What is our primary use case?
OpenText Process 360 is modular and there is also an integration with OpenText Content Suite. It's all now on cloud subscription, so you can use all the features without worrying about making the system update patches. All of the issues are taken care of in the cloud version.
How has it helped my organization?
OpenText Process 360 has our systems up and running, at least going forward. It's modular and has more features than other products from a financial point of view.
What needs improvement?
They need better solutions for common functionalities, like every week related activities, and customer support. They need to come with more out of the box solutions, rather than depending on customers to develop them.
I like SharePoint where you have work bots, so I hope they come up with a similar concept. Add the reusability of whatever components we configure. I believe this will be an advantage in the future.
For how long have I used the solution?
I have been using OpenText Process 360 for one year.
What do I think about the stability of the solution?
In the beginning, OpenText Process 360 was not doing well. At least some patches were applied to fix the issues. To be honest, my experience with OpenText is that usually, they are not doing too much on quality assurance with their product.
They are launching new features into the market but based on the customer feedback, they;re still incomplete. They are reactive. This is one of the difficulties of their solution.
What do I think about the scalability of the solution?
I believe it is easy to scale. We have a local administrator. There is also a technical administrator. Within each function, we have one administrator who is managing a business site, helping users, initiating requests, inserting workflows and processes. We are supporting about 500 users now.
We are also evaluating OpenText Process 360 in the HR sector. Maybe we'll extend it to the administration of domains as well.
How are customer service and technical support?
I believe we have this service agreement, and we are responsible for the contract with OpenText Process 360. We don't face any issues. There are different models they are offering. They are responsible for everything from A to Z. They are offering also another alternative where they have on-site support, plus a user model where they have normal support.
What we have done is we are getting some professional service agreements with OpenText Process 360. They are inviting us officially. We are contacting tech support on a monthly basis. On top of this, they provide 24/7 support.
Which solution did I use previously and why did I switch?
We were using SharePoint. There is another tool for the workflow on top of SharePoint. It's similar to Flex. It was okay, but we moved our enterprise content solution to OpenText.
We find it is efficient to have the same solution from the same company for the transactional beta workflow and business process management.
What's my experience with pricing, setup cost, and licensing?
OpenText Process 360 is costly compared to SharePoint. There is a very costly investment required to license the product.
I don't want to spend a lot on user licenses. The integration with OpenText Process was very complicated on licensing. This product supports the definition of roles and responsibilities. We are making a lot of investment in infrastructure and hardware with all this support.
What other advice do I have?
My advice to someone considering this solution is that before looking into the technology solution, understand what your business requirement is. Try to optimize the business process service before you go for automation and spending too much on this.
You'll pay a license while you are developing your business process. Optimize it a while, checking the laws and responsibilities. It is more valuable to spend the most time on the business side before you go for a set cost.
I would give OpenText Process 360 an eight out of ten because nothing is perfect. There is a lot of room for improvement with the product.