We performed a comparison between IBM Blueworks Live and QPR ProcessDesigner based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out what your peers are saying about Microsoft, Camunda, Software AG and others in Business Process Design."This solution is good at utilizing standards rules for connectivity."
"Valuable features include real-time modeling and design work, the ability to perform workshops with clients in real-time with the tool, and getting instant output."
"The ease of documenting and digitizing the processes was valuable to us."
"It is a stable solution since there has not been any downtime. Everything loads fast."
"The stability is pretty good. It is highly available, which is key. You don't lose your work and can autosave."
"We are you using the product as a process mapping tool and as part of a larger process improvement project. We use it with IBM BPM and IBM ODM. We get an automated workflow solution for our customers, an improved workflow automation."
"It enables decisions based upon processes that we do model, and ultimately move forward with."
"You can use if from your mobile device or you can be on the desktop. It doesn't matter. You are always connected. It is cloud-based, so you don't have to install anything."
"It makes communication easier due to transparency on processes."
"Processes become clearer, easier to understand, and easier to spot in development areas."
"In the Blue Works Live software boxes and lines are automatically placed by the programme and can't be easily manipulated."
"I wish Blueworks Live had simulations built in, but it doesn't. It also lacks a feature of reporting; ad hoc, drag and drop reporting. A lot of senior people are always asking for reports, and there's no reporting feature within IBM Blueworks."
"The solution is a very basic discovery product so it doesn't have that much modeling capability. This can be improved."
"Some of the import functionality was a bit restrictive, in terms of loading data in from other data sources. Something as simple as Excel, loading data tables from Excel, wasn't great. And vice-versa. Some of the export and import functionality with something like Visio - which, I know it's a slightly different tool - but being able to work seamlessly with those other tool sets would've been quite useful. I know it was something that was in the pipeline to be looked at. So that would be useful."
"The font size is really, really small and it's really not useful to print out process models because you cannot read what's written in different boxes. This makes it necessary for people to have access to the tool. We view licenses to see how the printing or output is. It's not very good."
"The initial setup is neither straightforward nor complex however you do need to know what you are doing."
"The objects that the solution creates are not unique."
"IBM Blueworks is BPMN 2.0 compliant, but it does not adapt to the overarching BPMN 2.0 concepts."
"There is definitely a need to produce models in XML. There is already something available, but it seems that transferring between the different modelling tools is difficult."
Earn 20 points
IBM Blueworks Live is ranked 12th in Business Process Design with 20 reviews while QPR ProcessDesigner is ranked 25th in Business Process Design. IBM Blueworks Live is rated 8.2, while QPR ProcessDesigner is rated 8.0. The top reviewer of IBM Blueworks Live writes "An easily scalable and affordable solution that enables users to document and digitize processes with ease". On the other hand, the top reviewer of QPR ProcessDesigner writes "FactView was easy to use and integrate". IBM Blueworks Live is most compared with Visio, SAP Signavio Process Manager, Lucidchart, ARIS Cloud and Camunda, whereas QPR ProcessDesigner is most compared with SAP Signavio Process Manager and Sparx Systems Enterprise Architect.
See our list of best Business Process Design vendors.
We monitor all Business Process Design 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.