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."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 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."
"Rapid development with low-code makes it easier to quickly get apps implemented and the time to break-even and ROI is much faster."
"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."
"We appreciate the drag and drop functionality and the easy to access plug and play features."
"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."
"Good workflow engines that bridge the gaps of processes."
"Appian also has very flexible local integration."
"Everything is coupled together and comes as one solution."
"The integration and design are valuable features."
"The installation was straightforward."
"It is transparent to business users because it is mostly picture based modelling."
"Scalability is good. In the time that I have been there, we have added more JVMs to help with the increased workload, so it does scale."
"Good user interface and good add option."
"Our customers use the solution as a workflow platform to manage their processes."
"Responsive Portal + Process Federation Server. This set of solutions offers a unified worklist to our customers."
"The ability of the interface to load automatic data is not great."
"It is difficult to set up the on-premise version."
"We would like to see more reduced latency. We would like to make sure that the scale-out factor will be much more as workloads come in."
"What could be improved is more on the front end perspective, like the user interface and the mobile application aspect."
"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."
"The reporting is not as good as in similar products. They could also improve the dashboards."
"We have clients that want to use Office 365, Microsoft Analytics, and Power Apps. Appian just isn't the same as using something specifically designed to cater to the Microsoft Suite."
"There should be more flexibility for the developers to choose the look and feel of the UI. They should have a better ability to design their widgets and customize them with different colors, shapes, and sizes. That is a limitation that could be improved upon."
"User Interface components could be further refined to enhance and extend customizations dictated by end clients."
"The people working on the front desk are having some problem with managing the documentation. For instance, they get a picture, and if the picture comes rotated 90 degrees, together with a picture that is not rotated, they have some problems dealing with that, technically. There are some minor aspects that on the usability side that are still lacking. That has to do with FileNet, too, I'm talking about the suite together."
"I'd like the tool to be more flexible."
"They don't have a mechanism to achieve processes, data sources, and data."
"I believe that if the license were cheaper, it would have a greater impact."
"The analysis reports could be much better."
"There are a few areas, like triggering mechanisms, externally exposed variables, and changing its values."
"I would like to see more inclusion of RPA technologies. If we have more manual processes, we can use robotic process automation and integrate that in with the solution."
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.