We performed a comparison between Appian and OpenText AppWorks 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."Recently, we added Appian Process Mining, Appian Portals, and now Appian RPA."
"Low code development: Code can be developed pretty quickly which leads to less turnaround time for automation of business processes."
"Appian helps you do a lot of things. It's easy to configure and build an application platform, and it offers a lot of features that you find in an RPA solution. It's flexible so you can reuse it for a variety of use cases."
"There is no need to worry about vulnerabilities in the system, because Appian built a secure system."
"The Application Designer is very user friendly. There are also lot of plug-ins that you can use and, for the most part, they are free."
"Since implementing we have had a faster time to solution, with fewer resources needed."
"The product's most valuable feature is the low code aspect of development. We can develop an end-to-end VPN solution using a single platform."
"The solution's most valuable features are the regular periodic and quarterly updates, they are very useful updates. They keep improving the solution more often, and that helps the platform or code always be up to date with the latest features."
"We've automated several processes, including purchase requisition to purchase orders, RFQ processes, vendor onboarding, project budgeting, and business case creation. The recent versions of OpenText AppWorks, especially those incorporating low-code functionalities, have had a significant positive impact. In some cases, we've observed a remarkable reduction in development time, ranging from 50 to 75 percent. The MTP model and life cycle have facilitated rapid development cycles."
"From a business perspective, the most valuable aspect lies in the optimization of processes."
"One of the most useful features is the code is customizable, we can make it our own."
"AppWorks is a very quick development platform with low-coding capability and strong integration with third-party systems."
"The monitoring aspect is highly valuable, as it offers an exceptional capability to track every minute of action performed by a business user in the global context."
"We really appreciate the process automation and how can you create human tasks as one of your processes."
"In terms of the scalability and the handling of complexity, the customers are satisfied, and we also have confidence in the solution to achieve whatever implementations are required."
"OpenText AppWorks has standard features such as system-to-system and human-to-human integrations, but what I find most valuable in the solution is its monitoring feature that tells you more about your processes, how to restart and how to stop each process, etc."
"There could be a scope of enhancement for capturing the variety of use cases."
"Lacks integration with other products."
"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."
"The graphical user interface could be easier to use. It should be simplified."
"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."
"Offline capabilities and responsive capabilities could be better. The mobility features of Appian platform are still evolving."
"I wouldn't say their response time is long, but it could be quicker."
"The solution needs more features. For example, a way to connect to our viewing database, to record, and more interface and component design."
"The solution needs to continue to enhance the low-coding feature within the product itself."
"A room for improvement in OpenText AppWorks is its user interface. It should have mobile compatibility because right now, you still have to make two applications with a user interface for Android and a user interface for iOS, so if OpenText AppWorks can provide one UI that can be used across all devices, that would make the solution better. An additional feature I'd like to see in the next release of OpenText AppWorks is a better UI in terms of the look and feel. Another feature I'd like to see in the next version of the solution is mobile compatibility because, at the moment, you have to make your application mobile-ready or compatible with mobile devices because there's no provision for it in OpenText AppWorks."
"AppWorks could be improved by including BPM simulation."
"The crucial missing element is the archival function."
"The integration could improve."
"OpenText AppWork's low-code capabilities can be enhanced by integrating them with AI offerings like Aviator."
"There is room for improvement in the pricing structure."
"There could be some improvements with the low code design part. It could be more customizable and more user friendly."
Appian is ranked 4th in Business Process Management (BPM) with 58 reviews while OpenText AppWorks is ranked 16th in Business Process Management (BPM) with 8 reviews. Appian is rated 8.4, while OpenText AppWorks is rated 7.8. The top reviewer of Appian writes "Low resource consumption, easy setup, and stable". On the other hand, the top reviewer of OpenText AppWorks writes "Automates processes like purchase requisition to purchase orders, RFQ processes, vendor onboarding, project budgeting, and business case creation". Appian is most compared with Microsoft Power Apps, OutSystems, Camunda, ServiceNow and Pega BPM, whereas OpenText AppWorks is most compared with Microsoft Power Apps, ServiceNow Now Platform, OutSystems, Mendix and Pega BPM. See our Appian vs. OpenText AppWorks 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.