We performed a comparison between ARIS BPA and OpenText ProVision 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."Platform that it supports covers legacy and new. Caters to moving older objects into an integrated DB, relatively popular ones: SQL, Oracle, etc."
"ARIS is probably the most mature product in terms of modeling an enterprise architecture so that it has context."
"The most valuable features of ARIS BPA are its flexibility and reporting."
"Business Process Analysis: We can simulate, optimize, and analyse business processes based on various business requirements. It assures our rolling out the best processes."
"The most valuable features of ARIS BPA are the centralized repository and the automatic rendering of diagrams."
"The solution provides integrations to ServiceNow and other systems, flexibility of connectivity, and reporting."
"The tool has good navigation."
"The solution is user-friendly and easy to expose."
"All the features come as part of a standard license."
"OpenText ProVision's best feature is the capability to attach a variety of attributes and extract and analyze that information."
"The stability of the product is very good."
"The product is difficult to use for someone without prior knowledge of working with it. It requires a certain level of administration training."
"The user interface could be more intuitive and better designed."
"I would like to see the reporting aspects improved."
"While the dashboarding solution for integrating all kinds of process-related information from company sources other than ARIS is getting ever better, my personal wish would be to have a module that is more targeted to an Agile implementation of some modeled processes (model–to-execute)."
"I would like the possibility to use real data. In other words, it can use this system to integrate with others that are operating directing with users like clients, employs, and others."
"I had this decentralization mission where I had some friendly fights with the consultants of Software AG. My opinion was the business department should be able to publish their processes and do all their evaluation stuff in ARCM themselves. It has to be a one stop shop. I want a one stop shop to go from ARIS BPM to ARIS ARCM, because having everything go through that would be an improvement due to the inputs that we made with Software AG. They will make it possible that the trigger sent from BPM to ARCM will start their object generation."
"Since this is a design tool, seamless interface to make the process flows executable."
"I could use more icons and other graphical elements."
"OpenText ProVision's collaboration management is quite complicated and difficult to use."
"Lacks the ability to have your own in-house developments."
"Integrating with or interfacing with other tools like data management tools would be very helpful."
ARIS BPA is ranked 6th in Business Process Management (BPM) with 64 reviews while OpenText ProVision is ranked 35th in Business Process Management (BPM) with 3 reviews. ARIS BPA is rated 8.4, while OpenText ProVision is rated 6.4. The top reviewer of ARIS BPA writes "I can usually find an answer to my issue on ARIS Community". On the other hand, the top reviewer of OpenText ProVision writes "Good attribute attachment but problems with collaboration". ARIS BPA is most compared with SAP Signavio Process Manager, ADONIS, Camunda, Sparx Systems Enterprise Architect and Bizagi, whereas OpenText ProVision is most compared with Visio, Sparx Systems Enterprise Architect and SAP Signavio Process Manager. See our ARIS BPA vs. OpenText ProVision 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.
