Report generation could be more detailed. There are some shortcomings when creating reports. We can't create tag-based reports or go beyond basic technical reports. I'd like to see more tags and more out-of-the-box column reports offered.

The solution uses Gartner's time-based framework for application rationalization. One more thing that you can consider is having some add-on frameworks for the same, not just Gartner.

It covers a lot from an enterprise architecture perspective, but it's not as robust in business architecture. 

What could be improved in LeanIX is the reporting aspect, in particular the variety of reports. If they could give us more drilled down reports, for example: if we can get more reports that can answer the question: "When the business is actually spending money, how can that translate into benefits?" that would be great. At times, we'd need customized reports, so more reporting varieties would be good.

The data import feature of LeanIX could also be improved, if they can give us more flexibility in terms of importing data across different data sources, that would be good. More generic, more lucid data importing would make the service better.

Feature-wise, if we compare LeanIX with industry leading tools such as MEGA and other competitors, there are certain features that aren't there, but those tools were built for something more holistic, so overall, LeanIX is fine for me.

They're moving forward pretty well. I'm seeing a little bit more focus on the business architecture side than they are currently focused on, but the pendulum for that is shifting back to more of a traditional enterprise architecture view, so they're probably positioned pretty well for that. Over the next eighteen months, you're going to see people starting to move back towards more of the traditional enterprise architecture view versus the MDA-type business view of the world. 

In terms of focusing a little bit more on the business side, there's a short-term window. By the time they focus on it, the window would have closed, so their current trajectory is very good. Some of them are trying to position with the heavy, what I refer to as, MDA-flavor on how business architecture is being addressed, and I see the pendulum has already swung out to that area, and it's starting to come back. So, if you're building for that now, it's not going to be that significant when you get to market with it. 

They're probably positioned pretty well. I hope that they would not focus that much on the business architecture, and they would focus more on the overall cloud strategy and how we can leverage multi-cloud and transition back and forth from other cloud providers. With a lot of current vendors, you get locked in with one cloud, and then you try to migrate to someone else, and it becomes very problematic. What they need to do is to look at the overall data strategy, and they probably need to amplify their data strategy, especially around multi-cloud.

The initial setup has room for improvement. Currently, the setup is complex.

The solution needs to incorporate an AI/ML data intelligence tool that gets smarter with industry wise enterprise engagements and provides suggestive data input when optimum data sources not available for a new engagement. 

The solution has good security but should be wary of publishing services over internet for open consumption, because that will increase the attack surface. 

LeanIX does a poor job of being able to allocate detailed costings to components within the network, rather using an average base, and it won't let you extend its data structure to include detailed pricing information. That is not sufficient in today's world and climate. The biggest issue we have is that the support staff are in Europe and we're in Southeast Asia so it's difficult getting support. 

They need to be able to provide extensions to their metadata structure so you can create functions but you can't add metadata structure, so you actually have to get creative and start using additional add ons or add on libraries. It takes away from maximizing the use of LeanIX. 

It would be beneficial to have additional features and capabilities to enhance mapping between applications, especially across domains where the relationships may not be direct. Adding a basic intelligence layer that could suggest connections and dependencies based on labels metadata assigned to applications in the future would save time.

There can be more factsheets covering technology capability, application capability, application services, etc. 

The whole integration architecture view of interfaces/data exchange could be improved. It would be better if the diagrams generated could be exported as Visio files. 

We need a way to create programmable/customizable dashboards/reports. 

The whole underlying meta-model should have been exposed for easy integrations; it's not good at documentation for easy integration (like AWS Lambda/Python/C#) in the use case of writing a batch application for data sync. 

The export of dashboards is not good or useful for printing or projecting.

It provides diagramming, but it is not the best diagramming tool that I've ever used. It's there. It can use all the linkages you already have, which is very handy. But it's not the best tool.

Even though that feature is not the best, for diagramming purposes it integrates with Lucidchart. That brings together the power of Lucidchart and all the information in LeanIX. From a visual perspective, it's great. We use that to make the diagramming better.

I don't think LeanIX will try to create a great diagramming tool. It's a basic tool that could definitely be improved, but it looks like they took a little bit of a different approach, by integrating with a leading diagramming tool.

Another area for improvement is that when you're starting to look into more advanced information, using the solution's APIs and its customizations, documentation for that specific aspect is not very good. There is not too much support built into the offering for that aspect, for a developer. As a simple example, I wanted to create a custom report. Using the documentation that was provided, I was not able to do that, and I have been a developer for more than 25 years, in addition to being an enterprise architect.

After I talked to a representative, they did bring some technical people into the discussion. They could even make that a service where I could say to them, "I would like to have your support for one day to set up the environment, to give me a couple of examples, and go over this." They acknowledge that they're looking into this, but they don't have it. It would be a great service, even a paid service. I would be willing to pay for it. It's not a matter of the complexity of the development part, it was more the complexity of the setup.

So they lack good information in that area, but it looks like they're working on it. And they are very open. I work with two success managers from LeanIX, and both of them are very responsive to our requirements.

The solution’s API integration needs to improve. I would like to see a digital screen watch feature also in the solution.

The modeling could be improved.

At present, I need to integrate LeanIX with the modeling tools to automate VPN. They could include a combination of the product and some modeling extensions. It would be a great idea.

The solution is limited compared to some other solutions like Enterprise Architect, which is less user-friendly, but you can do everything on it.

They should also automate support.

They should improve the right adoption in native connectors that they provide with clients. They should see if clients are really ready to adapt them during evaluation and it will help client to take informed call to purchase those connectors to other products.

We also use ServiceNow and during our LeanIX evaluation phase, the native connector from LeanIX and Service now was looked into it. But we didn't realize that it would cost almost half of Core LeanIX subscription, it is considerable amount. Then we realized that we were not actually ready for them and we opted out. We didn't understand how this integration were going to help our organization. It make sense only if we are matured with other product(Service now) to get full benefit of this integration in organization. Please, get the quote of cost involved before you plan for checking feasibility of any native integration that comes out of LeanIX.

After the contract signed for specific year with ServiceNow integration in LeanIX,  Amidst We wanted to discontinue from the later year(due to non readiness of ServiceNow data and situation, it really not yielding any value/benefits ) and we got push back from LeanIX when approached for any workouts on this deal. We really want to go ahead with core LeanIX. We are completely happy with the core LeanIX, the only part where we want to disengage is having those additional connectors conditions.

We are even looking at alternative vendor  in industry reluctantly due to unsettling discussing with LeanIX. The relationship with the vendor is very important to us and would always want to have long year tenure. They should as well reciprocate the same.