IBM Blueworks is BPMN 2.0 compliant, but it does not adapt to the overarching BPMN 2.0 concepts. There is only one kind of BPMN 2.0 diagram. It is a process diagram. It doesn't have the concept of separate tools, which other products offer. If I had to do a hardcore BPMN 2.0 modeling, the product would have its own reservations. There were features we could not explore from a BPMN 2.0 perspective.

Most of the time, people who are shifting from Microsoft Office tools to a digitized way of working still want the reporting capabilities to be strong. Some tools, like ARIS or Signavio, offer customized solutions from the reporting perspective. If I have documented my whole finance process and want to fetch out a complete SOP report in a very customized manner, IBM Blueworks cannot provide it. We have to rely on some other services. So that's one area in which we always struggled, how to really customize the reporting aspects.

I understand that we need to keep the tool a little more asset-light. It's very difficult to keep adding many options, but at least a few BPMN 2.0 options were needed. We have been suggesting to IBM that we should have some way of customizing the reporting.

At least we should get a custom way of reporting it into different formats like Excel or putting up a logo for one of the clients so that their SAP can be printed that way.

There is an area of improvement. For example, if I have to put some comments or if I have to, in between, if I have to create some comments in the process map, it is not possible. We have to go by adding annotations or our text messages somewhere, so it doesn't really fit it. So it's, like, if you print a paper and you wanna write something on top of the process map, that's how it should be. So now it is not possible. 

Moreover, I can't insert any images. For example, within the process map, if I want to put it in the box or rectangle, or circle. If I have to use one image or icon, that's not possible. So these kinds of things which I thought would be very useful.

I would love to see these functionalities in future releases. So , for now, it's just an impossibility to write a command on top of a given code.

Since you require a license per user to access the information it would be nice to have the ability to print the information out in large font for review. Currently, you can PDF but the text size is so small it can't be read properly.

In the solution Signavio, they have a customer journey mapping feature that should be added to IBM Blueworks Live. It's valuable to map or document the customer journey to identify the pains and opportunities in this process.

Indeed, the Signavio solution allows us to design the customer journey (actions made by the customer in the process) using pictograms and icons. So, we can indicate tasks, tools, goals, and frustrating points.

Sometimes, the tool is automatic, which can complicate it, but once you're accustomed to manipulating it, you can use it very effectively.

Anything to support printing out a big diagram would be good. Most often, we like to print the models out on a large piece of paper. It might already be able to do that, and there is probably a button to make a PDF version for an A0 paper size.

There should be an option to import from and export to Microsoft Visio. Being able to move files back and forth between Blueworks Live and Visio would be good.

They can make it less expensive.

I would like to see integration with ERP systems. This would help us to simulate the process and see where the problems are. Though IBM Blueworks Live is a good tool for documenting, it can improve the simulation. It also must grow to automatic process intelligence and discovery (example: Sigovia).

The objects that the solution creates are not unique. 

There are challenges in ensuring that when a detailed process flow is designed using the IBM Blueworks Live software, the steps are easy to follow.  At times the system places boxes and lines in a manner that is very complicated and convoluted as the lines begin to crisscross. Sometimes you can't follow the steps in the map and it is difficult to structure them in a way that is not cluttered. 

In the Visio software, you can move boxes and lines to any area within the chart easily. In the Blueworks Live software boxes and lines are automatically placed by the programme and can't be easily manipulated.

The movement is similar to Aris, and Praga, it's very difficult for the users. 

Because it is cloud there has to be a satellite, but when it comes to the process of implementing the world is leaning towards more complex documentation. With the building model, they want to see with the integrated workflow, and automation systems that can be managed and controlled. They have the automation machines but they need more attributes, controls, encryption, and more information because right now it's limited and needs to be improved.

Better integration with specific systems.

There is no BPMN documentation. Currently, they only have a tool offering of processing the BPMN Model. There are no choreographic models or they don't have models where multiple lanes or tools can be created.

You can't specify a notation that is not BPMN and I would like to be able to use multiple lanes.

It is BPMN-compliant but the tool needs to be more involved to get into a completely 2.0 oriented tool. It has a few things but it's not the complete BPMN model. Adding more BPMN modules to it is an important next step.

While it is scalable, I don't see it being equal with other enterprise solutions.

In the next release, what I would like to see added is more speed from an architecture perspective, adding more press information, such as controls, and adding KPIs for performance indicators. I would also like the ability to set that because the functionality is more important. A process is not seen in just the transformation of input, output, and scalability.

There is a model that changes the way the client use processes.

I think the spaces could be improved, it's not well organized so it's really convoluted. Instead of having spaces represented by any sub-sections of a process, the space controls are lacking. If there were better user controls for user grouping, it would be simpler to develop groups and reduce visibility across the entire organization. Currently, people have access to processes they may not need for editing, but they'd like to view them, and those controls could be expanded. It's really about improving user management and space controls. It's really hard to litigate and control who has access to what.

For additional features, I'd like to see better tools for creating documentation associated with the processes, so that if you're looking for specific information regarding a process of the space, you could do a search and find it without having to go through a process. 

In relation to sub-process links, the design is poor. On one process you can link back, but the system doesn't link it to the activity directly. It's not that obvious to people, and because of this, they have to read the different notes to find out more. 

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.

Process diagrams can sometimes be confusing. The starting point is at the bottom of the page and not on the top of the page where it actually should be.

It would be good if the control points were visible right away on your progress map.

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 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.

We'd like to be able to bring it on to our server. Because it's in the cloud I don't think that's going to happen.

We'd also like to see it be Six Sigma or Lean compatible, a lot of people have asked about that.

We haven't yet been able to dabble in case management with Blueworks Live, as it is not yet offered with the product.

There are a couple of things which are not there right now:

1. The ability to create a very structured rule. With the capability that we have right now, Blueworks Live is more process focused. We should be able to enhance it to include a lot more of decisions as well. Right now, we can create a simple decision, not a complex decision, in tools like the business console, modeler, etc. 
2. In the file management feature, we get 50MB of space. Maybe that needs to be given out as an option to customers who want to purchase the extra space.
3. While using the tool, it is a lot like creating a structure in BPM and Compliant, though not like 100 percent the same. The rule part as well becomes much easier when you are not using IBM BPM as a run-time engine, but Blueworks Live only for process discovery. If you want JBoss as a run time engine, it becomes a more compliant tool set and will help to increase your footprint.

In the past, we have seen some projects not start on time. This is because we had some process gaps in our automation. By removing those and getting the right people involved at the right time, we were able to send notifications and make sure the information was in the right place. This has really helped to eliminate that risk.

We would like the ability to add additional custom colors. We would like to color additional items to add notes to the blueprint.

We would like to see more robust API access. We want it to be able to interact not just through the front-end, and have the ability to integrate with other systems more easily.

The reporting and analytics features have room for improvement, as well as some of the management and governance. These should be done out-of-the-box, as opposed to being built manually.

The models produced are not sufficient to be imported and used by IBM Business Process Manager - the developers will need to use the IBM BPM modelling functionality to design processes.

The user interface is quite easy at first but process analysts soon run into roadblocks of limited functionality, which is disappointing.  For example, anything but a fairly simple 'happy path' workflow soon becomes tangled with the process flow lines being routed automatically and looking messy and off-putting for stakeholders.  In the version I used (I'm not sure if this is different now), a modeller cannot move any of the model components and re-route the flows; this can be mitigate by using the 'milestone' functionality which enables you to 'stage' a workflow - but this has limited effectiveness and also has the side effect of introducing artificial stages into the 'milestone' view of the model.

The workflow management functionality is so basic it was almost pointless. I was looking for some functionality and realised there isn't any - it is just a list of tasks which get sent as emails to users.  Again, very simple 'happy path' workflow.  If that is all you need, then this produce is fine but there are other similarly-priced solutions that have more extensive user forms, document and email generation etc. that can be configured closer to a full SaaS application.

IBM had an alternative product that was more comprehensive in its functionality but this was discontinued.

The solution is a very basic discovery product so it doesn't have that much modeling capability. This can be improved.  

The solution needs to be seamlessly integrated with downstream automation.

I think it's pretty good. I can't think of any additional features it needs.

We didn't really explore the opportunities for process execution. So moving from the modeling to the process orchestration, it wasn't very clear how we would do that from a BPM perspective, and then into the larger tool set perspective. But I can't talk with authority on it. We just never actually got there.

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.