We performed a comparison between ARIS BPA and OpenText ProVision 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."Objects can be reused across different BPMNs and processes, so we can design new processes quicker and easier."
"Visualizes processes which helps the business see pain points."
"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."
"ARIS has a good collaboration function. You create a portal where any authorized users can work on the models. There are simple flows for making and approving changes."
"There is a module designer, that one is very powerful and it creates very good reports."
"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."
"ARIS provides the basic foundation for any digital transformation an organization decides to take."
"One of the many advantages of ARIS is that it is supported by a very strong BPM community, which is critical for us. Although it has been in business for many years, it is still at an early stage of evolution. There are so many instances where your specific use case or requirement for using ARIS hasn't necessarily been matured across the sector. So, you need access to a very active community to help you explore possible solutions and ways in which ARIS can be used to achieve those use cases."
"All the features come as part of a standard license."
"OpenText ProVision's best feature is the capability to attach a variety of attributes and extract and analyze that information."
"The stability of the product is very good."
"ARIS BPA is not really a platform that offers you the opportunity to execute processes that you model."
"I would like to see the reporting aspects improved."
"With ARIS BPM, the script creation is quite cumbersome. With version ten, we needed our developers to do scripting."
"Since ARIS 9.X was released, the product has not been as robust and responsive as the previous versions."
"The interface is a little archaic."
"The product is difficult to use for someone without prior knowledge of working with it. It requires a certain level of administration training."
"I believe the solutions BPM tools are not very good and need improvements."
"Displaying role allocation matrix models in ARIS Connect needs improvement."
"Lacks the ability to have your own in-house developments."
"OpenText ProVision's collaboration management is quite complicated and difficult to use."
"Integrating with or interfacing with other tools like data management tools would be very helpful."
ARIS BPA is ranked 6th in Business Process Management (BPM) with 64 reviews while OpenText ProVision is ranked 35th in Business Process Management (BPM) with 3 reviews. ARIS BPA is rated 8.4, while OpenText ProVision is rated 6.4. The top reviewer of ARIS BPA writes "I can usually find an answer to my issue on ARIS Community". On the other hand, the top reviewer of OpenText ProVision writes "Good attribute attachment but problems with collaboration". ARIS BPA is most compared with SAP Signavio Process Manager, ADONIS, Sparx Systems Enterprise Architect, Camunda and Bizagi, whereas OpenText ProVision is most compared with Visio, SAP Signavio Process Manager and Sparx Systems Enterprise Architect. See our ARIS BPA vs. OpenText ProVision 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.
