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."I like the integration part, and I also like how they use the database, such as the data when they implement all the data side, and how you can easily integrate it with their widgets."
"Very user friendly and a professional solution."
"This solution is easy to use and it is a good tool for process modeling."
"Agility is most valuable because we can develop so much faster than other tools. We can make requirements, develop, and go out to production much faster. So, agility in the software cycle is most valuable."
"It is quite a stable solution."
"It has an easy to use interface which final users accepted with much more enthusiasm than our ERP (SAP)."
"The most beneficial features of Bizagi for our business processes are its seamless connectivity between process elements and its ability to automate tasks and perform simulations."
"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."
"IBM BPM's best features include document sharing, management document creation, widget and barcode creation, and integration."
"Responsive Portal + Process Federation Server. This set of solutions offers a unified worklist to our customers."
"One of the most notable things is how you can develop use cases with the customers, internal customers, but directly within. The software process model that BPM supports is really exciting in that aspect."
"IBM BPM and Automation Anywhere working together automate manual tasks with a reduction in FTEs, creating about a 30% reduction in FTEs by automating processes."
"Stability-wise, I rate the solution a ten out of ten."
"The most valuable features are the integration capabilities - BPM can connect with almost any legacy or advanced system."
"Scalability is good. In the time that I have been there, we have added more JVMs to help with the increased workload, so it does scale."
"There are a lot of things that you get out-of-the-box: Timers and so on, which took a lot of effort and code before."
"I would like to see a facility for building a simple CRUD application. In Bizagi, you can use database modeling, diagrams, forms, etc., but in some circumstances I need CRUD (Create, Read, Update, Delete) functionalities which are not there yet."
"There could be more documentation."
"They should improve the migration process between major versions, from version 9 to 10, we had to redo our implementation."
"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."
"I would like to see simulation as a free feature again. In version 3.3 it was free, but in 4.0 it isn't."
"When you start working with information modeling, et cetera, here is no really good solution for the data modeling and information modeling."
"The on-premise software has some bugs."
"One thing that I don't like very much is related to integration: we have to develop some connectors... I would need a connector that connects to a REST service and that uses client ID in secret... They provide the means to develop a connector and use it, but they should implement this because REST services are among the most used protocols for web services."
"I would like to see a lot more case studies."
"The coaches and the user interface are the areas that can be improved a lot. It is good in terms of data processing, but the UI, scripting, and coaches are not very user-friendly and developer-friendly. Performance is always an issue. The scripting and the pattern that it uses are very tedious for new developers to understand, and it takes time to master it in depth. When comparing IBM BPM with IBM APN, a lot of things are provided out of the box in IBM APN. We don't have to write code or a Java connector to make a functionality work. It would be very helpful and time-saving for developers if IBM BPM is improved in this area to provide many functionalities or drag-and-drop options so that the developers don't have to write the code."
"I would like IBM to consider including AI-enabled process mining, robotic process automation, and very good OCR capabilities from the computer vision side."
"The stability varies because it involves a lot of other components like databases, so sometimes if something goes wrong there, it can't recover from the fatal errors."
"They don't have a mechanism to achieve processes, data sources, and data."
"The front end is not customised for a good user experience."
"The user experience, while it has improved, should continue to improve."
"The interface is limited and should improve in the future."
Bizagi is ranked 7th in Business Process Management (BPM) with 78 reviews while IBM BPM is ranked 6th 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, IBM Business Automation Workflow, Pega BPM and Appian. 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.