We performed a comparison between Appian and Informatica Business Process Manager 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 is easy to install and set up, and it does not come out with your audit. It has accessible process orchestration and process management. With Appian, the time to market is much faster."
"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."
"Process Modeling enables creation of business process workflows. You can create complex business workflows in a visual manner, and it is also easy to debug/monitor."
"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 product has a very good mobile app."
"I find the BPM the most valuable feature."
"The agile manner that we require to create our workflows. This is probably the most critical part of our solution and the time it takes to start processing the solution."
"It reduces development time in half making us more efficient."
"Informatica Business Process Manager is easy to use and learn."
"I know that there are two good features, APN and ServiceNow but we haven't explored all of its features yet."
"There isn't any human touch involved. It's just an automated business process to build different applications and talking to various APIs using the client's ecosystems. We then build new functionalities out of it."
"The solution could improve by being more responsive when dealing with large quantities of data. Additionally, they can make the decision or rules engine better. It cannot handle too many rules or too many decisions at once."
"It needs better integration with our existing application ecosystem."
"The product’s pricing could be improved from the developers' perspective."
"There are some restrictions with respect to using external components within Appian. So, for example, if we do not have a particular feature available, there's a long cycle of getting approvals and all of that. That does not offer flexibility, which definitely can be improved on."
"It would be useful if they could create an academy or forum in the future to help active users answer questions they have about the solution."
"The ability of the interface to load automatic data is not great."
"If that had more DevOps capabilities, it would be an excellent product."
"One room for improvement is the ease of UI UX development, like in OutSystems and Mendix."
"We haven't had many technical issues. We don't use all of the components of the tool that are more complex and error-prone."
"I need to have some insight into the tool's cloud capabilities."
Appian is ranked 4th in Business Process Management (BPM) with 57 reviews while Informatica Business Process Manager is ranked 20th in Business Process Management (BPM) with 2 reviews. Appian is rated 8.4, while Informatica Business Process Manager is rated 8.6. The top reviewer of Appian writes "Low resource consumption, easy setup, and stable". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Informatica Business Process Manager writes "An easy-to-use solution for ETL purposes ". Appian is most compared with Microsoft Power Apps, OutSystems, Camunda, ServiceNow and Pega BPM, whereas Informatica Business Process Manager is most compared with Apache Airflow, Camunda and Oracle BPM. See our Appian vs. Informatica Business Process Manager 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.