ARIS BPA Reviews

My experience with the product was great. The tool has good navigation.

The tool must provide more documents. If someone gets stuck while using the product, the documents will help them to deal with issues.

I am learning the solution currently.

The tool is stable.

The support team resolved my issues. I rate the support a seven and a half or eight out of ten.

Neutral

The initial setup was straightforward. The solution is deployed on the cloud. It took us a few days to deploy it.

The product is a bit pricey.

ARIS BPA is my first BPA solution. I heard about it and thought to start working with it. I saw some YouTube videos and gathered some knowledge about it. It was a great experience. Overall, I rate the solution a nine out of ten.

We use BPA for modeling and documenting in a central repository. We are customers of ARIS and I'm a process professional. 

I value the reporting as well as the information query features, they are both very useful. It gives us a common language and a common repository, and we're able to control the workflow and relevant key processes. We're also able to utilize all the additional data that we capture and provide a holistic view of how our processes impact other areas of the organization.

Although the reporting and the information query features are good, they could do with some improvement. I'd also like to see better control over the library assets. It takes a lot of effort to maintain all the different types of central libraries. I'd like to see a simplification of the automation in the next update, it's currently quite a complex process. 

I've been using this solution for three years. 

The stability of the system is good. We've had some minor issues when they're running maintenance activities but other than that, the solution is stable. 

The technical support is reasonable.

I've also used Bizagi quite a lot but I like ARIS because we're able to extract a lot more information. Bizagi has the ability to start executing processes via the platform, which is a definite advantage over ARIS. Once we model a process in Bizagi, we can configure it and create an executable web service out of it. 

The solution is deployed across the entire company, almost everyone uses it.
We currently have around 600 users, but we're planning to scale up to approximately 2,500 soon. We have around 30 people maintaining the data.

I rate this solution eight out of 10. 

We use the solution to collect information, design, publish, and validate the process. We can implement the process according to the improvements that can be retrieved. We monitor the process before the four phases of discovery, design, publishing, and implementation.

BPA is used to represent reality. We need to find and implement potential improvements from a workshop presentation and then monitor the results. We are not implementing these tools to plan and organize artifacts. This tool covers everything except implementation because that is not the purpose of a BPA tool. However, this tool can interface with implementation tools, and after implementation, you can use APIs and other interfaces to get information back from reality. In terms of improvement, the app could use some small details and functionalities. However, I need more time to sync to get more specific suggestions. We already have interfaces for these four tools, and it is possible to develop interfaces for the other four tools. 

Inside the product, we can have a developer environment where we can create new scripts using APIs or STPI. This is the environment that we use to help interface the tools. In the past, we had many packages of interfaces. The suppliers of the provider preferred to have these package interfaces. We like to open the code, at least part of the code, with APIs and other things like this so that the consultants can create the interfaces with the specific tools. We use APIs and other search tools for this.

I have been using ARIS BPA for more than 30 years.

The technical support is good.

Positive

The product is expensive. People who don't understand BPA or only understand a little bit about it often compare tools with videos and things like this, which are not comparable. They may have a lot of models and artifacts, but nothing is aligned or consistent. Customers prefer to start with fizzes and things like this, and later on, they come back and prefer to use a more professional tool.

The solution is not easy to use. People at the operational level don't have the abstraction level needed for this proposal. When they get information from business people, they immediately decide on the other model. They come with additional information from other business departments and do the same. To do things properly, you need to think about a proper structure based on components. Then, when you get new information from previous areas, for example, IT, you should frame this further information or these recent changes in the structure you previously found. Otherwise, you're constantly reacting, doing a lot of ad hoc models. You'll have a lot of content without alignment, sense, or semantics. 

The first step is to contact the customer. The next step is to present the customer with some proposals because when you present the proposal to them, they may accept or reject it. If they leave it, what will you do? This flexibility allows you to generate different views of the process for different stakeholders. For example, someone in top management might want to see a view from the customer contact until the proposal. Another person might want to see everything. You can take all of the components that you have designed before and create a specific view for them. It’s only about how to design business processes. It depends on the other two. One of the primary and critical requirements is to create business processes based on specific components that are well-linked and aligned together, in order to avoid ad hoc models. Ad hoc models are not very good. They do not work in the future. Usually, people start doing this because it is easier. This is closer to how ordinary people think. 

Still, in the middle and long term, you will realize that it is not manageable because you have to prepare models, a visualization of things, and different models of the same reality. You will not know what the source of truth is at a certain point in time because you have many different presentations of the same fact. For me, this structure is crucial. This is where it should start: defining the system, how you will model it, and the methodology. What are the pros and cons of the method? How will you capture, model, validate, implement, and monitor the information? You must define this beforehand, at the beginning of any project. Otherwise, forget about it, regardless of your tool, because it is more about the concepts. If you don't have the right concepts, then forget about it. Overall, I rate the solution an eight out of ten.

I have been working with ARIS across different projects in several companies, including a project where we implemented ARIS.

In my current company, we use ARIS for business process mapping, capability management, and process analysis. In some of my previous jobs, we used it as a tool for quality and compliance management, because processes are obviously the basis for audits. In this respect, ARIS always came in very handy.

It is pretty easy for users to get access to published processes. With regards to published content, I can think of one or two enhancements but overall, it's pretty easy. When you know how you need to do it, then it's a good tool.

ARIS has the largest BPM community in the world, although I don't particularly care about the size. The important part is how active it is. For example, if you have 1,000 people that form a community but nobody is saying a word, then the community is useless.

Software AG is promoting the ARIS community quite heavily, and they may have started to rebuild it with this platform. People tend to use it more frequently and I personally try to contribute to the content. Essentially, for me, the engagement of the community is more important than its size.

As a process management tool, it provides a lot of transparency when it comes to processes. This means that people have a solid basis for discussion and this is important because only when you have a process mapped, people will understand how it works. Sometimes, they will then even say that they have understood the process to be something totally different.

In general, process mapping using ARIS is a really good basis to get discussions going and also for audits to ensure or to prove to the auditor that you have good processes in place.

My gut feeling is that ARIS helps to save us time on business process analysis. However, it is difficult to confirm because we wouldn't be able to measure that. It certainly helps to create transparency when it comes to processes, and thus automatically increases their effectiveness. This suggests that it saves time.

ARIS is very user-friendly compared to other BPM tools that I have used. The user has a really modern view when they're using the ARIS Connect platform, which is the web-based part of the application.

In general, the users really like it and they can get started using it very easily.

For some people, ARIS is quite intuitive when it comes to business process management and modeling. In the time that I have spent training people, I have found that there are two mindsets. If somebody is a very organized and structured person then it will be relatively easy to get started with ARIS. However, if somebody is more creative then it tends to be quite difficult for them. That said, these people would have the same difficulty when using other process management tools. The reason is that process management is about structure. For those with that type of mindset, it's really easy to get started.

As an administrator with several years of experience with ARIS, I find that getting end-users set up is a really easy thing to do.

I really like the large variety of functionality that ARIS provides. If you look at it from a methodology perspective, you have more than 100 different diagrams or model types that you can choose from. It's really flexible in all of your modeling needs.

You can easily model process diagrams, but you can also model bowtie diagrams, UML diagrams, and more. ARIS has a really wide range of functionality. 

I really like the EPC modeling because it allows you to model not only the doer's perspective, which is often done with BPMN notation, but it also allows you to model the contributors or the people who are accountable or informed in your processes. When it comes to manual processes or semi automatic processes, this is really useful because this is where you can improve a lot.

The Risk and Compliance Management tool is rather complex. So, we customized it. Customization was done by SAG and was done fast.

The facility for sharing content should be enhanced. For example, it would be nice if you could share content with viewers who do not explicitly have access to the model. As it is now, if you share a process with somebody that does not have access to the model, then the person receives a link that simply tells them they have no access.

Particularly, when you're in the process of modeling something and you want to share it because you want to get feedback from your colleagues, I would appreciate being able to share that content. It could be valid for a period, such as 24 hours or one week. This is something that would help.

I have been using ARIS since 2009. This has been in various positions in different companies.

Stability has increased a lot since I began working with it. I remember in one of the earlier versions, perhaps version 7 or version 9, there was a lot of trouble. We would run into unexpected errors, some of which were quite severe. Since then, however, there have been some errors, but it's pretty much stable.

There are different roles depending on the employee. We have regular employees who can read or view content. They can also comment on it. We also have employees, such as team leads, with modeling privileges. There is a big variety in terms of the different roles that people have.

We have approximately 130 modelers that use ARIS. When I run training sessions, I shift licenses from one person to another.

I don't have much experience with scaling but for our current use cases, it is sufficient.

ARIS definitely enables you to start small and increase usage over time. This is very important to us because it requires you to have a process-driven mindset in the company. This mindset becomes part of the organizational culture, and culture is something that evolves over time. Importantly, developing the proper mindset is a journey so you need to start small and then grow, otherwise, it will not really work. That's the nature of cultural development.

Generally, as process management is something that evolves over time, we expect our usage of ARIS to grow. Some people are early adopters but for others, it happens a bit later. Right now, the speed is increasing when it comes to the adoption of process management, which means that more people are using ARIS and have been requesting modeler licenses. This is something that is quite good.

I really like the support and I would rate them an A+.

Their response times are really good. Whenever I have a question, I get an answer, or at least I know that somebody is taking care of my ticket really quickly.

They do not close tickets without asking, which I appreciate a lot. So, from time to time, I've received an email notification asking, "Hey, can we close this ticket? Did we answer your question sufficiently?" This is also something that I value a lot.

Support also asks for feedback. The head of the global support team has also checked with me whether I had any ideas for improvements. The fact that they are always seeking to become better is another thing that I really like.

Neutral

I have some experience with other BPM tools but nothing as extensively as ARIS.

One of these is Signavio, and the ARIS interface is more user-friendly. Also, when I tested Signavio a few years back, they did not have as wide a range of functionality available.

From an implementation perspective, it was rather straightforward.

My colleagues at my previous company found the technical installation documentation really difficult.

As an end-user and ARIS administrator, I knew what the different steps were in order for people to start using it. From this perspective, I found it really easy.

Leaving the technical aspect aside, because it took our IT department quite a long time to deploy it, I was able to complete my part of the implementation in less than a week.

Their license model is really difficult to understand, and licenses are quite expensive. However, with the new subscription model, it's fair that you can rent licenses for a specific time and then give them back. From that perspective, it's okay.

In general, the licensing model is not clear and the complexity is growing. In the past, I was not able to get information whether new functionalities are available for us. This situation has been communicated and should improve: For me as an administrator it is annoying when people ask me about new features and functionalities, and I tell them what is coming, only to later find out that the feature is not available for us. After some discussions you find out that you need a license. This has happened to me two or three times and it is really embarrassing.

In our test environment, we use version 16 of ARIS. However, in our production environment, we use version 15.

We are currently doing a proof of concept project for the ARIS Risk and Compliance Manager. I believe the ARIS GRC has some potential, although it's a rather complex tool, which you definitely need to customize if you want to use it. It offers so many functions and functionalities that if you haven't had a real profound training of it, you will not really understand. So, at least in the beginning, you need to reduce the complexity of the tool. This is the approach that we took with the proof of concept project.

To this point, we have not used the ARIS process mining capabilities ourselves- but did a proof of concept with SAG. The support we received was really great. We haven't used the RPA functionality (yet). We are in the pre-project implementation phase of the AI-enabled translation services.

My advice for anybody who is implementing ARIS is that from a tool perspective, limit the functionality for the end-users. I strongly recommend using filters and to start small. Only allow limited functionality and a few attributes because the more complex a system you start with, the more difficult it is for a user to really understand how it is supposed to work.

That said, if anybody does have problems then I recommend contacting support. I've never experienced a situation where support was not willing or was not able to help. To assist them, it may seem like a standard practice but I suggest adding screenshots because it facilitates communication with them.

New users should also contribute to the ARIS community because the bigger the community is, the more powerful it is. When you have, for instance, new enhancement requests or feature requests, then this community can help to push these new features into a new release.

There is room for improvement but overall, I really like working with ARIS.

I would rate this solution a seven out of ten.

We use ARIS BPA for process modeling and the repository of our processes.

ARIS BPA has the kind of database structure to report from across all the models, roles, and systems. The solution provides integrations to ServiceNow and other systems, flexibility of connectivity, and reporting.

Sometimes, ARIS BPA breaks down, and its stability can be improved.

We had ARIS BPA in our organization for ten years, but it was never really leveraged. We have been using it more heavily for a year now.

Around 500 users are using ARIS BPA in our organization.

The solution’s initial setup seems to be a bit difficult.

I would recommend ARIS BPA to other users.

Overall, I rate ARIS BPA an eight out of ten.

The primary use for the solution is as an enterprise architect tool, but in the start it was about processing; modeling all kind of business processes. And that was before I even mention BPMN. Today, we have switched to using BPMN to do all the different kinds of business process modeling.

This product is supporting it very well.

I'm now working as an independent consultant, but in the past, when I was using it we could really quickly get a picture of what kind of business processes were being used across the entire organization, and which could be reused, and be sure that no one else is doing it another way. 

For example, the HR part, in that organization there were about 20,000 people working there. From an HR point of view, they had to do everything the same way, when they were hiring people, or when they were paying money, etc. There, we had a strong opportunity to define, describe, so that everybody could go in and see, "Okay, that's the way you have to do it. We have to follow these rules."

We could also create a good connection between the description of what we were doing the application. In this part, it was primarily SAP - and ARIS was coming from the SAP world in 1992, I think it was around then. They started as an independent firm, so they could do these things. That's why it's a very strong part, from when it started, but it has been developed now as an enterprise architect too.

The good thing about using this tool is the repository that gives us the opportunity: If you want to do modeling with the old notation form, ours was EPC, you can use the same object in the BPMN because the database is built in a way that you can use both things. So you only have to define it once, and if the notation form is BPMN and those kind of activities, you can use the same EPCs, so there is a connection between them. That is why it's a very flexible tool.

Furthermore, you can use this tool as an enterprise architect tool. So from an architectural point of view, when you're looking at the business area, you can find all the information you have to use as an architect.

The most important part of it, from my point of view - the way I work with it - is from an architect point of view. What I'm using it to handle, from the top-level management part, is where we talk about the strategy, then down to the business part, down to the information part, down to the application part, and to the technology part. So I use everything in the tool.

But, if you have to see it from a BPMN prospect, it will be the BPMN part of it. 

Also, the UML parts have been improved very much in the last two years. And it's very powerful now to combine the BPMN and UML parts in the product, because you can make a connection between them, so that you have the right interoperability between them. So if you're doing data modeling, you can use your class diagram and bind that to the BPMN part. That's a very strong part of it too. Had now implementet the Danish public ad on "Plusprofil" to the UML packed.

I have been talking with developers for many years, and it was before using your UML class diagram and those things for defining data. One of the issues is, when you are defining databases, the way they use entities and relationship diagrams, the way we can define data, like data models, there is still a part they could improve. By using the UML part, you would use that instead of the old fashioned way of an entity and relationships diagram. But there they have a still point where they could improve.

It is a very stable product. In all these years, I think once or twice in the beginning it gave me trouble, but never with stability. It's a very stable product. There are a very few bugs. When you find a bug, just give them a call or write to them and they will fix it. Today they are coming out with two major releases every year. They are really fast to go in and say, "Here is the update for that." So the stability is very good. 

It's also very good at scalability. If you follow what they are saying, how many users you should put on, etc., no problem.

The biggest challenge today is that people will not pay to have the right technology installation. For example, is there enough room for you at the network level to work with this product? In the new version where we can switch between the heavy one or the light one, the browser, there is no problem. It works. No problem.

The level of technical support is very high. Very good.

No, I didn't use a previous solution. If you ask me, if I have to choose between different kinds of solutions, I would prefer to use this. It is the most flexible and most user friendly product you can get. I would not switch. But, of course, when you are consulting, you also have to use other tools. Now, today, I'm also working with one of other tools, like HOPEX from MEGA. It's also one of the biggest tools that you can use. If I have to choose, I will choose ARIS instead of MEGA.

Of course, there are different things they can do, but I would still prefer to use ARIS. For the moment.

Every tool, like these - with so many different things you can do with these tools - you need, of course, education about the tools, and you have to make choices. What part of it will you use? It is always like that. When you work with it during one or two days' education, I think you will be very capable of using it in the area that you would like to work in.

For example, if you are using it in BPMN, one day of education and you will already be one of the best people to model BPMN with this tool. Still, BPMN is a big area to go into. Start small but think big.

You will never get a fixed price for this product because they will go in and ask you what kind of environment would you like to set up? How many people will you work with? How big is your organization? 

Today, they have a fixed price to say, "Okay, just to start the business area, buy two licenses for modeling and eight people that can look into the product." They have this kind of fixed price. It's 50,000 Danish Krone. If you divided that by about six, then you get the pricing in dollars.

From my point of view, no, it is not cheap, but it is not too expensive because you get this big organization behind it, technical support, and all those things. It's not so expensive to use. It's a Rolls Royce in this field, I know that. Even for small organizations, they can get so much effect from using this tool, in a very fast way, so the money will be back in the customer's pocket very fast. 

Still, when you are going out, negotiate and find the right price. You will never get a fixed price: "It costs this and, if you take ten of these, seven of these and eight of these, and then it costs this." No, you negotiate every time.

At that time, in 2002, it had to be connected to the SAP environment. The ARIS tool set at that time was one of the biggest in this area, and that's why we were choosing it. There was something else, but it was not as good. Not stable for the SAP environment. I think it was because of the SAP environment that we choose this product, not others.

Today, I would say, from an architectural point of view, it was a good choice. You will see that in the EU, they also use it in the customer area for defining BPMN processes and data. So, they are using this in the EU now as the main product for these areas.

It is not a challenge to implement the product, not even from a technical point of view, because if you have rights to do things, it takes less than two hours to implement the whole package. Download the product and then just run it.

You have to go to the top-level people and talk to them and say, "Okay, what is your strategy to get a good view of your business?" If they say, "We would like to have something help us to manage, what kind of strategy that we have, what kind of rules, principles that we have to follow, that can give us a picture from the top-level and then traceability down to business areas." 

For example, here in Europe, we have a new law called GDPR, data protection. That's coming in here in May, in the EU. This product can help you to be sure that you will not get in trouble when they come and ask you, "Have you completely made all these different kinds of process descriptions that show us where you are using, how you are using the data, etc?" Here you have a product that can support that.

If you want to have the full picture, also from an architectural point of view, then you should buy a product like this or something similar to this. You have to go up and find the best. ARIS is among the top in industry reviews, and I would recommend it. But I am also using one of the others up there as well.

Again: Where do you need it? That's a very important question to ask. Where do you want to put in? If it's in the BPMN area, use ARIS. It's a very easy way to use it.

We are modeling different processes and documenting all of them using the solution.

It's a really nice and user-friendly tool, and we can extract different reports from it. We have had different processes modeling and everything done with the solution. With the solution, we were using it for documenting, and then now we are updating all of these. So it's been great software for everyone.

We would have appreciated it if the company who has sold the software could show us how we can create our own reports, apart from showing us how to extract different SOPs and run our own scripts. So that would have been helpful for us.

An area where it lacks and can be considered for improvement in the future is if we can somehow automate or learn how we can automate different processes. So, it's like The processes in which we initiate a request, and we can follow where the request is and how the workflow management is being done in different software. So if you can somehow learn how we can do it, it will be great.

I have been using ARIS BPA for two years. I am a user of the solution. I don't remember the version.

It is a scalable solution. Scalability-wise, I rate the solution a ten out of ten.

It is a scalable solution. Scalability-wise, I rate the solution a nine to ten out of ten.

My designers are very few in number, but there are a lot of users. Also, we have a lot of viewers. We have around 10 designers and more than 2,000 viewers. We frequently use the solution in our company.

The support for the solution is good. I rate the support a ten out of ten.

Positive

Previously, I used Microsoft Visio for process mapping.

The solution is easy to install. It wasn't hours but maybe days to do the deployment, but it was done swiftly. It wasn't an issue.

I don't remember how many days it took to deploy. But currently, we have multiple designer licenses. So now the deployment doesn't take long. We can use it. Also, I wasn't involved in the installation process.

If we get stuck with the installation part, we request the provider company to let us know how to proceed.

I can't speak about pricing because I was not involved during the installation days.

It's a great system for viewing, modeling, and everything, extracting different kinds of reports. So the only thing is that the users must understand how different reports can be extracted. What are the different attributes or the fields, what is their purpose, and learn how analysis can be done. So we need to do the aforementioned things, and overall it is great software.

On a scale from one to ten, one is worse, and ten is the best, I rate the overall solution a ten.

We use it for creating a structured record of our processes and for updating them. We also use it to analyze how strategic changes in our company may impact these processes. 

We work with the cloud solution. We don't have to have anything installed on our computers locally. We designed the processes and the framework ourselves.

With ARIS: 

• We now have a better view of how everybody works in our organization and it helps us to see that everybody is doing the work they should be doing.
• We have more standardization, compared to when we first started, when it comes to describing processes. When we started, we saw that different people in the same unit, who should be doing the same work, performed their work in different ways. ARIS enabled us to achieve more alignment there.
• The solution also makes it easier to solve problems, and similarly helps when there is a strategy change or a new product. It's easier for us to pinpoint where the differences will be, compared to the current way things are done. It helps us respond more quickly to things we change in the organization.

The last point helps us to identify where we have to focus when things change. There are no surprises. We know what our processes are now and, if we know where we are heading with the changes, we can use ARIS to see where the changes need to be made. It helps us to speed up the rollout of transformation processes.

It has also definitely helped us to save time on business process analysis. It's now easier to find processes. We have them clearly described and we don't have to work through a pile of Word or PowerPoint documents. We just go to ARIS and we can search and navigate in the system. It's easier to access things. We are now doing more work with the same number of people, without these people having too much on their plates. We're more efficient and we all benefit from each others' best ways of working.

A basic feature that most other tools like ARIS BPA have as well, is a database with all of the relationships in the system. It makes it easier to have more standardized processes across the organization. The database also makes it possible to run reports and do analysis, which is kind of cool.

What also makes it good is the way we have set it up so that we not only have the processes in place, but we also have relationships specified with our IT systems and our organizational chart. That makes it possible to analyze things from the systems point of view and regarding the organizational part of the company. It all comes together in one tool and that is what gives us the most value at the moment.

We use the modeling technique called BPMN, which is a standard way of describing processes. It's independent of ARIS, but ARIS facilitates working with it. All the objects are available in ARIS, which makes it quite intuitive. For me, ARIS BPM is easy to use because I have known it for quite a long time. Others need some training before they can use it properly. They need a basic understanding of how the tool works. But overall, the intuitiveness of the solution is quite good.

Also, access to the solution is good because it's a cloud solution, and the performance is quite good. It's well-organized.

There are reports available in ARIS and you can modify them a bit if you want something more specific, but it's not that easy to adjust them and make modifications. It would be nice to have some kind of tool to do that, something that is more user-friendly for people who are not too technical, so that they could create reports the way they want them. That would be a good feature. That would also help in the adoption of ARIS.

At this company, I have been using ARIS BPA for a year and a half, but I'm quite experienced in using the tool, having used it for about 10 years.

The stability of the solution is quite good. I haven't had any issues with it. Maybe years ago it was less stable, but it's quite stable now.

We don't have that many users, so it perfectly suits our company. ARIS enables you to start small and grow the use of the solution over time, although it's quite expensive. So if you want to start small, it's quite an investment for a small company. But it's perfectly suitable for growing.

I am the administrator of the solution and we only have a subscription for 10 other users and two other designers.

We have used it very extensively over the last 18 months, but due to our strategy for growth, which is a little bit different, and because of what the pandemic has caused, we are not really growing the process area. We may have even turned it down a bit. That's a shame, but we have to focus on other parts of the organization at the moment.

The technical support is quite good. I have had a few interactions with them by email. There are formalities to the process. I have to put my issues in a certain format and then they will respond. 

It might be easier if I could have direct contact, just easily pick up the phone or chat or just write a quick email, so that we could find a solution. There might be some room for improvement there.

Positive

When I started here, we didn't have anything other than descriptions of processes in Word on PCs around the organization. We wanted to have that available in a more structured way.

I have a good deal of experience in setting up an ARIS environment, so I knew quite well what I needed to do. For me, it's not really that complex. We set it up for our needs.

We had it ready within one month, approximately. It's quite important to think about what you want to have, which areas you want to touch, and what you want the results to be. 

It's important to take some time to do a good implementation of the tool. Our implementation strategy involved investigating, defining, and describing what we wanted to have; what we wanted to describe with the tool, and what benefit we wanted from the tool. In that way, we could set it up, from the start, in a way that we wouldn't have to rework it in a few months or a few years. It's better to take some more time to set it up well than to start in with it directly and then see, in a few months, that you're missing some parts.

I created a framework in which we could capture all of the processes across the organization, from IT to delivery to logistics to HR and finance. Gradually, we have been filling it. We have defined five layers of detail. I interview people who are working with the various processes in the field, and I try to describe them as they are right now. When there are changes within our organization, when we have a new product or we have a new strategy, we also look at the processes and see where these changes will impact them. Based on where the impact might be, we can more easily pinpoint what we need to do when adopting a new strategy or a new product.

There is not that much work involved in maintenance of the solution. The maintenance of the content, on the other hand, depends on the business you're in. For us, it's our day-to-day work, making sure that all the processes are in place and correct. But the maintenance of the tool itself, the more technical part, does not require that much work, about half a day per week.

I did it myself. Because of my experience, I didn't need other people to help me with it.

The ROI depends, for our company, on how big we grow. The intention is to grow and we need a tool in place, like ARIS, to make our growth happen. We have to be in control and we need an overview and insights. If we can achieve the growth we're thinking about, the return on investment should take a few years.

In the future, ARIS might help us save on development costs associated with business process transformation. At the moment, we just describe the business processes without going too much into detail regarding the technical IT solutions. That connection is there, but not too extensive at the moment. But if we improve that part, we will definitely see some cost savings there.

If you want customized reports in place and you cannot create them yourself, you have to get them done externally, so that would be an extra cost.

We briefly looked around at what was in the market, but with my past experience with ARIS, the choice was quickly made to use this tool. It might be a bit more expensive, but it has a lot of possibilities, so we didn't spend very long searching for other tools.

If you start working with ARIS, first investigate very well what you want to achieve. You can use it for different kinds of goals. You need to know what you have and what you want to achieve. Then you have to create a setup. So the requirements are quite important to the design, before you start working with the tool. That's the most important thing you need to do.

The tool functions quite well and you can put every process in it, but it's also important to look at your organization and make sure that people are willing to work with processes. That means you have to do some educating, in addition to the technical solution ARIS provides. Be sure that all the management positions participate in describing their processes and that managers encourage their teams to work in and use ARIS, and to do their work in the way things are described. There are these kinds of change-management issues to be aware of.

The fact that ARIS has the largest BPM community worldwide is not that important to me, because I don't use it very much. I only use it to pose some technical questions. I have used some other frameworks, such as the eTOM APQC Frameworks. So I generally get my knowledge from other sources, rather than from the ARIS community.

When I came into the company, I immediately started to implement ARIS, so I don't have a clear view of how things were done before. But everybody in our organization is more and more aware that we should use ARIS and that we are benefiting from it, although I can't clearly define the benefit compared to how things used to be.

I'm very happy with the ARIS solution. The ARIS Advanced product we have would work quite well for most of the companies. A very big company, like a multinational, might want to have something that is on-premises, and to customize it a little bit, but for most companies, what we have is good enough.