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 boosts productivity and cost efficiency, crucial for device management with 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 support is praised for higher tiers and Premier Support, while basic levels often face inefficiencies.
I would rate their support between eight and nine out of ten.
 

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
7.1
Microsoft Configuration Manager is scalable, adaptable, and effective for various environments, with high user ratings despite some limitations.
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
6.9
Microsoft Configuration Manager is highly stable and reliable, with minor issues often related to system configuration rather than software.
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 requires enhancements in deployment, resource usage, integration, reporting, usability, remote management, scalability, and third-party support.
The maintenance charges have increased significantly, and a lower cost would be beneficial.
 

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 is costly, especially for large enterprises, but offers automation benefits and potential negotiation discounts.
 

Valuable Features

IBM Workload Automation excels with dynamic scheduling, multiplatform integration, user-friendly GUI, real-time updates, and effective monitoring.
Microsoft Configuration Manager streamlines IT management with automation and integration, enhancing efficiency and security for large-scale infrastructures.
One valuable feature of IBM Workload Automation is the ability to combine different applications and platforms to organize jobs together, creating dependencies.
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 (11th)
Microsoft Configuration Man...
Average Rating
8.2
Reviews Sentiment
6.4
Number of Reviews
82
Ranking in other categories
Server Monitoring (7th), Configuration Management (4th), 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 6.8%, down 8.2% compared to last year.
Microsoft Configuration Manager, on the other hand, focuses on Server Monitoring, holds 5.3% mindshare, down 8.0% since last year.
Workload Automation
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.
MikeNelson2 - PeerSpot reviewer
Deployment recovery works well but requires configuration improvements
While I do not use the product frequently, many issues were due to configuration rather than the product itself. I cannot give an exact recommendation as it is not my area of responsibility. The team that uses it finds it adequate. It is presently good enough for us not to investigate other options. Overall, I rate the product a six out of ten.
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Workload Automation solutions are best for your needs.
862,452 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Financial Services Firm
31%
Computer Software Company
10%
Manufacturing Company
7%
Retailer
7%
Financial Services Firm
12%
Government
11%
Computer Software Company
10%
Manufacturing Company
8%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
 

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 )
 

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, Redwood Software and others in Workload Automation. Updated: June 2025.
862,452 professionals have used our research since 2012.