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."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."
"This is the most complete solution of its kind."
"The most valuable features are the low coding and low code data."
"The process models provide self-documenting systems."
"It is really simple to create a new app, and I like the data-centric aspect of the BPM tool."
"Appian is a very low code platform. It's very easy to learn and use."
"Call Web Service Smart Service - Web service integrations with other systems are super simple and fast to create, supported by low code menus."
"Low code development: Code can be developed pretty quickly which leads to less turnaround time for automation of business processes."
"The benefit from the tool is we can develop it quickly and easily use it for middleware services. We can publish the services so other applications can consume them. This is providing us some reusability and a type of security."
"The most valuable feature is the complete workflow through the BPM, from making it available as a generated code based on the backend, deploying it in the test environment, and then going to production."
"We selected this solution not only for the BPM but for the entire package."
"One of the most valuable features of Oracle BPM is the workflow itself. It is quite intuitive."
"It is easy and cheap."
"The processor management system is quite fast and scalable. We have 10 developers using this solution and it supports 25,000 users."
"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."
"I find the data lineage features most valuable."
"I wouldn't say their response time is long, but it could be quicker."
"Offline capabilities and responsive capabilities could be better. The mobility features of Appian platform are still evolving."
"The graphical user interface could be easier to use. It should be simplified."
"The solution could use some more tutorials to help brand new users figure out how to use the product effectively."
"The biggest areas of improvement would be in facilitating team development, DevOps, and integration with typical tools used in enterprise development (Jenkins, Subversion, etc.)"
"One room for improvement is the ease of UI UX development, like in OutSystems and Mendix."
"Appian has a few areas for improvement, which my organization raised with the Appian team. One is the Excel output which is limited to fifty columns when it should be up to two hundred or three hundred columns."
"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."
"Their Case Management set of features is severely lacking and should be a target for immediate improvement dealing with unpredictable processes inside of organizations."
"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."
"There is room for improvement in the pricing structure."
"The time it takes to get from deployment to production could be faster."
"Oracle BPM is hard to configure."
"The product must reduce its cost."
"Overall, the engine and the UI both have to be made lighter."
"Existing APIs in the product need to be fine-tuned, made more robust and flexible for adoption."
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.