We tell you our view here, but, should you be interested, Wikipedia is always a good place to start.

It is a crucial issue: according to the World Economic Forum, the capacity to solve complex problems will be one of the 10 skills more needed in 2025.

The orchestrator is the element centralizing exchanges among elements in the architecture. Without it, the complexity of the system grows at speed of the number of components squared; changing any of them means changing all its interactions with the others.

An orchestrator should also manage processes involving more that one element. So it should be able to store on-going processes and to described and execute processes.

Finally, bear in mind that processes combining different element have a high variety. artifact-centric is the technology fit for that need.

Find here our vision on orchestration and, here, which companies need it.

CRM are definitely wonderful tools, some of them even able to manage claims or to serve as a front-end for Customer Service Agents… However, there is an issue: in “CRM” – Customer Relationship Management – the “M” part is not automated. It require human beings… or additional code.

In a complex service context, such as financial services, telco or utilities, effects such as the one described here can not be avoided. Without an orchestrator, the needs of the “Brand Journey” are difficult to meet, or even any customer-facing omnichannel process, most of them of High Variety.

Migrating “back-end”, those mission-critical systems that have served the business successfully for years, is nothing short of a nightmare.

Digital Decoupling” suggests that the needs of omnichannel services, connectivity or internationalization, do not neccesarily encompass a migration. The issue can be split: migration could be avoided, and at least two projects, lighter and less risky, will be easier to manage and can evolve independently.

Namely, an orchestrator will be needed, together with a decoupling methodology. But that would not be the first time around… right?

There are many examples around of intuitive, apparently straight-forward issues that end up being almost impossible to automate to deliver a proper, autonomous, easy experience. Those are the cases with many “exceptions”, which end up being the majority.

If there is too much variety, the intuitive “workflow” is not the best option to define the automated system. The process needs to be transformed into something closer to a navigation journey: the goal is drawn as a straigh line among two locations but no boat ever known has traveled that line. It is just a goal; sailing is about checking the context to get as close to the goal as possible.

There is more available in Wikipedia, in LinkedIn, o right here.

Do you have other questions? Let us know.

We will answer them and include them in our list.



The artifact-centric design of the customer lifecycle allows to orchestrate outbound customer messages in a Spanish direct Insurer.


A software manufacturer consolidates in a data-centric platform all the dimensions of its customer experience: licences, devices and customers. Each campaign lead adapts to each particular context.


The impact of the KYC process in the commercial conversion rate.


An interesting experience of composing external services into a seamless customer experience.


Processes based on digital evidence need a very strong governance without harming the flexibility of the service.