Try our new research platform with insights from 80,000+ expert users

IBM Workload Automation vs Microsoft Configuration Manager comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive Summary

Review summaries and opinions

We asked business professionals to review the solutions they use. Here are some excerpts of what they said:
 

ROI

Sentiment score
5.2
IBM Workload Automation is valuable for complex setups with trained teams, despite maintenance costs and slower performance on simpler networks.
Sentiment score
1.0
Microsoft Configuration Manager is valued for managing devices, offering cost savings and enhanced productivity, despite some Mac support challenges.
 

Customer Service

Sentiment score
8.3
Opinions on IBM Workload Automation's support vary; some praise it, while others face delays and inconsistent service.
Sentiment score
5.5
Microsoft Configuration Manager receives mixed reviews for support, praised for resources but criticized for first-level support effectiveness.
I would rate their support between eight and nine out of ten.
Their response time and first-level support quality need improvement.
For technical support from Microsoft, I would rate them a nine.
 

Scalability Issues

Sentiment score
7.0
IBM Workload Automation is preferred for scalability in complex scheduling, with minor challenges at higher scales, especially in time zones.
Sentiment score
7.6
Microsoft Configuration Manager scales well for enterprises, though expertise and investments may enhance scalability, especially with cloud integration.
The product is suitable for our size, handling 800 devices.
 

Stability Issues

Sentiment score
8.8
IBM Workload Automation is viewed as reliable and stable, with minor issues resolved swiftly, boosting user confidence.
Sentiment score
6.3
Microsoft Configuration Manager is praised for stability, with issues mostly due to external factors and the need for proper setup.
There were misconfigurations by our team rather than issues with the product itself.
 

Room For Improvement

IBM Workload Automation requires interface improvements, enhanced automation, better support, and lower maintenance costs to improve user experience.
Microsoft Configuration Manager needs improved integration, automation, Linux compatibility, and enhanced PowerShell, UI, mobile support, and AI alerts.
The maintenance charges have increased significantly, and a lower cost would be beneficial.
A better command line interface for Microsoft Configuration Manager would be an additional feature I would to see in the future to make it closer to a perfect score.
Improvements are needed for servers. Servers are still not getting it properly, so we could add the servers in Microsoft Configuration Manager for things such as OS deployment and Autopilot as well.
 

Setup Cost

IBM Workload Automation is costly but offers flexible pricing models with cloud advantages and justifies expense with reliability and features.
Microsoft Configuration Manager pricing is high but offers comprehensive features, with value seen mainly for larger infrastructures.
The setup cost is considered sufficient.
The pricing for Microsoft Configuration Manager is okay for me.
 

Valuable Features

IBM Workload Automation excels with dynamic scheduling, multiplatform integration, user-friendly GUI, real-time updates, and effective monitoring.
Microsoft Configuration Manager offers scalable endpoint management, efficient deployment, vulnerability fixes, and integration, crucial for enterprises with remote operations.
One valuable feature of IBM Workload Automation is the ability to combine different applications and platforms to organize jobs together, creating dependencies.
If I want to get a fetch report for anything, such as hardware-related issues or group policy-related issues, I need to fetch the report by using SCCM's scripting language and remediation part.
The most valuable features I find in Microsoft Configuration Manager are mostly patching, deploying software, deploying images, and running custom scripts.
The product valuable for deployment recovery.
 

Categories and Ranking

IBM Workload Automation
Average Rating
8.0
Reviews Sentiment
7.0
Number of Reviews
33
Ranking in other categories
Workload Automation (8th)
Microsoft Configuration Man...
Average Rating
8.2
Reviews Sentiment
6.4
Number of Reviews
85
Ranking in other categories
Software Distribution (1st), Server Monitoring (4th), Configuration Management (3rd), Patch Management (1st)
 

Mindshare comparison

IBM Workload Automation and Microsoft Configuration Manager aren’t in the same category and serve different purposes. IBM Workload Automation is designed for Workload Automation and holds a mindshare of 6.0%, down 8.3% compared to last year.
Microsoft Configuration Manager, on the other hand, focuses on Server Monitoring, holds 5.3% mindshare, down 7.1% since last year.
Workload Automation Market Share Distribution
ProductMarket Share (%)
IBM Workload Automation6.0%
Control-M18.9%
AutoSys Workload Automation9.9%
Other65.2%
Workload Automation
Server Monitoring Market Share Distribution
ProductMarket Share (%)
Microsoft Configuration Manager5.3%
Zabbix25.1%
Checkmk10.1%
Other59.5%
Server Monitoring
 

Featured Reviews

Ilhami Arikan - PeerSpot reviewer
With an easy setup phase in place, agent-based installation can be done in minutes
Sometimes we have issues with the solution's stability. So, stability can be improved. Reporting and visibility of the solution need improvement. These days, we need more visibility. We need to access the logs and databases easily. You need to keep track of the running number of logs, like which ones are executed, completed, etc. So if there would be a good reporting dashboard, then it would be good. There's room for improvement in the solution since it is a challenging thing when we want to use the solution's technology with our new technologies. For example, if we need to use TWS on our OpenShift platform, the solution's API is not capable enough. So the product itself needs to be aligned with new technologies.
JunedBedrekar - PeerSpot reviewer
Have effectively deployed patches and applications while integrating with cloud solutions
The features I find most valuable in Microsoft Configuration Manager are replication and scripting. If I want to get a fetch report for anything, such as hardware-related issues or group policy-related issues, I need to fetch the report by using SCCM's scripting language and remediation part. The inventory collection features of Microsoft Configuration Manager are good because we always prefer the inventory. We do it by using the script language. We use remote management capabilities in Microsoft Configuration Manager. Remote management capabilities are useful if the user is not providing access; we can use the backend users to update the group policy and sync the devices. These are the main features we require.
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Workload Automation solutions are best for your needs.
869,952 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Financial Services Firm
29%
Manufacturing Company
8%
Computer Software Company
8%
Retailer
8%
Financial Services Firm
12%
Government
11%
Computer Software Company
9%
Manufacturing Company
7%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business4
Midsize Enterprise1
Large Enterprise29
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business20
Midsize Enterprise13
Large Enterprise64
 

Questions from the Community

What needs improvement with IBM Workload Automation?
IBM Workload Automation could be improved by reducing its cost. The maintenance charges have increased significantly, and a lower cost would be beneficial.
What is your primary use case for IBM Workload Automation?
We use IBM Workload Automation ( /products/ibm-workload-automation-reviews ) as a scheduler. We install agents on the application servers and use scheduling to trigger jobs on other servers. Our us...
What advice do you have for others considering IBM Workload Automation?
I recommend IBM Workload Automation as it's a well-established and stable product. However, the cost is a concern. The product features a master-slave setup that ensures continuity during failures....
How does Ansible compare to Microsoft Endpoint Configuration Manager (SCCM)?
Microsoft Endpoint Configuration Manager takes knowledge and research to properly configure. The length of time that the set up will take depends on the kind of technical architecture that your org...
How to choose between ManageEngine Desktop Central and Microsoft Endpoint Configuration Manager (formerly SCCM)?
ManageEngine Desktop Central is very easy to set up, is scalable, stable, and also has very good patch management. What I like most about ManageEngine is that I can log on to every PC very easily a...
What do you like most about SCCM?
One of the standout features of SCCM is its application management capabilities. It allows us to create packages efficiently and deploy them to specific groups within our network. This streamlined ...
 

Also Known As

IBM Tivoli Workload Scheduler, IBM TWS
Microsoft Endpoint Configuration Manager, System Center Configuration Manager (SCCM ), Microsoft SMS
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Standard Life Group, Banca Popolare di Milano, A*STAR, ArcelorMittal Gent
Bank Alfalah Ltd., Wªrth Handelsges.m.b.H, Dimension Data, Japan Business Systems, St. Lucie County Public Schools, MISC Berhad
Find out what your peers are saying about BMC, Broadcom, JAMS Software and others in Workload Automation. Updated: October 2025.
869,952 professionals have used our research since 2012.