Omada is scalable.

Our initial impression is that the performance is slower than we'd like. While I wouldn't say I'm entirely dissatisfied, we'd hoped for some quick fixes. Perhaps there's room for improvement in the program's logic. However, scalability limitations exist. We experienced these limitations during our go-live process, which extended from the planned two days to three and a half days.

We have around 38,000 students and 4,500 employees. During the part of the season when students do the new enrollment and they get their diplomas, there is an overlap between year four and year one, and then the number of accounts can easily rise to 50,000 in Omada.

In terms of scalability, I do not see what is going on in the cloud, but I would rate it at least an eight out of ten in terms of scalability. As explained by the technical people from Omada, if we need more resources, it is just a few clicks for us, and we can give out resources to two, three, or ten times more accounts without any problem.

We very likely would add functionality to Omada because some of the processes are still being done manually or by another subsystem, which we want to get rid of. We want everything to be done on one platform. It is easier to support, and it is easier to maintain. It is easier for people who use the systems because instead of manipulating their data in three screens, they have two screens or maybe even one. Reducing complexity is one of our prime tasks.

We have had no problems with Omada's scalability. 

It's at least scalable for what we need. We are now running a few systems on it with no problems so far. It has been scaled and that was fantastic. When we start to implement more and more systems, I hope it will continue to scale just as well as it has up until now.

I rate Omada 9 out of 10 for scalability. It's suitable for enterprise organizations. 

For our use case, we had no problem.

For the comprehensiveness of the model out-of-the-box connectors for the applications that we use, all the applications we wanted to integrate into our first wave. We had a few custom connectors for the out-of-the-box ones and for the ones we're missing, the REST connectors where we have flow.

And also, currently, Omada is developing a lot of new connectors, and the amount of connectors is currently growing, so this would be maybe also a good point.

We have about 32,000 students, but that number fluctuates. Overall, we have about 4,800 identities for the staff. Some of the teachers work only one or two days, and some of the interns work only a few days.

It is very capable of scaling based on the needs of our organization. We have just started. We have to see how things go in the future, but I am very confident of that.

We have about 8,500 people in our organization using it. Our team has six administrators, but not all of them are working with Omada all the time. I am the one who works the most with Omada.

The scalability of the solution is fine. There are a lot of possibilities to scale from a small business to a big business. You can use part of the system or use the more advanced functionality for creating roles.

We currently have 5,633 employees in the system, and there are 59,000 citizens in our municipality.

We're looking to expand our use of Omada Identity by providing more functionality to the users and the managers in our municipality. Right now, Omada is running in the background. Nobody actually knows that it's there. It's doing its job and people are happy, but no one in our business has access to the platform. We want to make it more visible and to exploit some functionality for the managers, for example, so that they can do more themselves. We also want to have managers do access reviews for all roles they are responsible for. That way, they can say, "Okay, this employee has access to this, this, and this, which is okay. But he also has this right of access and he doesn't need it anymore." This type of access review is something we are still planning to implement, but we are not there yet.

I believe Omada is scalable. The product has had built-in connectors for integrating with our solutions for many years. The new ones may lack some features that you might require. It depends on the age of the implementation. We've had situations where we couldn't use the out-of-the-box connector because it was too simple, so we built our own. 

It seems quite scalable in terms of performance and in terms of the ability to scale itself.

Omada's scalability is virtually unlimited as it can connect with a wide range of systems and services.

I would rate the scalability of Omada Identity 9 out of 10.

Scalability has improved a lot over the past years. I would rate it a nine out of ten for scalability.

Overall, we have 50,000 users, and there are a couple of thousands of users who use Omada and the processes of self-service. There are 1,000 to 2,000 users out of 50,000 identities in total.

For the scalability that we need, we are fully satisfied. We have 2,000 licenses, but I know that they have a customer in the US with 30,000 licenses on the same kind of solution, so I expect that they can support our needs for scalability.

Omada Identity is a cloud-based solution so it is scalable.

Omada isn't scalable in an on-prem deployment because it requires a complete installation on a new server. That's our setup, and it can be quite difficult. When deployed with cloud services, Omada is quite scalable. 

I would rate the scalability of Omada Identity 9 out of 10. We started with 4,000 users and are now over 10,000.

I rate Omada 10 out of 10 for scalability. They have many APIs to work with. Omada has a comprehensive set of connectors. We are mostly using the connectors for our HR solution, Microsoft Exchange, and Active Directory, and those work well. 

Our current usage hasn't necessitated scaling Omada Identity yet. However, based on the number of identities it can handle, it appears to be scalable. Additionally, I understand it's possible to spin up additional instances for further scaling if needed. Overall, my impression is that Omada Identity is a scalable solution.

Omada is scalable.

My company had no problems with the scalability of Omada Identity. I've experienced it in a large-scale setting, and the solution works.

It is partly scalable on-premises. There are some scalability issues, but they are, of course, very organization-specific.

We had about 10,000 users, but all of them were not using it on a daily basis. There were just a few hundred active users because it was not fully rolled out for all kinds of requests. The end goal was 5,000 to 10,000 daily users, but at that time, there were only a few hundred users. We planned to keep using it.

I rate Omada eight out of 10 for scalability. There are many connectors to services, so it's good to have them. At the same time, configuring these connectors requires more effort than expected.

The scalability is great. It is not often that I hear that our supplier can't do something with Omada Identity.

We manage 6,500 users with Omada Identity.

The tool's scalability is fine.

We are planning to implement more and more of these standard processes and to connect more target systems to it.

We have not tried to scale it. We have more than 2,000 people in our organization. We have four people who work directly with Omada Identity. It works well for the number of users we have. I would rate it a 9 out of 10 for scalability.

There are around 2,000 users. Omada requires three to four employees for maintenance. 

In the latest version, there have been big improvements with scalability. If you add more compute then you can scale this solution without limits.

When it comes to scalability of Omada's cloud-native SaaS solution, we've used it with a Fortune 10 customer and a Fortune 100 customer. It's definitely scalable. The fact is, we're connecting it to SAP which is running the internal organizations of some of these companies. It's a new product, so it probably hasn't gone through enough Fortune 500 companies to say that it has been fully tested at that scale, but the customers that we work with are pretty significant customers.

In terms of our customers increasing usage of Omada, if they've gone through the process, they have a prioritization of the applications that need to be onboarded to an IGA tool. Once they get those high-priority applications onboarded, there's the never-ending list of additional applications to get onboarded. The priority for onboarding applications could be business-related, it could be audit-finding related, or it could be SOX-related. The client makes that determination. 

We've integrated the product with CyberArk and ServiceNow, to automate some of the helpdesk support that is typically required. Most of our customers are at the stage where they're saying, "Hey, let's get this Oracle HR product onboarded as our system of record, and work from there to onboard the other apps." Most customers, even the small customers, have an endless list of applications that need to be onboarded, once they have onboarded their highest priority applications.

We haven't had any scalability issues with our customers. Omada Identity has been scalable to our customer requirements. It's a high-capacity solution, so large environments (more than 2000 users) is not a problem for Omada Identity. 

Omada is at par with the industry standard at this point for scalability. They aren't extraordinary yet, but they are working on it. They are probably at par with their competitors.

We're on-prem, so scalability in the sense of plugging in extra memory is something we need to do ourselves. For the scalability of its functionality, it's pretty good. You can add new target systems, for example, and new applications. If you want to use new functionality, you can build your own processes that work well.

The only problem with its scalability is the import part because an import for a target system can take quite some time, up to three or four hours. In the end, we can run into an issue where there is more imports to be done than hours we have in a day. But overall, it's pretty scalable.

We have 6,000 employees and we now have around 800 to 1,000 external people who are not in our HR system; they are contractors. We are also managing 64 technical systems from Omada and behind that are around 500 to 600 applications.

In terms of administering Omada, we do almost everything ourselves with two to three FTEs. It's not only operations, but it's also the development of Omada. That is always ongoing because we bring on new target systems that we need to onboard into Omada. We also get different requests for new processes in Omada. We have a partner who helps us at some points, but their role is mostly QA.

If we ask for technical support, it is more because of an incident or things that are not documented properly. If we want to implement something new which isn't documented, our partner might be unable to help because of that. Then we go to Omada. 

The scalability of the product is good. There is a lot of functionality within it, without paying extra costs. It is quite complete on its own, and there are no hidden costs. 

It scales in terms of numbers and types of identities. It can govern the on-premise applications as well as the cloud applications. So, it can manage hybrid environments with all types of identities and various load amounts. 

The new version of Omada is scalable.

I have experience with rather large companies that have OIS handling thousands of identities and without worrying much about load balancing, server clusters, etc.

We haven't tried doing scaling it yet, so I don't know about that.

On my side, I consider it relatively easy to scale. I have been involved with customers that have worldwide organizations running with it. There are guidelines for scaling to that kind of size. Generally, scalability is ok.

Frankly, everybody in the company uses it because it is used to apply for permissions. Our internal administration team is between ten and twelve people, whereas there are a couple of thousand end-users.