We performed a comparison between Appian and OpenText AppWorks based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Business Process Management (BPM) solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."Another advantage of this tool is its reports and records. You can maintain dashboards, layouts. If you with a Java solution, it takes six months time. If you use this tool, you can finish in one or one and a half months' time."
"Technical support is quite responsive."
"The Application Designer is very user friendly. There are also lot of plug-ins that you can use and, for the most part, they are free."
"The application life cycle is very clear. I started learning it and giving some workshops to my team. Creating the users and the building is very structured. Documentation is nice and it's easy to learn."
"The low code functionality and being able to get applications faster to customers or to the market are valuable."
"Write to Data Store Entity - Saving data in SQL databases is done easily using entities. Entities (CDTs in Appian terminology) define relationships and target schema tables via XSD files."
"Call Web Service Smart Service - Web service integrations with other systems are super simple and fast to create, supported by low code menus."
"It reduces development time in half making us more efficient."
"In terms of the scalability and the handling of complexity, the customers are satisfied, and we also have confidence in the solution to achieve whatever implementations are required."
"The monitoring aspect is highly valuable, as it offers an exceptional capability to track every minute of action performed by a business user in the global context."
"OpenText AppWorks has standard features such as system-to-system and human-to-human integrations, but what I find most valuable in the solution is its monitoring feature that tells you more about your processes, how to restart and how to stop each process, etc."
"AppWorks is a very quick development platform with low-coding capability and strong integration with third-party systems."
"We really appreciate the process automation and how can you create human tasks as one of your processes."
"One of the most useful features is the code is customizable, we can make it our own."
"We've automated several processes, including purchase requisition to purchase orders, RFQ processes, vendor onboarding, project budgeting, and business case creation. The recent versions of OpenText AppWorks, especially those incorporating low-code functionalities, have had a significant positive impact. In some cases, we've observed a remarkable reduction in development time, ranging from 50 to 75 percent. The MTP model and life cycle have facilitated rapid development cycles."
"From a business perspective, the most valuable aspect lies in the optimization of processes."
"The ability of the interface to load automatic data is not great."
"Lacks integration with other products."
"Appian is easy to set up, but JBoss is complex. JBoss is the application server for running Appian."
"The UI of Appian is more internal. Recently, there has been an addition of an external user portal for the customer-facing stuff. It's still coming out."
"Appian could include other applications that we could reuse for other customers, CRM for example."
"Something I would like to see improved is an SQL database connection."
"Appian could be improved by making it a strict, no-code platform with free-built process packs."
"I would like to see more features for enterprises. They would also benefit from adding documentation and training on their site."
"There is room for improvement in the pricing structure."
"There could be some improvements with the low code design part. It could be more customizable and more user friendly."
"AppWorks could be improved by including BPM simulation."
"The integration could improve."
"The crucial missing element is the archival function."
"OpenText AppWork's low-code capabilities can be enhanced by integrating them with AI offerings like Aviator."
"The solution needs to continue to enhance the low-coding feature within the product itself."
"A room for improvement in OpenText AppWorks is its user interface. It should have mobile compatibility because right now, you still have to make two applications with a user interface for Android and a user interface for iOS, so if OpenText AppWorks can provide one UI that can be used across all devices, that would make the solution better. An additional feature I'd like to see in the next release of OpenText AppWorks is a better UI in terms of the look and feel. Another feature I'd like to see in the next version of the solution is mobile compatibility because, at the moment, you have to make your application mobile-ready or compatible with mobile devices because there's no provision for it in OpenText AppWorks."
Appian is ranked 4th in Business Process Management (BPM) with 58 reviews while OpenText AppWorks is ranked 16th in Business Process Management (BPM) with 8 reviews. Appian is rated 8.4, while OpenText AppWorks is rated 7.8. The top reviewer of Appian writes "Low resource consumption, easy setup, and stable". On the other hand, the top reviewer of OpenText AppWorks writes "Automates processes like purchase requisition to purchase orders, RFQ processes, vendor onboarding, project budgeting, and business case creation". Appian is most compared with Microsoft Power Apps, Camunda, ServiceNow, OutSystems and Pega BPM, whereas OpenText AppWorks is most compared with Microsoft Power Apps, ServiceNow Now Platform, OutSystems, Mendix and Pega BPM. See our Appian vs. OpenText AppWorks report.
See our list of best Business Process Management (BPM) vendors.
We monitor all Business Process Management (BPM) reviews to prevent fraudulent reviews and keep review quality high. We do not post reviews by company employees or direct competitors. We validate each review for authenticity via cross-reference with LinkedIn, and personal follow-up with the reviewer when necessary.