We asked business professionals to review the solutions they use. Here are some excerpts of what they said:
"The integration and design are valuable features."
"This solution has always been lacking in the user interface (UI), it needed to be improved a lot. However, from the acquisition of Spark UI, the UI is much better. Overall the solution is robust and has the ability to integrate with any product for complex workflows."
"This is one of the best tools to support the business and the way we work, and the numerous processes we need to implement."
"IBM BPM is both scalable and stable."
"IBM BPM is equipped with all the functionalities which are needed for building BPM enterprise-level applications."
"IBM BPM is stable."
"It provides a very robust environment to build an integration framework or workflow patterns that we have. A lot of changes or modifications have been made to this solution over the past few years. The features that they have added this time have helped developers like us to work on the developmental environment and leverage all the capabilities of the tool. This is what I like about this solution."
"I liked its robustness the most. It was a very robust platform in my experience. It seemed like a very stable and powerful tool for handling lots of concurrent users and hammering at the system."
"The solution is robust. The connection management and the scalability, which IBM provides to the Stack, are also valuable."
"The scalability of the product is quite good."
"It does integrate well with the Tivoli Federated Identity Management system."
"We needed this type of integration and WebShepere is the best tool for it."
"The solution has good performance."
"This solution is easy to use with a GUI that is intuitive and very helpful."
"As compared to other applications, it has tremendous support. We have built internal capability so that we use it extensively internally. It is also easier to use with the outside data. You can write in ESQL, Java, or any other technology that you want to use for development. So, it is a lot more flexible in the language that it supports."
"It has good stability of the application server in the long term compared to other solutions."
"Importing and exporting between multiple environments is more difficult with other tools."
"The interface is limited and should improve in the future."
"If you want to use IBM BPM, you will have to invest a lot of money for licenses and you need to learn that there are limitations in developing applications. You cannot create anything you want."
"Some of the features are not enough for my business. We need to build custom user management for the many end users affected by BPM."
"Finding errors and bugs on the system is not easy. We can't seem to use the events or logs to find them, so it makes it difficult to debug the system. They really need to work on their debugging features to make is much, much easier. It would improve the solution considerably and should be something they add in a future release."
"There needs to be better documentation for IBM BPM in a central place. There is not any standard documentation for each component available and has been a barrier for developers."
"They don't have a mechanism to achieve processes, data sources, and data."
"This is technology, and there's always room for improvement. It would be better to have a single solution. Trying to have an overview in terms of this solution brings together the concepts of BPM processes, customer journeys, and an automation part for KPIs. All of this working together and coming up with a single solution with privacy is more commercial than anything else."
"I think that this is a good product but I think that the cloud environment could be improved. I think that the future is in the utilization of the product in a product as a service way which is something that is lacking at this moment."
"Based on the field and based on the build that was provided, we've noticed a lot of constraints in terms of the performance now."
"The solution could improve the integration."
"Some things are very difficult to do, so the interface and usage could be more intuitive for those."
"The business logic side of it is sort of missing in the sense that if I want to track and measure velocity, it is not really available. You have to buy another application and embark on a separate implementation. Instead of having different licensing, IBM DataPower should be integrated with WebSphere. It will allow us to build the business layer and rules a lot more efficiently, rather than developing rules within the application. It would be good if we can set up the business layer through parametrization rather than development. IBM DataPower has the business rule and the controls, and if it can be integrated, it would be fantastic. It will help the application in working better in terms of security features and business logic. If you're going to use it for open banking, you will be able to monitor velocity on the total pricing."
"They should make the solution more lightweight and not bundle everything into a single product."
"It should be able to serve more concurrent requests like Oracle. Oracle has more powerful stability, availability, and real-time serving."
"The availability of the solution needs improvement."
"I wish it was less expensive. I don't know why their pricing model is so high for a piece of software that could benefit so many. It just seems to me that they could have a lower cost, maybe with fewer features or whatever, but it should be possible to do a lower cost workflow software that uses the same interface and underlying engine but does not cost so much that you have to be a Fortune 50 company to buy it. It is annoying to me. There are a lot of solutions that IBM has that are really powerful but nobody can afford them. They know their business, but I still feel that there are a lot of customers who would benefit from this sort of thing. I don't know what this elitism is all about. I am sure they have people doing the money numbers, but it seems like you can make a lot more money by selling it to way more people for a little bit less."
"Licensing is managed by the client, but we know it is yearly. Camunda is relatively cheaper. There is not much difference in pricing of IBM and PEGA. For large licensing, there are discounts as well."
"When considering the features of the solution the price is expensive compared to competitors."
"Its price is on the higher side, and it can be improved. Its licensing is on a yearly basis. There are no additional costs."
"The price of the solution is fair for an enterprise solution that has both cloud and on-premise deployments and when comparing to competitors. Recently IBM has introduced Cloud Pak which allows for more flexible licensing options for automation and other features."
"I already compared some solutions related to business process management, and I saw that the cost of IBM BPM is more expensive compared with that of Camunda, for example."
"It's expensive. All software is always extremely high. The manufacturing cost that we have compared to the selling cost, it's not like you're building a house or building a car. But putting that aside, considering that it's expensive, it's a lot of money. If you compare it with some of the other alternatives in the market, it's a similar price. For instance, if you compare it with Pegasystems, it's a similar price."
"IBM could improve the price. It is far too expensive."
"We pay around $200,000 annually."
"The price of IBM WebSphere Application Server could be less expensive and there is an annual license required for this solution."
"The price of this product is higher than that of competitors."
"We used to pay about $100,000-$120,000 US or somewhere around there. That was a bit cost-prohibitive for us to continue."
"It is very expensive."
IBM BPM is ranked 1st in Application Infrastructure with 24 reviews while IBM WebSphere Application Server is ranked 6th in Application Infrastructure with 8 reviews. IBM BPM is rated 7.8, while IBM WebSphere Application Server is rated 7.2. The top reviewer of IBM BPM writes "A very stable and powerful tool for handling lots of concurrent users, but it is expensive, and the Eclipse-based tool has performance issues when you have a lot of developers". On the other hand, the top reviewer of IBM WebSphere Application Server writes "Bad documentation, does not scale well, and has a lot of complexities". IBM BPM is most compared with IBM Business Automation Workflow, Camunda Platform, Pega BPM, Apache Airflow and K2, whereas IBM WebSphere Application Server is most compared with Tomcat, JBoss, JBoss Enterprise Application Platform, Oracle WebLogic Server and IIS. See our IBM BPM vs. IBM WebSphere Application Server report.
See our list of best Application Infrastructure vendors.
We monitor all Application Infrastructure 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.