Operational Risk Analyst at a financial services firm with 5,001-10,000 employees
Real User
2020-01-22T12:44:00Z
Jan 22, 2020
The hardest part of implementing this solution is what happens before it is deployed. We were involved in creating some of the processes that we had already been doing manually. We interacted with the IT business person to translate those processes into their business requirement that is compatible with ProcessMaker. Once we were through that stage, the rest of it was just training people on how to use the platform. At that point, it wasn't difficult for my team to use it. When you train somebody on a particular workflow, you don't have to train them a second time on a different process. It is generic and they can use the platform in their day-to-day work. Once the system is deployed, it is pretty easy to use. My advice for anybody who is implementing this solution is to dedicate the proper time to it. Don't rush if they want to implement it correctly. The pre-deployment stage, where each unit has to explain exactly what they need it for, is very important. The IT team has to deploy something that is relevant to the process, and it takes time. Proper planning will reduce errors, and moreover, if it is not properly planned then something will be deployed but it will not be very useful to the end-users. Ultimately, they may not end up using it at all and instead return to their manual, paper-based solution, because it's easier for them. Essentially, the end-users need to precisely and accurately communicate their requirements to the IT team, and in turn, the IT team needs to be able to deliver those requirements. With this done properly, you will be successful in deploying ProcessMaker. Overall, this is a good product but I would like to see the support for more than just basic text, as well as some functionality for processing data. I would rate this solution an eight out of ten.
I would recommend this solution to others. I would rate it a seven out of ten.
The hardest part of implementing this solution is what happens before it is deployed. We were involved in creating some of the processes that we had already been doing manually. We interacted with the IT business person to translate those processes into their business requirement that is compatible with ProcessMaker. Once we were through that stage, the rest of it was just training people on how to use the platform. At that point, it wasn't difficult for my team to use it. When you train somebody on a particular workflow, you don't have to train them a second time on a different process. It is generic and they can use the platform in their day-to-day work. Once the system is deployed, it is pretty easy to use. My advice for anybody who is implementing this solution is to dedicate the proper time to it. Don't rush if they want to implement it correctly. The pre-deployment stage, where each unit has to explain exactly what they need it for, is very important. The IT team has to deploy something that is relevant to the process, and it takes time. Proper planning will reduce errors, and moreover, if it is not properly planned then something will be deployed but it will not be very useful to the end-users. Ultimately, they may not end up using it at all and instead return to their manual, paper-based solution, because it's easier for them. Essentially, the end-users need to precisely and accurately communicate their requirements to the IT team, and in turn, the IT team needs to be able to deliver those requirements. With this done properly, you will be successful in deploying ProcessMaker. Overall, this is a good product but I would like to see the support for more than just basic text, as well as some functionality for processing data. I would rate this solution an eight out of ten.