We performed a comparison between OpenText Operations Orchestration and Pega BPM based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out what your peers are saying about Camunda, Pega, Appian and others in Process Automation."The product is good functionality-wise. I am impressed with the tool's flexibility in customization."
"It's very stable. If you ask me for the success rate metrics, it's more than 90% for both."
"It has reduced the time taken to go to market. In the past, we were struggling with building these integrations, but now the process has sped up and there is an added advantage of quick delivery. In addition, it is an agent-less solution, which provides more flexibility in terms of multiple options."
"The most valuable feature is flexibility, as we can configure it to best suit our requirements."
"The best part of Pega, for me, is that they let you reuse a lot of the aspects in the product."
"The interface is quite simple and easy to use, even for beginners."
"The case management functionality of this solution has been most valuable."
"Pega BPM's most valuable features are case management, integration, the convenience of using REST APIs, and the ease of changing things at the UI level."
"In general, we use web services to integrate this solution with our other tools. It is the main approach we use with this solution and it integrates with all tools that we need. If you want to integrate with other solutions such ThreatFire or similar, it is possible as well."
"The solution is operating well overall."
"The most valuable aspect of the solution is the various workflows."
"The tool's UI needs to be improved. It needs to have better administration features in future releases."
"There were a lot of scalability issues that we initially faced. Whenever I tried to deploy 100-200 endpoints, it became a huge challenge. We had to actually start using other tools like Tivoli Endpoint Management in order to patch the issues."
"The price is an area that should be addressed because the price is high."
"I would like to see Pega BPM improve the user experience."
"Compared to other BPM products, the interface is somewhat complex, so the usability could be improved."
"I believe they simplify the application development. It is still complex. The learning is not easy, it takes time compared to other products on the market."
"They are currently spending some time on improving the product with respect to machine learning, especially related to robotic automation. They probably could be a little more adept on that area would help."
"This is a quite expensive product."
"What should be included is some UI features and maybe some integrations. This includes documentation on how the UI works."
"The way the IDE works with the chatbox and the taxonomy imports could be a little smoother."
"We need more light retail BPM tools within the Pega system. However, Pega is mostly for big companies."
More OpenText Operations Orchestration Pricing and Cost Advice →
OpenText Operations Orchestration is ranked 17th in Process Automation with 24 reviews while Pega BPM is ranked 2nd in Process Automation with 55 reviews. OpenText Operations Orchestration is rated 7.8, while Pega BPM is rated 8.2. The top reviewer of OpenText Operations Orchestration writes "HP OO blows away the competition, but has its fair share of flaws". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Pega BPM writes "Low code with great APIs and good flexibility". OpenText Operations Orchestration is most compared with Red Hat Ansible Automation Platform, Control-M, Camunda, BigFix and Microsoft System Center Orchestrator, whereas Pega BPM is most compared with ServiceNow, Camunda, Appian, Microsoft Power Apps and IBM BPM.
See our list of best Process Automation vendors.
We monitor all Process Automation 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.