{"id":26954,"date":"2026-09-30T10:58:36","date_gmt":"2026-09-30T08:58:36","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/scheer-pas.com\/en\/?post_type=post_type_article&p=26954"},"modified":"2026-11-04T11:04:17","modified_gmt":"2026-11-04T10:04:17","slug":"model-to-execution-why-the-old-phased-model-suddenly-works-again","status":"publish","type":"post_type_article","link":"https:\/\/scheer-pas.com\/en\/blog\/article\/model-to-execution-why-the-old-phased-model-suddenly-works-again\/","title":{"rendered":"Model to Execution: Why the Old Phased Model Suddenly Works Again"},"content":{"rendered":"
<\/div>
\n
\n \"Model <\/div>\n\n<\/div><\/div>
\n\t

BLOG<\/p>\n<\/div><\/div><\/div><\/div>

\n\n\t
\n\t\t

Model to Execution: Why the Old Phased Model Suddenly Works Again<\/h1>\t<\/div>\n\n<\/div><\/div>
\n\t

30 September 2026 | Sharam Dadashnia<\/p>\n<\/div><\/div><\/div><\/div><\/div>

<\/div><\/div>
<\/div>
\n\t
\n\t\t
<\/div>\n\t\t\t\t
<\/div>\n\t<\/div>\n<\/div><\/div><\/div><\/div>
<\/div><\/div>
<\/div>
\n\t

Business Concept. IT Concept. Implementation.<\/span><\/h2>\n<\/div><\/div><\/div><\/div>
<\/div><\/div>
<\/div>
\n\t
\n\t\t
<\/div>\n\t\t\t\t
<\/div>\n\t<\/div>\n<\/div><\/div><\/div><\/div>
<\/div><\/div>
<\/div>
\n\t

Three terms that many still recognise from their training, studies, or first major implementation projects. And three terms that were long considered a symbol of IT that moved too slowly.<\/p>\n

 <\/p>\n

Much of the criticism was justified. Thick documents piled up between the business unit and the development team. By the time the IT concept was finalised, the business had long since moved on. Implementation began with a model that was already incomplete by the time of the first release. Later, no one knew anymore whether the BPMN diagram, the wiki, or the running code actually described the process.<\/p>\n

 <\/p>\n

The problem, however, was not the separation of business logic and technology.<\/p>\n

 <\/p>\n

The problem was that the middle ground remained on paper.<\/p>\n

 <\/p>\n

With agent-based processes, this intermediate level takes on a new role. It doesn\u2019t just describe what<\/em> a process is supposed to do. It defines which steps run deterministically, which tasks an AI agent handles, which systems it is allowed to access, when a human makes a decision, and how a process remains controllable over the course of weeks.<\/p>\n

 <\/p>\n

This transforms an IT concept back into what it should have been: an executable link between business requirements and operations.<\/p>\n<\/div><\/div><\/div><\/div>

<\/div><\/div>
<\/div>
\n
\n \"Broken <\/div>\n\n<\/div><\/div><\/div>
<\/div><\/div>
<\/div>
\n\n\t
\n\t\t

Why the phase model has fallen into disrepute<\/h2>\t<\/div>\n\n<\/div><\/div>
\n\t

The classic model promised a clear division of labour:<\/p>\n

 <\/p>\n

    \n
  1. The business department describes the goal, workflow, and rules.<\/li>\n
  2. IT translates this into a technical specification.<\/li>\n
  3. Development and operations implement the specification and keep the system running.<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n

     <\/p>\n

    In practice, the connection usually broke down at the second stage.<\/p>\n

     <\/p>\n

    The business department worked with process diagrams, tables, and free-form text. Development wrote code, database scripts, and interface logic. Between these two worlds lay handoffs, clarifications, version conflicts, and often multiple tools. After the first process change, there wasn\u2019t enough time to update all the documents.<\/p>\n

     <\/p>\n

    This led to a familiar pattern: The business concept was understandable but not executable. The code was executable but virtually unreadable to business departments. And the IT concept lay somewhere in between, usually as a document with an outdated revision status.<\/p>\n

     <\/p>\n

    Agile development has solved part of this problem. Teams deliver in smaller increments, coordinate more frequently, and test earlier. What it doesn\u2019t automatically solve is the lasting connection between business process logic, integrations, authorisations, agents, and operations.<\/p>\n

     <\/p>\n

    This connection is becoming more important again. After all, an AI agent can be built quickly. A productive business process involving AI agents is something else entirely.<\/p>\n<\/div><\/div><\/div><\/div>

    <\/div><\/div>
    <\/div>
    \n
    \n \"Modern <\/div>\n\n<\/div><\/div><\/div>
    <\/div><\/div>
    <\/div>
    \n\n\t
    \n\t\t

    The IT concept has more substance today than it did three years ago<\/h2>\t<\/div>\n\n<\/div><\/div>
    \n\t

    A technical process concept used to describe primarily data models, interfaces, user interfaces, rules, and error handling. These topics remain. But for Agentic Process Orchestration, additional questions arise.<\/p>\n

     <\/p>\n

    A modern concept must, at a minimum, answer the following:<\/p>\n

     <\/p>\n