We performed a comparison between erwin Data Modeler by Quest and SAP Signavio Process Manager based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Business Process Design solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."The solution is excellent in providing a visual representation of a database and can generate DDL for implementing changes. We use DDL for logical purposes to review with business people, ensuring they have the required fields for processing. We also use it as a data dictionary for the physical data model to understand all the purposes of the terms. This helps us map the logical and physical terms with the business definition to understand our data."
"The most valuable features are the ability to reverse engineer and do model comparison. With the reverse engineering, I can understand the databases from third-party products. With the model comparison, I can track the differences between two versions of the same database."
"There is absolutely no problem with the stability."
"Any tool will do diagramming but I think the ability to put the stuff up in a graphical fashion, then think about it, and keep things consistent is what's valuable about it. It's too easy when you're using other methods to not have naming consistent standards and column consistent definitions, et cetera."
"The ability to collaborate between different members across the organization is the most valuable feature. It gives us the ability to work on the same model, regardless of where we are physically."
"The most valuable features are being able to visualize the data in the diagrams and transform those diagrams into physical database deployments. These features help, specifically, to integrate the data. When the source data is accumulated and modeled, the target model is in erwin and it helps resolve the data integration patterns that are required to map the data to accommodate a model."
"We can create mappings in erwin and possibly data dictionaries."
"Another feature of erwin is that it can help you enforce your naming standards. It has little modules that you can set up and, as you're building the data model, it's ensuring that they conform to the naming standards that you've developed."
"The solution is user-friendly."
"There are many valuable features, of course. I would say the main value of Signavio is to have your current process map in a way that is easy to read and derive optimization actions to make it leaner, faster, more user friendly, etc. Another great feature is the visualization, which is easy to see and read. How they map the process is also very user friendly, with drag-and-drop functionality. Also, it's a very self-explanatory, user-friendly solution."
"The Signavio tool is very easy to use and it is one of the reasons why I like it."
"One of the most valuable features is ease of use which has really been a good thing to put into the business. People like tools that they can just pick up and use straight-away."
"The feature that I like the most is the collaboration hub, where every user or every employee can see the process in the overview."
"The reason we chose Signavio is it's a very robust industrial-grade business process modeling data tool, with data capture behind it, as well as a collaborative nature. A lot of it comes out of the box and requires less technology involvement. It can be run well by the business users. That's what we really like about it."
"The most valuable feature for me is the collaboration point of view, where everybody has a single view, or source of truth, and everybody sees the same thing. Everyone can comment, contribute, and discuss the processes itself, which makes it easier to funnel down the most value adding comments and make the relevant changes to the processes. This leads to the next best iteration or version of your process."
"Version management is helpful because I like to try different versions and then decide which of them should be the main model."
"The modeling product itself is far and above anything else that I've seen on the market. There are certain inconsistencies when it comes to keeping up with other platforms' databases in the reverse-engineering process. It should also support more database platforms."
"Some Source official systems give us DDLs to work with and they have contents not required to be part of the DDL before we reverse engineer in the erwin DM. Therefore, we manually make changes to those scripts and edit them, then reverse-engineer within the tool. So, it does take some time to edit these DDL scripts generated by the source operational systems. What I would suggest: It would be helpful if there were a place within the erwin tool to import the file and automatically eliminate all the unnecessary lines of code, and just have the clean code built-in to generate the table/data model."
"I would like to see more support for working with the big-data world. There are so many new databases evolving and it's very hard for them to keep up with all of the new technologies. It would be good if they were able to dynamically support big-data platforms, other than Hive and Teradata."
"I find the UI very clunky and very difficult to use. If I add columns to a table the whole workflow could be so much easier. I get frustrated using it. I've tried other tools. I've tried to get off of erwin a few times. I always come back to it because every tool has its own set of problems, and it seems like if I have to pick my poison, I stay with erwin. But so many things that are clunky with it."
"I would like the solution to be less rigid in terms of its theory."
"One of the things I've been talking to the erwin team about through the years is that every data model should have the ability to be multi-language... When I was working at Honda, it became very difficult to work with the Japanese teams using just one model. You can have two models, one in English and one in Japanese, but that means you have to keep the updates back and forth, and that always increases the risk of something not being updated."
"I am not so happy with its speed. Sometimes, it can have problems with connections."
"It is not a very stable solution. I rate the stability five out of ten."
"The reporting is too slow and there is a limit of 250 processes."
"I find it difficult to figure out how I can better align this solution with my KPIs."
"If you start from scratch then I think this product would be ideal, but if you already have something then it may or may not suit you."
"I think the interface itself can improve a bit. I think the interface is still stuck about a decade in the past, if I may be so brutal about it. Some of the buttons are really small, so you can't even see them. I think it needs upgrading to the 21st century with apps and the way we use mobile phones."
"I would like to be able to include images in the documentation."
"It is not easy to learn the product."
"I would like to be able to link a single word within a textual description directly to the glossary."
"There are some small graphical bugs, but they are addressed immediately by Signavio to their product development team."
erwin Data Modeler by Quest is ranked 9th in Business Process Design with 37 reviews while SAP Signavio Process Manager is ranked 6th in Business Process Design with 58 reviews. erwin Data Modeler by Quest is rated 8.6, while SAP Signavio Process Manager is rated 8.2. The top reviewer of erwin Data Modeler by Quest writes "The product lets users import different types of models, but it is expensive, and the interface must be improved". On the other hand, the top reviewer of SAP Signavio Process Manager writes "Has many functionalities and is used to model processes to the former operating model". erwin Data Modeler by Quest is most compared with SAP PowerDesigner, IDERA ER/Studio, Lucidchart, Visio and Sparx Systems Enterprise Architect, whereas SAP Signavio Process Manager is most compared with Celonis, ARIS BPA, Camunda, Visio and ADONIS. See our SAP Signavio Process Manager vs. erwin Data Modeler by Quest report.
See our list of best Business Process Design vendors.
We monitor all Business Process Design 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.
