people talk to us. If anybody would like to say anything or share anything, please feel free to raise your hands and we'll bring you into the call.

Michael White: Yeah, I was just saying we probably don't have time to do the comparison between repositories or operating models.

Trevor Moore: Oh, I could quickly show him what it would look like, yeah.

Michael White: Yeah. So this capability is not just for mergers and acquisitions, it's also potentially — if you create your desired business operating model, your digital operating model that reflects your business operating model, you can actually create that model, then you can actually compare it against where you're actually at. So, again, it's very, very powerful, maybe even for benchmarking purposes. So if you're looking at, you know, acquiring or divesting, it's probably kind of invaluable to actually get a really good understanding of what you need to do in order to divest a part of your organisation, or if you're actually acquiring or merging, what are the best bits that we need to take from each organisation to actually blend into a single model. Or just as a reference, you know, if this is best practice, how close are we to best practice?

Trevor Moore: That does raise a question — I think somebody's already asked, besides iGrafx, are there any plans to analyse execution data from BPM platforms as well? Absolutely, absolutely. It doesn't have to be just iGrafx, it could be other solutions as well. The idea of IGX360 Insights is that it's a vendor-agnostic solution, which means that we should be able to plug in — and this is kind of what we're showing here, having one target with another. But also we can plug in not just model data, but if you have execution data, we could fit that over the top. It's not saying it's there now, because this is still a fairly new capability for existing iGrafx users, but we would be open to working with companies to shape how this grows going forward. As I say, we already have examples of capability in this interface that have been derived with clients already, and there is further capability that is also coming from clients.

Trevor Moore: So a customer journey being one example — customer journey modelling. In most repositories you have to manually create the graphical view of that journey. But if you have the data view in terms of the relationships that you have, why can't we just render that kind of visualisation? It might not look exactly the same, but certainly we have examples where we — let me just see if I can pick one up for you. We've automatically started building some of this capability for clients based on what they want to see, and if you bear with me I'll get a couple of examples.

Trevor Moore: Because I think this is important to show — being able to pull in data to show the customer journey. This could be execution data being plugged into the system and having a dashboard to show how many are active, what the average cycle time is, completion and drop-off, overall health score. You see this is a mock-up, just showing how data would come in to give you a tracking capability, and what that journey looks like — the five stages of the journey, the capabilities that underpin them, and the systems that underpin them. This could be derived based on the data we capture within the data set within iGrafx.

Trevor Moore: But it doesn't have to be just iGrafx — that's my other point. Another example of where you might use this kind of thing — this is again a real use case with a client. They're looking at their shared services and support functions, and these are the sort of things that they are interested in: number of cases, what SLA compliance is, cost per case, and seeing how this flows between the different tiers, from self-service, service desk, tier one, tier three experts, and again showing how that area is actually comprised of all the different process layers, if you like. We can see a lot of scope for this, and we're open to developing alongside our clients — if you're interested in working with us on this, happy to do so.

Trevor Moore: Hopefully that answered the question that came in. I'm happy to answer any more if you'd like to, if you have anything further, or if you wish we can schedule a call, follow up and have a conversation around what we've shared with you all today. More than happy to do that. I've got a couple of links that we can add into the conversation if you wish. I think Michael is going to share them now, anyway. Are you sharing your screen, Michael? You want to put it onto presenter mode? There you go, perfect.

Michael White: Yep, absolutely. I think the first statement I'd make is this is available right now. When we talk about looking for your feedback and doing development, that's because we don't want to stop developing it. We want to make it even more relevant, either generically or to specific clients, but the point is it is available now.

Michael White: So I'd like to leave you with one thought. Most organisations don't need more process documentation, right, they don't even need more data. What they need is a better understanding of how the organisation actually works. They need knowledge and intelligence democratised. The organisations that will succeed with AI, automation and digital transformation over the next decade won't necessarily be those with the most technology, they'll be the ones that understand their digital operating model well enough to make confident, evidence-based decisions. That's the opportunity for BPM. So, you know, we'd like to hear from you, whatever your specific needs are — so do contact us.

Michael White: It's the opportunity to move from being seen as a cost centre to becoming a strategic business capability. And that's exactly why we created IGX360 Insights, because there was nothing in the BPM market space that actually did this with all that data and that information — it just doesn't exist. It enables you to unlock the value you've already invested in, transform process knowledge into organisational intelligence, and extend that value across the whole organisation.

Michael White: If today's demonstration resonates with you, we'd encourage you to experience it using your own repository. That really brings IGX360 Insights to life, when you can see the insights from your own data. So to do that, you can book a complimentary 48-hour facilitated trial, complete the AI Readiness Assessment, and let us show you how quickly your existing BPM investment can become a source of enterprise-wide insight, intelligence, and measurable business value. Okay, back to you guys.

Trevor Moore: I think we're good actually, we're just on the hour, so I do appreciate everybody taking their time. If you have a question or follow-up, feel free to reach out to us. I'm going to share a link so you can schedule a call with us if you wish to reach out and have a conversation outside of this webinar. We appreciate your time.

Gareth Collishaw: We'll also share slides and a link to the video, so yeah, you can add those to your notes. Thank you very much for your time and attending.

Trevor Moore: Appreciate you all, thank you very much.

Gareth Collishaw: Thank you, bye bye.

Trevor Moore: Bye-bye.