I would assess the impact of process modeling features on operational transparency as a four. I give it a four because of how well the platform could be utilized if one has a license or would be able to access it via collaborative features, and as well be able to communicate, making it less people dependent and more process dependent. A small gap of one is only because if the map has to be shared or if somebody has to work together on a map, similar to how we have Google Forms where more than two people can make changes simultaneously, the map does not allow that. One has to close it, and the next partner can only access the map after I close it. The existing changes are lost if they click on ignore or if they close the diagram. This is one feature which is sometimes bothersome. The gap of one is something that is personal feedback from my end. If someone is a newbie and they are building a map for the first time, they definitely go through a training module. But if somebody is jumping right in to build a map for the first time, which I did more than a couple of years ago, I felt that given the extent to which we have artificial intelligence capabilities right now, it would be nice if whenever you are saving a diagram and if I build it incorrectly in terms of adhering to BPMN 2.0, errors are shown, which is really nice. There are errors and warnings that need to be corrected to adhere to the standards. It is great that it allows me to save, but in order to correct the errors, if I do not understand what the error is trying to tell me. For example, sometimes it says that the element is named wrong. I understand that; it is a verb and noun that is a requirement. But sometimes it says the edge folding is not clear, and despite trying several times, I still do not get it. SAP could consider having AI capabilities to suggest how it can be done immediately on the screen itself, perhaps in the form of a virtual assistant or something. Today, for larger errors, I go to Google to check it and try to understand. If an assistant tells me that I think the arrow may be placed wrong, I think that would help me. It would save time and help me from looking up multiple dictionaries to understand what it is trying to say. At the moment, we are not integrating SAP Signavio Process Manager with existing ERP systems because internally I think we are using multiple enterprise resource planning tools. Because of that, there is a restraint to connect it with SAP Signavio Process Manager, and there is a lot of concern in terms of how data could be used because we work in a banking environment. We are not leveraging, and we have SAP S/4HANA. It would be great if there is a data lake that connects to the process, but at the moment, we do not do that. Every time we build a process, it is picked up by a different team, and they try to connect it with the data lake. It is a great feature which I think can be leveraged, but with the range of legacy systems that the company is using today, there is not much I can comment about how the ERP can be leveraged internally.
