We performed a comparison between Bizagi 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."What I find most valuable is the flexibility, I find it very easy to use and very flexible for my purpose. I can use it without any particular problem, and it's very intuitive and easy to understand."
"The main feature of Bizagi is the speed to which we can automate processes and how we can modify them without a strong impact on the end users."
"Bizagi is flexible. I can share things with other consultants because it is the most commonly used software in my community. It has been a great and good resource for us in making sure that we adhere to the process."
"The ability to write our own code inside each activity is beneficial. Sometimes we need to create functionality that doesn't come out of the box, and this allows us to do that."
"I like that Bizagi is fully compatible with BPMN 2.0. It also eases the way in which we work with BPMN 2.0 itself, which is a comprehensive and rather complex notation standard."
"The most valuable feature is the organizational modeling capability."
"I like the business process management engine. It's very detailed, and you can probably map any of the corporate workflow processes you come across in it compared to some of the other solutions out there. I can probably say that it has very good support to work in tandem with other RP solutions in the market. The software is still very user-friendly and integral, and they have pretty good online resources. The automation feature is pretty good, so is the integration feature."
"It is quite a stable solution."
"It is being able to see the process, and understanding what the process is versus having to bury it in code somewhere."
"I like the APIs and the BPM coach is a good tool. But if I had to pick one, it would be the API."
"I liked its robustness the most. It was a very robust platform in my experience. It seemed like a very stable and powerful tool for handling lots of concurrent users and hammering at the system."
"This is one of the best tools to support the business and the way we work, and the numerous processes we need to implement."
"Integration is a big plus for me."
"Enabled us to convert most of the paper-based work into an automated workflow process, and some of them were converted into straight-through processing, with no human interaction involved whatsoever."
"It is a very powerful solution."
"It is efficient in reducing costs."
"One of the features which could be improved is machine learning. Even though this product has been working on this topic, we can see that it still requires improvement."
"The free version could be better. Some of the templates and all the functionalities aren't available in the free version. I've been trying to check some maps, for example, organizational maps or a model on organization hierarchy. Apparently, there seems to be no template. You have to create your own. I am not sure if there are templates, but I've not really seen any. I think that there's room for improvement."
"I don't know if it's a problem with my operating system or a Bizagi problem, but many times I see that when I try to connect different activities, they show up as not connected."
"Can be difficult for new users."
"Sometimes, when your process is big with multiple lanes, the product will freeze the issue noticed on multiple laptops, not a single PC."
"Cloud support for their process mapping tool could be better. To map all your processes in any way and call your data, you need to download their on-premise setup or their desktop setup. Cloud support for process mapping is limited, and they should work on that."
"In terms of what needs improvement, the costs can be lowered."
"The product used to have a simulation feature, which I had used quite often. However, it's since been discontinued. It might have originally been a paid feature. It would be nice if they could bring it back and offer it for free."
"It is a really powerful tool, but its entry price is so high, which makes it a very exclusive club for who gets to use it. The thing that seemed to be the most intolerable was that you could put lots and lots of users on it, and it worked fine, but if you put lots and lots of developers on it, it sure seemed to have challenges. The biggest challenge was the development because of the Eclipse tool. It just seemed like irrespective of the development team that you put together, whether it had 10 or 50 people, you would end up having to reboot the development server throughout the day when you concurrently had lots of people hammering on the system. The development server just got sluggish. This was true for every project I was on. Once you got more than about five people working on the system at the same time, it would just get slower and slower during development work, and the only way to fix it was to reboot the server. It became just like a routine. Sometimes, we would reboot at lunch or dinner time, which is silly. After the cloud instances started rolling out, I never saw that again. That was probably the one big advantage of the cloud version. Instead of using an independent Eclipse-based process development tool, we moved to web-based process and design. The web-based tool definitely had greater performance than the Eclipse-based tool. I never got onto another project after that with 50 people, so I don't know how the performance is when you get a large team on it, but it definitely seems that the cloud design tool was a massive improvement."
"IBM BPM lacks openness, that is, the ability to become open for new options in terms of APIs, front-end development, and ecosystem. IBM BPM has been quite closed. One of the main improvements would be to somehow embed the rules engine into IBM BPM. Merging IBM BRMS and the rules engine with IBM BPM would be helpful. If there was some simpler way to define rules without having to put IBM BRMS on top of it, it would be good. It's something that we can get out of Camunda but not out of IBM BPM."
"There is room for improvement in the stability."
"It might not be suitable for entry level clients because it comes with a huge number of modules for processing that at times might not be necessary for upcoming clients."
"We had hoped that the product would provide us with plug-ins like Salesforce. Its development environment needs to improve. We expect to see elastic features like containerization. We don't just need an on-prem virtual machine."
"User Interface components could be further refined to enhance and extend customizations dictated by end clients."
"Process versioning was tricky, not straightforward."
"From the testing perspective and minor enhancements perspective, customization is something that is a little tedious as compared to new tools. In addition, various open-source tools that are available are not working with IBM BPM."
Bizagi is ranked 7th in Business Process Management (BPM) with 78 reviews while IBM BPM is ranked 5th in Business Process Management (BPM) with 105 reviews. Bizagi is rated 8.4, while IBM BPM is rated 7.8. The top reviewer of Bizagi writes "A flexible, customizable solution that reduced time to market, but the UI and customer support could be better". 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". Bizagi is most compared with Camunda, Visio, Bonita and Microsoft Power Apps, whereas IBM BPM is most compared with Camunda, Appian, Pega BPM and IBM Business Automation Workflow. See our Bizagi 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.