We performed a comparison between Appian and Oracle 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."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."
"Recently, we added Appian Process Mining, Appian Portals, and now Appian RPA."
"It has created executable requirements and speeds up the SDLC process greatly."
"The most valuable features of Appian are the VPN engine, it is fast, lightweight, and easy to set up business rules. Business teams can do it by themselves. That is a very good feature."
"The setup is easy."
"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."
"This is the most complete solution of its kind."
"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."
"What I found most valuable in Oracle BPM is that it has a lot of out-of-the-box integrations. The solution also provides a lot of adapters which is very helpful."
"We selected this solution not only for the BPM but for the entire package."
"One of the most valuable features is its user-friendly API, which simplifies the implementation of workflows, such as managing inbox tasks for specific users within BPM profiles."
"The initial setup is straightforward."
"Our company is based around Oracle processes. It provides a lot of flexibility in its processes."
"The Workspace is a full, rich application where most users can find what they want. It shows them a list of their work."
"The processor management system is quite fast and scalable. We have 10 developers using this solution and it supports 25,000 users."
"It is easy and cheap."
"There is no UI customization possible."
"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."
"Authoring tool is slow to use resulted in limitations on how quickly solutions can be built."
"My only request is that they decrease the license costs."
"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."
"Appian could include other applications that we could reuse for other customers, CRM for example."
"The biggest areas of improvement would be in facilitating team development, DevOps, and integration with typical tools used in enterprise development (Jenkins, Subversion, etc.)"
"It could have easier administration. It takes time to configure and deploy."
"Every time we roll out a new version of processes, we have to migrate to a new process. The process of this migration was not very smooth. We later decided that it would be easier for us to stop all processes, deploy a new version and then restart."
"It would be good if they could provide some additional connectors or an application developer environment for microservices."
"Their Case Management set of features is severely lacking and should be a target for immediate improvement dealing with unpredictable processes inside of organizations."
"The time it takes to get from deployment to production could be faster."
"Oracle BPM could probably be improved with respect to the cost. When you are using this product, it'll be a bit costlier for the ROA. I think they should do some discounts on these products, especially for the licenses."
"The product must reduce its cost."
"Pricing is an area that could use improvement."
Appian is ranked 4th in Business Process Management (BPM) with 57 reviews while Oracle BPM is ranked 14th in Business Process Management (BPM) with 22 reviews. Appian is rated 8.4, while Oracle BPM is rated 7.4. The top reviewer of Appian writes "Low resource consumption, easy setup, and stable". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Oracle BPM writes "Stable, has a lot of features and out-of-the-box integrations, but it's heavy, and the technical support isn't good". Appian is most compared with Microsoft Power Apps, OutSystems, Camunda, ServiceNow and Pega BPM, whereas Oracle BPM is most compared with Camunda, SAP Signavio Process Manager, IBM BPM, AWS Step Functions and Adobe Experience Manager (AEM) Forms. See our Appian vs. Oracle BPM 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.