We performed a comparison between Appian and SAP Signavio Process Manager 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."In terms of interface, it's very good. In terms of infrastructure, it's amazing and already using multiple tools behind the scenes. It's a low-code platform, so it's very easy to implement."
"SAIL (Self-Assembling Interface Layer), a scripting language provided by Appian. It is the equivalent of JS and CSS. It allows creation of complex UIs which are also responsive. With SAIL, we have a single language for both the UI logic and its appearance. UI components can be built as reusable components and used in multiple UI interfaces."
"It reduces development time in half making us more efficient."
"This is the most complete solution of its kind."
"Rapid development with low-code makes it easier to quickly get apps implemented and the time to break-even and ROI is much faster."
"The most valuable features are the low coding and low code data."
"What stands out are the speed of the product, the quick, easy development, and visual diagramming."
"The application life cycle is very clear. I started learning it and giving some workshops to my team. Creating the users and the building is very structured. Documentation is nice and it's easy to learn."
"The most valuable feature is that you can customize it completely with all of the attributes that you need."
"Process management/Process governance is what we think Signavio is very good at."
"It is a scalable solution."
"In my opinion, the most valuable feature is the editor and its ease of use, and when people are looking at it, they can make comments about changes that need to be made."
"The GUI is very easy to use, where you can sit together with your colleagues, discuss the process, and during these discussions you can build up the model."
"A complete business project management suite which seems to open endless possibility."
"The most valuable features of this solution are the portal for spreading it over the organization, the usability, and the workflow generator in the background."
"This functionality ("invite anyone for feedback") has substantially increased visibility over work-in-progress when it comes to process modelling and overall process management and it decreased the time spent on giving and receiving feedback through emails and through sharing screenshots/.ppt files/Visio files etc."
"I would like to see more complete university tools. For example, with UiPath, I have had a good experience related to a free course in order to provide some users some different levels of knowledge. This extra training helps users not only use the solution but to develop further within the tool."
"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."
"Occasionally, certain pre-made modules may not be necessary and customers may desire greater customization options. Instead of being limited to pre-designed features, they may prefer a more flexible version that allows for greater customization."
"Even though the company has made great improvements in online documentation, featuring rich material which includes case studies of real-life use cases, the material could definitely be better in quality and coverage of use cases."
"Authoring tool is slow to use resulted in limitations on how quickly solutions can be built."
"The solution could improve robotic process automation."
"They should provide more flexibility so designers can create a more picture perfect device."
"The reporting is not as good as in similar products. They could also improve the dashboards."
"There are a few bugs when you use the Microsoft Surface Hub with the big screen."
"It could use a better user interface, one that is more efficient."
"There is a need for more varied access packages. The access packages that I have used are not cheap enough. They also provide a complete set of tools that are not always used. Sometimes, you need more segregated things, e.g., Signavio includes functionality for a company that has not yet matured. Since there are no basic packages, the company must pay for a package that is not fully used. Typically, process management is started in a company of a certain maturity."
"From what I have experienced when I worked with a process team, we would like to work with dummy process diagrams. Right now, I don't know if I would set up a process as a dummy, since it very often gets mixed up with diagrams in production. There are many process diagrams linked to the production environment. I would like to have some kind of sandbox to work with. That would be very good. I don't even know if they already have it, but I would certainly like that."
"It could be more flexible from a customization point of view, where the user is able to display only whatever he needs."
"I would like to be able to link a single word within a textual description directly to the glossary."
"The solution’s pricing could be improved."
"The tool's navigation could be improved."
Appian is ranked 4th in Business Process Management (BPM) with 58 reviews while SAP Signavio Process Manager is ranked 8th in Business Process Management (BPM) with 58 reviews. Appian is rated 8.4, while SAP Signavio Process Manager is rated 8.2. The top reviewer of Appian writes "Low resource consumption, easy setup, and stable". 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". Appian is most compared with Microsoft Power Apps, Camunda, ServiceNow and OutSystems, whereas SAP Signavio Process Manager is most compared with Celonis, ARIS BPA, Camunda, Visio and ADONIS. See our Appian vs. SAP Signavio Process Manager 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.