IBM BPM Reviews

We are using it to automate specific processes in cooperation with robotic process automation. We have some manual tasks that we want to automate and are using this to link different tasks under one process.

IBM BPM and Automation Anywhere working together automate manual tasks with a reduction in FTEs, creating about a 30% reduction in FTEs by automating processes. Part of the benefit is due to the automated execution and the other part is due to linking tasks and their specific processes.

The integration with the robotic process automation tool that we are using. We are using Automation Anywhere tool, as it appears that the two product integrate quite well together. It was actually the reason we chose them.

I would like it more documentation during the design phase.

We would appreciate more user-friendly definitions of processes with a more user-friendly interface for documenting processes. Also, the ability to produce process documentation automatically in a readable manner.

It appears to be quite stable.

We haven't actually stressed it because we do small processes.

We did not switch solutions. We chose to purchase IBM BPM because it was bundled with the actual RPA program/solution that we decided to purchase. We decided to use Automation Anywhere tool (RPA), and it is was bundled with IBM BPM.

The initial setup was quite straightforward.

We needed about a week of assistance from the vendor.

Most important criteria when selecting a vendor:

• Price
• Sales support
• All the technical requirements or functional requirements of the product.

As a bank, any business processes which run on it:

• A treasury application
• A lost and stolen credit card application
• New accounts, etc.

There are many use cases that are now administrated through one BPM processor.

It has performed pretty well. One of the concerns, which is a question of our processes more than the product, we like to do a monthly release cycle and that is not fast enough for some people. Therefore, we have created a separate BPM that we call our DevOps box, which allows them to update it anytime they want. This is in production.

We use it as a combination of machine processes and human processes. There is a workflow, then somebody kicks it off and enters the data. Some decisions are made automatically, and other decisions are made by human beings. Just the mix of these two makes it a good combination.

We are incorporating ODM to some degree.

We are creating a new box because we have all these forms. They have to be signed, therefore we have not been able to take advantage of the ease of deployment. However, we now have separate boxes, which do not need all the same approvals in order to get something into production. You can just put it in whenever you need to.

I like the Process Center. I can go to one place and view what all the environments are doing, the ease of deployment, etc.

Stability is good. We have had a few problems, but IBM has helped us to resolve them.

We had a weird problem that whenever the database would go down, even for a few seconds, it broke the connection. It would not come back up as it was supposed to. However, working with IBM, we were able to figure out a fix, then it came back up, even after an interruption of the database.

Scalability is good. In the time that I have been there, we have added more JVMs to help with the increased workload, so it does scale.

Technical support is good. They are very responsive. It is usually me who takes more time to get back to them than they take to get back to me, which is good.

We did use Oracle for a little while, but we did not like the Oracle BPM product.

IBM BPM allow us to streamline manually processes.

I have been involved in the setup of this new box (DevOps). I installed and configured it, but I did not do the original install. I did the new install, which was complex. However, the documentation is good, and we did it pretty much without incident.

We did the implementation directly with IBM.

Try it out on a small scale. Do one project which is relatively simple, then work out the bugs this way. Do not try to put too much in it at one time.

Most important criteria when selecting a vendor: We are a bank, so security is extremely important. We are looking for someone who is going to be here a year from now, and someone who will support us. 

The number one thing is support. If we are down, we want somebody helping us now, because we can't be down.

We've been using BPM for most of the enrollment process, for banking, infrastructure, the financial side. So we've been using BPM to improve our business management process.

Performance so far has been pretty good. We've been using for almost five years now. A lot of auditing is in there, so we're pretty good with it.

We will be using the automation product, that's a new version, I think. These are new things we just learned about it. So we'll be discussing that more now.

The audit functionality.

IBM BPM has had an impact on our ability to change or update our processes in a good way. We have improved our process with it.

The business process management, where we can avoid lot of paperwork.

I'm more on the infrastructure side, not on the development side of it. So I'm not sure I can answer this. It's scalable right now from the infrastructure perspective. But I'm not sure of the development side of it. I'm not a developer.

The latest versions have been more stable. Initially, we were using older versions. With the latest version it is more stable.

It's pretty good. I would rate it eight or nine out of 10.

I'm not sure if we've seen ROI as a result of implementing BPM.

It's pretty good. We've been on calls with IBM. We have a technical account manager, so it's pretty good. I can almost rate it 10 out of 10. Good relationship.

Mainly for auditing purposes, and security concerns. That's why we started using the BPM tool.

When looking at vendors, we do a PoC with them to find out their support structure, etc.

I was not involved in the initial setup. It was done in-house.

Right now we're looking at BP3.

On the infrastructure side, I'd rate this a 10 out of 10.

I would recommend this solution, it's a pretty stable, good environment and platform for business process management. 

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.

The coaches and the user interface are the areas that can be improved a lot. It is good in terms of data processing, but the UI, scripting, and coaches are not very user-friendly and developer-friendly. Performance is always an issue. The scripting and the pattern that it uses are very tedious for new developers to understand, and it takes time to master it in depth.

When comparing IBM BPM with IBM APN, a lot of things are provided out of the box in IBM APN. We don't have to write code or a Java connector to make a functionality work. It would be very helpful and time-saving for developers if IBM BPM is improved in this area to provide many functionalities or drag-and-drop options so that the developers don't have to write the code.

I have been using this solution for eight years. I have been involved with this tool since the beginning. It was called Lombardi before it was taken over by IBM. I've seen how this solution has progressed in the last few years. 

I don't have much experience with their technical support.

It is straightforward.

I would recommend IBM BPM to others depending on the use case that they are planning to implement and the actual specification they are looking for. If they are focusing more on user interfaces, I would not recommend IBM BPM, but if they are focusing more on workflows, integration designs, and straightforward processing, IBM BPM would be a good choice.

I would rate IBM BPM a seven out of ten.

My primary use case is to take a lot of the business processes from the client portfolio and smoothly, seamlessly transfer it over into a solution for them to grow their business. The key ideas are to eliminate a lot of the proprietary footprint in development and try to seamlessly go with their business logic in a framework, which we have developed, and be able to mitigate a lot of the risk and to make the front-end interaction with the customer optimal.

We use the solution as a workflow platform to manage processes. It really gets into understanding the business logic of the clients, seeing how closely that aligns with the frameworks that we've built out in the BPM portfolio, and keeping that locked into the solution.

In some of our use cases, we have used it in conjunction with IBM Case Manager and other IBM automation products.

Having good experience with the portfolio of IBM products, we have the capability of leveraging them, and part of our practice is to take our clients through the journey, very specifically mapping out the approach for each client. We don't have a niche solution, but rather we are true partners, much like we find with the IBM portfolio of products. We are true partners in leveraging only those which are relevant, applicable, and can add a progressive value. A lot of times, we want to give them the leadership but we base that upon rock-solid capabilities of the delivery in the IBM portfolio.

As an example of the impact on a customer's ability to change or update processes, one customer, in particular, wanted to link the front-end through the enterprise. The BPM solution frameworks that we were able to provide them through the IBM portfolio, they have enabled them to lock in from the back-end processes through the middleware to the front-end, so they can go to market and sell their company.

It has a mature delivery already spec'd out with almost global applicability through IBM's many customers, and being able to put that on it. It helps maintain, and in many instances, lower costs, as well as to maintain those costs, keeping them stable. It mitigates a lot of the risk of scaling to the enterprise. It also gives the best possible customer experience for that particular client.

If you're trying to lower and contain your costs or mitigate a lot of risk, there is nothing like the IBM Cloud. It can take on the security and regulatory risks.

I would like to see a lot more case studies. 

I'd like to see a lot more of the partners who've adopted these solutions come forward and demonstrate themselves. We have done this in the past where we had our clients at the IBM Think events interconnect, come forward and say, "This is what we've done with Miracle and IBM," and make that presentation known. I'd like to see a lot more of that available on a case by case basis. 

I'd like to see a lot more of the partners come forward and talk about how various partners have assisted them rather than just this is what it is and this is what it can do. Nothing like kicking the tires after you've bought it. Understand where the value is.

The product has been well-orchestrated and proven. Through a lot of our own blood, sweat, and tears in terms of our frameworks, we've been able to validate them in every instance.

Because we try to understand the full enterprise, whether it's an SMB or a larger organization, we already have the scalability understood, and we've already taken a look at that architecture, we've taken a look at the delivery. The scalability is part of what we deliver as a company, in terms of the thought leadership, which is all hallmarked on the IBM product like that we're able to leverage.

Everything is complex. There's no easy-peasy. Intelligent process automation becomes a complex matter. Most people are terrified of moving from their on-prem into the automation and digital transformation. 

We often times will map out according to what we've done in the industry. There is nothing simple, everything is very focused on a true partnership with our customer base.

We demonstrate ROI even before we go on. We show it to our clients from our understanding of the business assessments, expectations, and objectives. We then transcribe that into our technical solution, in which we portray and show them the ROI, from the user base from day one. Then, they can understand what they will realize in terms of time and in terms of growth.

Competing solutions are SAP, Microsoft, and Oracle.

With IBM, you have only a few roadmaps, and I think that's the value of IBM.

Stay as close as you can to what the current business model is; don't try to reinvent or recreate it. Just because it has appeal on all the buzzwords and new technologies, stay with what you've currently done and utilize that in each incremental stage.

I always like to have an early start. I find early adopters to be amongst the best proponents. In every case, I would like to get in earlier.

I'd like to see a lot more partners come forward in the present. This is where IBM has stepped forward previously and helped me in our world.

BPM is very horizontal solution, so it can be used across any kind of industry. Financial services is the largest one - banking and insurance would be the biggest sector for BPM. But really, it's anything where there's a situation where a request comes in the door and has to be serviced, or at least that use case fits most of the time. But my biggest project at the moment is telecom infrastructure for mobile phone tower installation of antennas.

In terms of how our clients use it for workflow, first of all they're just going to implement what the process is. It's very similar to any kind of BPR methodology, mapping out the process - the "as-is" process - and then using that process to identify what the "to-be" process should be, how it should be different. Sometimes, it's even just implementing things using automation with their "as-is," having automation so that they can actually analyze how it performs, and then using that to make decisions on how it should be improved. Then, in an iterative fashion, going ahead and making those improvements.

For our clients, I'd say the more common case of using it in conjunction with other IBM automation products would be the ECM, the content management, because a lot of business processes will be delayed with documents. So sometimes they will use the one that comes with BPM itself, but for customers that really want to focus on the documents, they will have IBM FileNet, the document management system for that, and that's usually fairly tightly compatible with BPM.

The most valuable thing is actually the Analytics, which is actually a little bit not where it should be.

I'm hearing things might be improving, to really deliver on BPM as opposed to simply workflow. That really should be emphasized a lot more than it has been, because a lot of customers will simply implement the process and leave it there, because the product maybe doesn't emphasize BPM as much as it should, as much as maybe they talk about it in the sales process.

The whole idea of BPM, is to iteratively improve the process, and in order to do that you have to have the Analytics tool with it. A lot of times that doesn't go as far as it should simply because there's a lot more work to be done for that to happen, and just some sort of technical limitations that don't make that as easy as it should be.

I think they are working on it. I'm looking forward to seeing how much of an improvement it will be. They did announce that they have some stuff on the way for this, so I'm hoping it will be good. I think that at the moment, BPM as an industry in general, and IBM in particular, is not differentiating itself enough. I think the hype for it is down a bit, and I think that is a key way that they can reinvigorate the whole thing, by going back to emphasizing the entire cycle and fitting in with business improvement, as opposed to just being a technology with a layer type of thing.

So, that is, in a way, the most important aspect of it, for it to be BPM, as opposed to simply another way to implement a software solution that could be the same as anything else.

I would say it's very good but it's not perfect. It is much more scalable than it has been in the past but there are some things, it does require some work to keep it stable. So that is an area that should be improved, actually.

The engine itself tends to accumulate a lot of data that needs to be cleaned up, and that's the kind of thing that keeps it from, in some scenarios, scaling as much as it needs to. And then, when you're building solutions, if you're not careful to keep the screens from being associated with too much data, if you're going to just do things the way that a lot of people would just assume that they can do, without having experience of having made those mistakes before, it will accumulate a lot of data, and that will cause it to perform very badly.

It would be great if you didn't have to worry about that, but the reality is, at the moment, that you have to pay attention to that. If you do, then you can do just fine. But if you pay attention only to the business requirements, and just throw in everything that the business imagines that it wants see, you can easily build something that is way too heavy on the front end. But if you handle those things, if you tune the underlying platform, it can achieve the target, sometimes with more hardware than you want.

In terms of ROI and scaling use of the product, I don't have a client where I can say that we specifically measured that as much as you would say we should, but my feeling is yes, they do see return on investment.

Usually it's the client is using their account. The initial technical support is fine. When there are escalations, and their Tiger Team comes in, they are excellent.

My clients that go with IBM usually do so because they have a sense of, if they have problems they have an organization like IBM to complain to.

If we try to use open-source, that's usually a problem if it's a relatively big company, something like banking or insurance, they're not going to want that. But the manufacturing companies, they tend not to care as much, and as long as it works they're fine. For banking, they want something that looks a bit like the big-time.

It has improved a lot. They built some tooling for the BPM platform in particular, in the releases that started about three years ago; they streamlined that quite a bit, it is quite a bit better.

It is still a massive installer compared to some of the heritage software that it was built from. It's quite large and it can take quite a bit of time to install. So that definitely could be better, but it is what it is, it's an IBM product.

Regarding working directly with IBM in the setup, if it's not an IBM project, usually I don't, because I'd have to pay. If it's actually an IBM customer then I would. And I do, sometimes, informally talk to some of the people that I know about what is the current latest and greatest way to handle certain things, but not so much in formal channels if it's not an IBM-direct engagement.

In the BPM space, the undisputed leader is a company called Pega. In terms of the market share, they win a lot more deals, but they have a very different approach, and they have different types of customers.

In the region where I work, Oracle is doing pretty well, although their software is not as good by any stretch. Their services organization is a bit more respected for some reason in the region. So they have won some things, although they struggle to actually deliver.

Globally, I think the other one that I find interesting is called Appian, and Appian does quite well. I think that they have more of a lightweight cloud solution that's a bit easier to go to. They have a strange sort of closed mindset, you can't read their documentation unless you have an account with them, this kind of thing.

And then there are the open-source vendors, which used to not really be considered much, but they actually have started to do very well, for certain types of scenarios. Among them are Camunda and Activiti, and another one called Bonita, although I'm not really sure - its heritage is definitely open-source. But all of those open-source solutions have an enterprise version. Their approach to marketing is open-source, but they'll still sell you an enterprise license.

I rate IBM BPM a seven out of 10. It's good but it needs some help.

Most of the use cases are for fraud investigations and managing the cases. We also use it regarding account opening. It's all related to financial services and banking, so it's all about account opening, fraud investigations, KYC, pretty much around the financial services processes.

We use it for workflow management. For example, when the customer requests opening of an account, they reach out to the customer and they initiate the process. Then it goes through the KYC process and it comes to the account executives to determine whether they are eligible to open the account. And of course, there would be a career check as well. So that workflow is actually implemented very well using BPM.

At this moment we are not using it in conjunction with IBM Case Manager or any other IBM automation products.

It has been used in multiple LOBs and a lot of benefits have been identified. There is a good return on investment, because some of them were using paper-based processing, and introducing BPM has actually improved the time involved.

Regarding any impact on our ability to change or update processes, as I said, most of the paper-based work was converted into an automated workflow process, and some of them were converted into straight-through processing, with no human interaction involved whatsoever.

The UI-based workflow, where a lot of human interactions are involved.

It's a bit technical, related to the instance of migrations. It's a tough thing to handle, in every new release, in every upgrade, that we have to do things in the applications or in the product. I think IBM is working on it but I know there are a lot of requests coming in from different organizations on this. 

Stability is pretty good. Many users, concurrent users especially, are using the application built on BPM, so it is good.

We did have multiple setups where the system was scaled to have more users when there was an expansion.

We do use them often, in terms of working with product-based issues or product-relevant problems. 

We have received good response whenever we engage IBM support for issues. We did get some help from IBM support on some of the BPM-related issues, even though they were not relevant to product. Certain kinds of consultations were answered.

I would say clients prefer to go with IBM, versus competitors, because of the support, and product releases, upgrades or updates or new features that come up very often, in the last couple of years. That has improved compared to two or three years ago.

I would say it's medium-complex. It's not highly complex but, yes, since there are a lot of integrations, it's kind of complex.

As I was explaining elsewhere in this review, regarding the paper-based workflow, there were multiple business professionals involved, but now, with BPM, they actually do not work on paper, they do everything online. So they do better work than just filling the paper or processing it.

Pega, obviously, is currently one of the main competitors to IBM BPM. I think Pega is actually doing pretty well compared to IBM currently, and I think IBM RPA should do well going forward.

The important criteria when selecting a vendor include looking at 

• the licensing cost, obviously
• the infrastructure needed
• scalability
• resiliency of the product
• the enterprise direction, where they are headed. 

Most of the time, time to market is also a consideration. IBM BPM does these pretty well.