We performed a comparison between Appian and IBM BPM 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."It provides us with real-time data on all connected systems in terms of how they're integrated with each other and how they are performing in a workflow manner."
"What I found most valuable in Appian is that it lets you drill down on multiple things through the structure of the reporting and UI side. It's also low-code, yet it results in quick deliverables."
"The process models provide self-documenting systems."
"The solution's most valuable features are the regular periodic and quarterly updates, they are very useful updates. They keep improving the solution more often, and that helps the platform or code always be up to date with the latest features."
"Appian's most valuable features are the quick time it takes to develop for the market. It's easy and faster than other BPM solutions."
"The product's most valuable feature is the low code aspect of development. We can develop an end-to-end VPN solution using a single platform."
"The initial setup is easy."
"Process culture is making noise inside the organization because now, everybody knows that their time is being monitored."
"We use it for automating certain processes which previously took a lot of time for agents to set up different products for customers. They would have to enter a lot of different systems. This has now mostly been automated."
"It helps maintain, and in many instances, lower costs, as well as to maintain those costs, keeping them stable."
"The most valuable feature of IBM BPM is the low code design, and ease of maintenance. Additionally, the integration is good and easy to do."
"Previously, our company's business automation process was slow. IBM BPM's schedule and response functionalities are excellent...There are countless use cases in which IBM BPM proves to be a valuable tool for my clients."
"Stability-wise, I rate the solution a ten out of ten."
"This solution is very stable."
"We use the solution to develop and deliver products."
"This is one of the best tools to support the business and the way we work, and the numerous processes we need to implement."
"The solution needs more features. For example, a way to connect to our viewing database, to record, and more interface and component design."
"They should provide more flexibility so designers can create a more picture perfect device."
"One room for improvement is the ease of UI UX development, like in OutSystems and Mendix."
"If we could calculate the amount of data that will be realized, it would help us a lot."
"Appian could be improved by making it a strict, no-code platform with free-built process packs."
"It has it's own built-in UI components and doesn't provide much flexibility to customize or extend those components."
"The product’s pricing could be improved from the developers' perspective."
"There could be a scope of enhancement for capturing the variety of use cases."
"The configuration is not that easy, and the initial deployment took three months."
"There needs to be better documentation for IBM BPM in a central place. There is not any standard documentation for each component available and has been a barrier for developers."
"From the testing perspective and minor enhancements perspective, customization is something that is a little tedious as compared to new tools. In addition, various open-source tools that are available are not working with IBM BPM."
"IBM BPM lacks openness, that is, the ability to become open for new options in terms of APIs, front-end development, and ecosystem. IBM BPM has been quite closed. One of the main improvements would be to somehow embed the rules engine into IBM BPM. Merging IBM BRMS and the rules engine with IBM BPM would be helpful. If there was some simpler way to define rules without having to put IBM BRMS on top of it, it would be good. It's something that we can get out of Camunda but not out of IBM BPM."
"Performance in the development environment space. I know that they have been taking it off the desktop version and putting on the web, and it is not 100% yet."
"IBM BPM's UI is an area with shortcomings where improvements are required."
"We had a weird problem that whenever the database would go down, even for a few seconds, it broke the connection. It would not come back up as it was supposed to. However, working with IBM, we were able to figure out a fix, then it came back up, even after an interruption of the database."
"IBM BPM needs to have a better and modified interface."
Appian is ranked 4th in Business Process Management (BPM) with 25 reviews while IBM BPM is ranked 6th in Business Process Management (BPM) with 26 reviews. Appian is rated 8.4, while IBM BPM is rated 7.8. The top reviewer of Appian writes "Stands out with its integration capabilities, but the backend modeling can be streamlined a little bit". On the other hand, the top reviewer of IBM BPM writes "A reasonably priced tool that is helpful for the automation of business processes ". Appian is most compared with Microsoft Power Apps, OutSystems, Camunda, ServiceNow and Bizagi, whereas IBM BPM is most compared with Camunda, IBM Business Automation Workflow, Pega BPM, Apache Airflow and AWS Step Functions. See our Appian vs. IBM BPM report.
See our list of best Business Process Management (BPM) vendors and best Process Automation 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.