We performed a comparison between ARIS Process Governance and Hyland OnBase 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."Using this solution we can design our own processor governance, assign some specific technical services, and also run tests of the process to make sure it operates as we need it to."
"Ability to use all the features that your catalog has inside the modeling and export it to a BPM augmentation engine."
"It's a very easy-to-use product."
"The solution is very developed and we are not taking full advantage of its functionalities."
"The most valuable features are that it's very secure and provides audit trails for our documents."
"OnBase is a remarkable tool. It is a well-done product. Hyland has a lot of experience in building it and looking for new things for clients in terms of functionalities. It has amazing stability, and it can grow horizontally and vertically. It is built for growth. Their technical support is also quite good and available throughout the year."
"The retention module is one of the most valuable features. Whatever we scan onto the system can be identified and we are notified when the records are due to be disposed."
"I like the cloud and its integrability."
"We found the setup process to be okay since they do offer a troubleshooting guide."
"It's a bit annoying that you have to use two environments in the older version."
"There is a lot of complexity around licensing."
"The solution uses a coding language for process design that is specific only to this product. We would like to see this changed to something more universal."
"For user experience, they would have to do more with the interface. It is not easy to work with and is a little messy. It is getting better, but it is not yet good enough. Other products are comparatively doing better in terms of the user interface. I have been hearing about Box, which is very easy to use and learn for the users. OnBase has to work on this aspect. It should have BPM capabilities. We compete with tools that provide the BPM feature and support those standards. They can do better in terms of the pricing model. It is a really expensive tool in Latin America. They should have different prices for different regions."
"We need to troubleshoot why our reports didn't get downloaded in a day. There is a workflow feature which powerful but also complicated."
"An area for improvement would be the training - getting our people up to speed on how to use it required more training than we expected due to the complexity of the solution."
"The dashboards do have some room for improvement as compared to the other vendors which are there in the market."
"The look and feel could be better. The integration with the user could be better. It could also be more user-friendly."
"We are struggling with duplicates and would like to have OCR functionality when using this solution."
ARIS Process Governance is ranked 34th in Business Process Management (BPM) with 3 reviews while Hyland OnBase is ranked 25th in Business Process Management (BPM) with 8 reviews. ARIS Process Governance is rated 8.0, while Hyland OnBase is rated 8.0. The top reviewer of ARIS Process Governance writes "Easy to use, reliable, and simple to expand". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Hyland OnBase writes "Stable content and workflow management solution with a valuable retention module". ARIS Process Governance is most compared with , whereas Hyland OnBase is most compared with Alfresco, SharePoint, OpenText Documentum, OpenText Extended ECM and IBM FileNet. See our ARIS Process Governance vs. Hyland OnBase 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.
