We performed a comparison between IBM Blueworks Live and Sparx Systems Enterprise Architect based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Business Process Design solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."The stability is pretty good. It is highly available, which is key. You don't lose your work and can autosave."
"Business users understand it really well, which means we can then help them automate their business processes."
"The ease of documenting and digitizing the processes was valuable to us."
"The licenses are transferrable between different users."
"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."
"I like the two-tiered approach, that is, discover and then drill down to the main steps. You can right click and attach risk, policies, and much more. It is a user-friendly solution."
"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."
"For me the most valuable feature is that it's one depository for our bank. So it's not like everybody has their critical processes on SharePoint or on their desktops. Everything is centrally located. It's very intuitive, easy to use. The support that I get from IBM is always great."
"The Business Process Modeling or BPM part is the most valuable. Its ability to simulate scenarios is also very useful. It can also create descriptions of the workflows. It has a feature in which if you create some BPMN process, a workflow diagram, and the description inside, you can actually simulate the whole scenario, and you get the description. That's very handy."
"Sparx Systems Enterprise Architect supports multiple modeling languages like ArchiMate for database design, software lifecycle visualization, and team management."
"It has led some teams to do better code reviews - to be less focussed on coding conventions (syntax) and more focussed on the semantics because of the abstraction level clear design affords."
"The system provides powerful tools for obtaining reports and documentation."
"Ability to maintain cross-references for all models in all levels - great tractability."
"The initial setup is easy."
"Artifact templates are most valuable."
"The most valuable feature is the integrated data model, so if I change the name of an item, all models using that object are automatically updated."
"IBM Blueworks is BPMN 2.0 compliant, but it does not adapt to the overarching BPMN 2.0 concepts."
"The solution is a very basic discovery product so it doesn't have that much modeling capability. This can be improved."
"Sometimes, the tool is automatic, which can complicate it, but once you're accustomed to manipulating it, you can use it very effectively."
"The APIs are great, except the normal business user doesn't know how to create APIs. So it's hard because IBM comes to us as the business users and tell us to create reporting with APIs, except we don't know that, so we have to turn around and flip it to our IT people."
"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 objects that the solution creates are not unique."
"The user interface is quite easy at first but process analysts soon run into roadblocks of limited functionality, which is disappointing."
"We'd also like to see it be Six Sigma or Lean compatible, a lot of people have asked about that."
"Inconsistent UI elements must be tidied up with the toolbox gaps removed."
"I would like to see integration with Confluence or any other TRM, and the capability to integrate with the data storage, such as a repository similar to GitHub."
"The templates for documentation should be enhanced to include complex documents such as template RFP, or Non functional requirements template."
"Sparx can be a bit slow. If you are trying to design software architecture, sometimes we run into issues and need to refresh."
"Because its easy to create diagrams one needs to be vigilant on the housekeeping of orphaned fragments - I have written my own scripts to do this, maybe they are available now."
"This solution has some limitations from a business perspective."
"They should make the Save button easier to find. A simplified user interface for a lighter user would probably be useful. I am not sure if such an interface is already there."
"The presentation graphics need to be improved in future builds."
More Sparx Systems Enterprise Architect Pricing and Cost Advice →
IBM Blueworks Live is ranked 12th in Business Process Design with 20 reviews while Sparx Systems Enterprise Architect is ranked 4th in Business Process Design with 97 reviews. IBM Blueworks Live is rated 8.2, while Sparx Systems Enterprise Architect 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 Sparx Systems Enterprise Architect writes "Easy to set up and had no issues with stability, but it's not a very friendly tool, and its database modeling and entity-relationship modeling functions need improvement". IBM Blueworks Live is most compared with Visio, SAP Signavio Process Manager, Lucidchart, ARIS Cloud and ARIS BPA, whereas Sparx Systems Enterprise Architect is most compared with Visual Paradigm, Visio, No Magic MagicDraw, Lucidchart and LeanIX. See our IBM Blueworks Live vs. Sparx Systems Enterprise Architect report.
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.