We performed a comparison between Appian and ARIS BPA 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."The agile manner that we require to create our workflows. This is probably the most critical part of our solution and the time it takes to start processing the solution."
"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."
"Call Web Service Smart Service - Web service integrations with other systems are super simple and fast to create, supported by low code menus."
"Appian also has very flexible local integration."
"The product has a very good mobile app."
"It reduces development time in half making us more efficient."
"The tool is very flexible."
"It is really simple to create a new app, and I like the data-centric aspect of the BPM tool."
"You can relate different aspects of an organization to each other, and you can clearly define the rates seen in the application."
"The tool has good navigation."
"I am an advanced user. ARIS BPM is intuitive for me because I know the UML, BPMN, and EPC methodologies implemented in this tool. It is very easy to create processes for restructuring a company with some descriptions."
"I like everything about ARIS BPA. I've used it for a long time and it's a fantastic tool. There is a list of things ARIS has that other solutions do not have."
"It is a well-featured, functional product."
"The most valuable features of ARIS BPA are its flexibility and reporting."
"The ease of use is the most valuable. I have tried a number of BPMN packages, and I find the user interface of ARIS BPM easier and more intuitive than others. If your team is knowledgeable on BPMN, it is really pretty easy to figure out on your own because it adheres to the standards extremely well. I have tried Bizagi, BizFlow, and a variety of such solutions, and I just liked ARIS BPM better."
"Collaboration and governance over enterprise artifacts."
"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."
"There are some restrictions with respect to using external components within Appian. So, for example, if we do not have a particular feature available, there's a long cycle of getting approvals and all of that. That does not offer flexibility, which definitely can be improved on."
"It is also not easy to learn. Training tutorials could be improved."
"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."
"There could be a scope of enhancement for capturing the variety of use cases."
"The graphical user interface could be easier to use. It should be simplified."
"We would like to see more reduced latency. We would like to make sure that the scale-out factor will be much more as workloads come in."
"It needs better integration with our existing application ecosystem."
"I had this decentralization mission where I had some friendly fights with the consultants of Software AG. My opinion was the business department should be able to publish their processes and do all their evaluation stuff in ARCM themselves. It has to be a one stop shop. I want a one stop shop to go from ARIS BPM to ARIS ARCM, because having everything go through that would be an improvement due to the inputs that we made with Software AG. They will make it possible that the trigger sent from BPM to ARCM will start their object generation."
"They should make improvements as per customer requirements."
"The interface is a little archaic."
"User interface (UI)."
"In terms of improvement, the app could use some small details and functionalities."
"Making it more customizable and easy to learn would be a benefit."
"I would like the possibility to use real data. In other words, it can use this system to integrate with others that are operating directing with users like clients, employs, and others."
"Regarding stability, when there are any customized settings being done at customer end - post upgrade to newer versions - it makes the customer environment unstable for a short duration."
Appian is ranked 4th in Business Process Management (BPM) with 57 reviews while ARIS BPA is ranked 6th in Business Process Management (BPM) with 64 reviews. Appian is rated 8.4, while ARIS BPA is rated 8.4. The top reviewer of Appian writes "Low resource consumption, easy setup, and stable". On the other hand, the top reviewer of ARIS BPA writes "I can usually find an answer to my issue on ARIS Community". Appian is most compared with Microsoft Power Apps, OutSystems, Camunda, ServiceNow and SAP Signavio Process Manager, whereas ARIS BPA is most compared with SAP Signavio Process Manager, ADONIS, Sparx Systems Enterprise Architect, Camunda and iServer. See our ARIS BPA vs. Appian 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.