We performed a comparison between IBM BPM and IBM Case Foundation 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."It helps improve your process through continual measurement."
"The most valuable features come in the bundle, the design process, creating services, creating BPDs, creating coaches, and UI/UX."
"It has improved my organization quite a bit. It brought awareness to what the business processes are, even to the business side, who did not necessarily know what they are."
"Compliance with the BPMN 2.0 standard."
"The solution is stable."
"The process creation."
"IBM BPM is equipped with all the functionalities which are needed for building BPM enterprise-level applications."
"I rate the technical support a ten out of ten...The product's installation was easy."
"The client and the IBM content navigation are the solution's most valuable features."
"A valuable feature includes seamless integration with the document management system, along with robust capabilities in analytics and reporting."
"The most valuable feature is its stability, which is why we are using it."
"It is easy to set up workflows that notify the user depending on certain events."
"Flexible and the ability to divide search screens, and to search for documents. The ECM feature inside the system is great."
"It provides us the capability of producing business processes for documents that are launched immediately when a document comes into the repository."
"Case Foundation provides a strong security boost."
"It's very easy."
"I would like to see more inclusion of RPA technologies. If we have more manual processes, we can use robotic process automation and integrate that in with the solution."
"We would like better performance and more visibility on each step of the tool."
"The engine itself tends to accumulate a lot of data that needs to be cleaned up, and that's the kind of thing that keeps it from, in some scenarios, scaling as much as it needs to. And then, when you're building solutions, if you're not careful to keep the screens from being associated with too much data, if you're going to just do things the way that a lot of people would just assume that they can do, without having experience of having made those mistakes before, it will accumulate a lot of data, and that will cause it to perform very badly."
"Finding errors and bugs on the system is not easy. We can't seem to use the events or logs to find them, so it makes it difficult to debug the system. They really need to work on their debugging features to make is much, much easier. It would improve the solution considerably and should be something they add in a future release."
"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."
"They could provide case studies to investigate and understand the functionality of business processes before development."
"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."
"I'd like the tool to be more flexible."
"Once a workflow is launched then it stays static forever, which is a problem because if there is a change in the business then you cannot change the workflow."
"There is a need for more open and flexible integration capabilities, allowing seamless collaboration with a broader spectrum of business process management solutions, beyond the confines of IBM's document management offerings."
"We are now using microservices but there are some areas where the coordination with FileNet is problematic."
"There are some features that could be enhanced like the document viewer"
"The service as it currently stands is out-of-date and lacks flexibility."
"The cloud version could use more stability."
"The interface needs to be more user-friendly."
"Comparing the solution with other interfaces, IBM BPM is much better than Case Foundation. They need to make this solution's interface more user-friendly."
IBM BPM is ranked 5th in Business Process Management (BPM) with 105 reviews while IBM Case Foundation is ranked 27th in Business Process Management (BPM) with 12 reviews. IBM BPM is rated 7.8, while IBM Case Foundation is rated 7.8. The top reviewer of IBM BPM writes "Offers good case management and its integration with process design but there's a learning curve". On the other hand, the top reviewer of IBM Case Foundation writes "Streamlined business process automation with user-friendly design". IBM BPM is most compared with Camunda, Pega BPM, Appian, IBM Business Automation Workflow and Apache Airflow, whereas IBM Case Foundation is most compared with IBM Business Automation Workflow. See our IBM BPM vs. IBM Case Foundation 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.
