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."Technical support is quite responsive."
"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."
"SAIL (Self-Assembling Interface Layer), a scripting language provided by Appian. It is the equivalent of JS and CSS. It allows creation of complex UIs which are also responsive. With SAIL, we have a single language for both the UI logic and its appearance. UI components can be built as reusable components and used in multiple UI interfaces."
"Compared to other code tools that I've seen, Appian has a more robust rules engine"
"Appian's most valuable feature is that we can create end-to-end process workflows with minimum turnaround."
"It has good integrations. We were looking for out-of-the-box integration with both on-prem and publicly accessible data sources. We needed integration with the cloud, OData, our REST API feed, and then on-prem passthrough to go to a SQL database or on-prem APIs through Azure local deployment, etc."
"The most valuable features of Appian are workflow management and the ease with which you can build the UI."
"There is a version coming out every six months with performance improvements."
"I find the data lineage features most valuable."
"This solution has given us a quick time to market, the ability to integrate with the rest of the corporate applications, and the ability to hire talent in low-cost locations."
"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."
"The support is good."
"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 default Workspace does not meet all our needs and sometimes you need to create your own custom Workspace."
"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."
"We selected this solution not only for the BPM but for the entire package."
"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."
"They should provide more flexibility so designers can create a more picture perfect device."
"There could be a scope of enhancement for capturing the variety of use cases."
"We'd like improved functionality for testing new devices."
"Lacks integration with other products."
"The ability of the interface to load automatic data is not great."
"The documentation needs to be improved."
"Sometimes, clients expect us to implement ERP using Appian, which is very complicated. In such cases, I don't believe that Appian is a good tool for that."
"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."
"Though Oracle BPM is a stable solution, it's very heavy, so this is one area for improvement. If Oracle can make the components of Oracle BPM lighter, and if the deployment for the solution could be easier, that would make Oracle BPM better."
"Oracle BPM is hard to configure."
"Existing APIs in the product need to be fine-tuned, made more robust and flexible for adoption."
"The default Workspace does not meet all our needs and sometimes you need to create your own custom Workspace."
"Overall, the engine and the UI both have to be made lighter."
"The time it takes to get from deployment to production could be faster."
"You have to maintain it manually."
Appian is ranked 4th in Business Process Management (BPM) with 56 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.