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 is really simple to create a new app, and I like the data-centric aspect of the BPM tool."
"Rapid development with low-code makes it easier to quickly get apps implemented and the time to break-even and ROI is much faster."
"It reduces development time in half making us more efficient."
"The initial setup was seamless. We didn't run into any hardships at all."
"It's a stable product."
"Appian helps you do a lot of things. It's easy to configure and build an application platform, and it offers a lot of features that you find in an RPA solution. It's flexible so you can reuse it for a variety of use cases."
"The most valuable features are the low coding and low code data."
"The low code functionality and being able to get applications faster to customers or to the market are valuable."
"I rate the technical support a ten out of ten...The product's installation was easy."
"It excels at analytics. It provides visibility across all activities of a company's processes and performance."
"The most valuable feature is the ability to customize your rules and put them inside the tool."
"The most valuable features are the integration capabilities - BPM can connect with almost any legacy or advanced system."
"There are a lot of things that you get out-of-the-box: Timers and so on, which took a lot of effort and code before."
"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."
"IBM BPM's most valuable features are its speed in implementing and providing any changes."
"IBM BPM and Automation Anywhere working together automate manual tasks with a reduction in FTEs, creating about a 30% reduction in FTEs by automating processes."
"A point of improvement would be the SAIL forms. The built-in tool used to generate forms does not have debugging support (to view local variables as they change on live preview, and step-by-step valuation) which is a big drawback for form development. Moreover, the script language used to build SAIL forms does not support inheritance or lambda expressions (functions as arguments of other functions), which makes the code base more verbose."
"What could be improved is more on the front end perspective, like the user interface and the mobile application aspect."
"Authoring tool is slow to use resulted in limitations on how quickly solutions can be built."
"The solution could improve robotic process automation."
"The solution needs more features. For example, a way to connect to our viewing database, to record, and more interface and component design."
"I wouldn't say their response time is long, but it could be quicker."
"It has it's own built-in UI components and doesn't provide much flexibility to customize or extend those components."
"There are four areas I believe Appian could improve in. The first is a seamless contact center integration. Appian does not have a contact center feature. The second is advanced features in RPA. The third would be chatbot and email bot integration—while Appian comes with chatbot and email bot, it's not as mature as it should be, compared to the competition. The fourth area would be next best action, since there is not much of this sort of feature in Appian. These are all features which competitors' products have, and in a mature manner, whereas Appian lacks on these four areas. I see customers who are moving from Appian to Pega because these features are not in Appian."
"The price and the overall installation process could be improved."
"I would like to see the solution be able to interact with other customer software solutions."
"There are a few areas, like triggering mechanisms, externally exposed variables, and changing its values."
"There is a lot of room for improvement of the dashboards."
"The initial setup process is complex for basic users."
"IBM BPM integrated with Spark UI and the UI is now much better, but they still need to improve the UI because competitors have predefined templates and other additional features. In these competitor's solutions, you are able to use the templates, map your data, and the form is ready to use. With this solution, you need to write a lot of code to have the same quality as the competitor's templates. It would be a benefit to make this platform more towards low-code or no-code."
"They don't have a mechanism to achieve processes, data sources, and data."
"The integration could be improved."
Appian is ranked 4th in Business Process Management (BPM) with 57 reviews while IBM BPM is ranked 5th in Business Process Management (BPM) with 105 reviews. Appian is rated 8.4, while IBM BPM 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 IBM BPM writes "Offers good case management and its integration with process design but there's a learning curve". Appian is most compared with Microsoft Power Apps, OutSystems, Camunda, ServiceNow and Bizagi, whereas IBM BPM is most compared with Camunda, Pega BPM, IBM Business Automation Workflow, 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.