We performed a comparison between ARIS Process Governance and WorkflowGen 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."
"It's a very easy-to-use product."
"Ability to use all the features that your catalog has inside the modeling and export it to a BPM augmentation engine."
"We use it a lot for creating workflows to transfer materials between plants, which is a signature part of what we do."
"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."
"There is a lot of complexity around licensing."
"It's a bit annoying that you have to use two environments in the older version."
"This solution needs to be more customizable."
Earn 20 points
ARIS Process Governance is ranked 34th in Business Process Management (BPM) with 3 reviews while WorkflowGen is ranked 56th in Business Process Management (BPM). ARIS Process Governance is rated 8.0, while WorkflowGen is rated 7.6. The top reviewer of ARIS Process Governance writes "Easy to use, reliable, and simple to expand". On the other hand, the top reviewer of WorkflowGen writes "Good for automatically triggering workflows, but needs to be more customizable". ARIS Process Governance is most compared with , whereas WorkflowGen is most compared with . See our ARIS Process Governance vs. WorkflowGen 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.