Appian Reviews

My clients use Appian for workflow automation that spans many verticles.

The solution can be deployed on-premise and on the cloud. Customers that use cloud deployments typically use Amazon AWS and on-premise deployments are typically used for financial institutions.

The most valuable features of Appian are the VPN engine, it is fast, lightweight, and easy to set up business rules. Business teams can do it by themselves. That is a very good feature.

Occasionally, certain pre-made modules may not be necessary and customers may desire greater customization options. Instead of being limited to pre-designed features, they may prefer a more flexible version that allows for greater customization.

In a future release, they should add more connectors with the new upcoming integrations and data platforms.

I have been using Appian for approximately nine years.

Appian is a highly stable platform.

I rate the stability of Appian an eight out of ten.

Cloud deployment of the solution is highly scalable.

My clients are typically enterprise-sized businesses. They can have various sizes of users up to 20,000 VMC.

I rate the scalability of Appian a nine out of ten.

We provide support to some of our customers. However, some of my customers have not had satisfactory support.

We have a strategic partnership with Appian. We have different routes to receive support because we know people in order to contact them directly. We have had a good experience.

I rate the support of Appian a seven out of ten

Neutral

Not everyone can do the implementation of the solution, it requires specialized people. It is easy for qualified people.

The duration it takes to implement the solution depends on a lot of factors, such as how many workflows are required. A typical implementation can take four to six weeks.

I rate the initial setup of Appian a six out of ten.

We set up the solution in the customer's environment.

The price of the solution is reasonable and is paid annually. The price of the solution depends on how many users use the solution. It can range from $50,000 to $200,000. For example, for 20,000 users the price can be approximately $200,000.

There is an additional implementation cost.

I rate the price of Appian a seven out of ten

To determine whether a platform, such as Appian, is suitable for your domain industry, you must first assess whether it offers any out-of-the-box features relevant to your needs. If it does, utilizing that platform would be the best option since it already has the required functionalities. If the available features do not align with your requirements, consider choosing a platform that can easily build such services. Attempting to modify pre-existing features on a platform is a challenging task, and any upgrades to the platform could pose further issues for users.

The solution has high performance but the main issue is the lack of customization after deploying it.

I rate Appian an eight out of ten.

I work on the system administration side. I have customers who develop their applications on it for sourcing and procurement. In the past, it has been mostly related to nuclear facility management and risk applications.

The low code functionality and being able to get applications faster to customers or to the market are valuable.

There should be more flexibility for the developers to choose the look and feel of the UI. They should have a better ability to design their widgets and customize them with different colors, shapes, and sizes. That is a limitation that could be improved upon.

I would like to be able to integrate Appian and store various codes in external repos rather than just having everything within the Appian platform. 

It should integrate with open source a little bit more. There should be more flexibility and integration with various other tools in the organization, such as Jira and Confluence for release tracking, bug tracking, and being able to automatically tag items related to bug fixes and things like that. It is currently a little bit difficult to do in Appian. If it opens up to external integrations, it would be great.

I have been using this solution for about 10 years.

It is pretty stable.

It is scalable. You can horizontally scale the servers to add more nodes and have a clustered and high-availability environment.

Currently, we have about 20,000 users in the company. For maintenance, we have a big team of about 50 people, but they don't maintain just this environment. There are a couple of other environments that they maintain.

I have interacted with them several times. They're pretty good, pretty helpful, and knowledgeable. So far, it has been great.

I didn't use any other BPM solution prior to Appian. Appian was my first solution. Prior to that, I was basically developing applications from scratch using J2EE. In that aspect, Appian has been very helpful in getting the applications out very fast.

Its initial setup was not complex. It has been a pretty straightforward installation for the most part. There have been a few changes over the years in the support of app servers, and they've improved the functionality. Initially, it needed more work, but recently, they have added a lot of functionalities to be able to deploy quickly and migrate the code between environments. There used to be a few more steps previously, whereas now, it takes just a few clicks to get the code from one environment to another and finally into production.

It was implemented in-house.

I don't work on that side of things, but I have worked with various implementations of Appian in various organizations. Everybody seems to be liking it very much. They seem to be sticking with it for a long time and adopting it for more and more applications and different organizations within the company. I've seen good success with Appian across organizations.

I would advise starting small and developing applications in phases and adding as you grow. It is a pretty scalable environment, and it is easy to start small and learn along the way to be able to develop high-performance, complex applications.

I would rate it an eight out of ten.

Appian is a platform that focuses on human-centric workflows around processes. It facilitates requests for policies or incidents involving groups of people. The application manages the workflow between individuals to negotiate and confirm these policies.

Appian is managed and upgraded regularly.

The most productive aspect of Appian lies in its ability to develop interfaces, particularly user interfaces. Creating user interfaces is highly productive when these interfaces are integrated with the original database. In such cases, using record types proves to be a very efficient method of handling data. The synergy between interfaces and record types enhances productivity.

The case management studio is still immature, but it looks very nice. However, the VPN should be improved. The case management system needs improvement, but it has some promising features. Appian has the commitment to continuous improvement. With each new release, they enhance the platform for all users.Currently, making changes requires too much backend development work. They're working on streamlining this process, particularly with VPN integration. As it stands, storing everything in memory doesn't effectively handle large datasets. Transitioning VPN processes to a more traditional database approach would greatly improve scalability and usability in real-world scenarios

When the sentences are too long, they become difficult to manage. The scalability is low, when they become complex. The integrations are fine. There are some minor errors and details, but it does a great job in explaining errors within Appian. Internally, there is much information to help you understand what's going on, but not always. Sometimes, it's difficult to know what's happening, but these instances are rare.

Architecturally, there is an issue with Appian that it tends to put all the applications in the same infrastructure. Big customers resort to having several installations of Appian to deploy different applications in different infrastructures. They face the problem of managing assignments. Appian should make it easy to deploy different applications in separate infrastructures. Additionally, there needs to be a way to unify them because without using VPN, users are left without a unified inbox. Applications can't use the VPN and have to resort to their own solutions to show users their work, leading to inconsistency. Since each application is different, it becomes crucial to have a centralized point where users can find their work. Even if the applications are split into different installations, there needs to be a single way for users to find all their work.

I have been using Appian for two to three years. We are the using V24 of the solution.

The solution's stability is better.

I rate the solution’s stability an eight out of ten.

The solution is difficult to scale. 1,000-2,000 users are using this solution.

I rate the solution’s scalability a six out of ten.

I have used SoftEther VPN.

I rate the initial setup a seven out of ten, where one is difficult, and ten is easy.

The platform was set up by third party.

The solution is expensive. 

I rate the product’s pricing an eight out of ten, where one is cheap and ten is expensive.

We evaluated Outsystems. Appian is much proactive to create solutions applications.

The most frustrating aspect is its DPM offering. It fails to support VPN due to its limited scalability. You can only use the VPN for isolated cases. When attempting to apply it in a real-world scenario with multiple applications, it becomes unusable due to its lack of scalability. It boosts everything into memory. 

It is very easy to develop interfaces and access data with Appian. The local code acts as a communicator. The interfaces function as record types, and the logic you program use special rules, which resemble a kind of functional language exclusive. This combination of user interfaces and record types, along with the special rules, is very productive. You typically need to write much less code compared to other platforms

Intergration is good.

I recommend the solution, One should evaluate the VPN needs very closely. Not everybody needs VPN, but those who do should take a closer look to avoid surprises. You can use VPN in Appian, but it's somewhat different from what you might expect.

Overall, I rate the solution a nine out of ten.

We use the solution internally. It is for internal front ends for capturing transactions and then managing the workflows and sending them to back-end systems. 

The rapid deployment of solutions is excellent. 

It's cloud-based, and it was a smooth transition from the cloud to on-premises. We've really enjoyed the automatic updates. We never have to manually upgrade to the latest platform. It saves us some work. The cloud setup is simple.

The solution is very stable.

It can scale well.

Technical support is quite responsive. 

We have a growing need for more DevOps for deploying branching strategies, and Appian is not great at that. If that had more DevOps capabilities, it would be an excellent product.

On-premises setup can take a while. 

We've used the solution for the last five years. 

We've only had one 15-minute downtime incident that was related to an AWS hardware issue in their 1AZ. That wasn't Appian's fault. That was it. It's been pretty stable and reliable. There are no bugs or glitches. I'd rate the solution's stability nine out of ten. 

The solution can scale. 

They've promised they will bring out Kubernetes, which we currently don't have. Right now, it vertically scales. There is no horizontal scaling yet.

So far, we've scaled from 4XL to 8XL without issue. I'd rate the solution seven out of ten. 

We have 400 users on the solution right now. 

We do plan to increase usage. The solution is mission-critical. 

Pi and P2 issues get responses within a couple of minutes. Support is very responsive. 

Positive

We did try to shoehorn Cibo into doing everything. We unbundled it into different domains. 

If you do the setup, there is a bit of a learning curve you have during the initial setup. On the cloud, the deployment is much easier. They spin it up for you and manage it for you. It's less work. For the on-premises deployment, I'd rate the ease of setup six out of ten. It took a few months to deploy. Cloud deployment, of course, is much easier since there really is nothing to do. We deployed over a weekend.

We deploy every month. It takes a couple of minutes to deploy the latest features. 

We run a lean show and only have about five people dealing with the solution. There's an architect, two engineers, and a few QAs.

We have an integrator helping us from India. 

I don't deal with licensing. However, my understanding is that it's not the most expensive. It is moderate. I'd rate the pricing seven out of ten in terms of how expensive it is. 

We're a financial institution, and we're customers. 

I'd rate the solution eight out of ten.

I'd advise users to choose their implementation partner very carefully. Do the due diligence on the implementation partner for the best results. 

We primarily use the solution for application creation and process automation. 

We have 15 different applications running from CRM applications to case management applications, and we are using some RPA functions. We have a big stack of applications we are using. 

The quick development cycle is great.

The ease of development is great.

It's a stable product.

The solution scales well.

There is no issue with setting it up. It's easy.

Pricing is very competitive.

Technical support has been amazing overall. 

There needs some improvement related to the chatbot features.

The performance could improve. If we could calculate the amount of data that will be realized, it would help us a lot. 

I've used the solution for three years. I've used it for a while. 

We'd had no issues in the past three years. It is stable. 

I'd rate the scalability ten out of ten. It's excellent.

We have the maximum license, and we do not plan to increase usage as we do not have plans to increase our workforce. 

Techncial su[port is excelelnt. It's one of the best companies offering support right now. 

The initial setup is straightforward. It's pretty easy. It's not complex. 

We have witnessed an ROI while using the solution. 

The pricing is very competitive. It is not overly expensive. 

We have the solution implemented in our firm. 

New users need to understand the technical aspects of the product in order to take full advantage.

I'd rate the solution ten out of ten. 

We use Appian for a variety of processes in our large company. We use it for some financial processes, such as approvals.

Appian had definitely improved the productivity, and functionality of our company.

It is really simple to create a new app, and I like the data-centric aspect of the BPM tool.

In terms of what could be improved, there is nothing worth mentioning.

I have been using Appian for one year.

We are using the second most recent version.

We use the Appian managed cloud.

The performance is pretty good, but the distortions need to be optimized in order for it to work well.

I have not yet experienced the requirement for scalability.

We have 100 people in our company who use this solution.

We use this solution widely throughout the company. As I am new to the company, I cannot say whether we will increase or decrease our usage.

Technical support is good. They are responsive and were able to resolve my issues.

I would rate the technical support a five out of five.

Previously, I used IBM BPM, on a limited scale. I am not able to make a comparison.

The initial setup was straightforward. It was easy even for a developer.

The development itself can take a month or two to deploy.

We have 10 to 20 people to maintain this solution in our organization.

We used a third-party reseller and a consultant because we are a large company.

I am not aware of the licensing cost. It is handled by someone else.

It is fully managed, and I don't believe there are any additional expenses.

It's a good, solution, that is easy to use. If you are a large corporation, go for it.

I would rate Appian a nine out of ten.

Our organization uses Appian for content management for our documentation. We are also using the solution for endpoint authentication in our clinic for clinical trials. In terms of banking, we use Appian for contract and access management.

Over the past 13 years, we have implemented Appian for 53 customers.

Appian is easy to install and set up, and it does not come out with your audit. It has accessible process orchestration and process management. With Appian, the time to market is much faster.

We are anticipating a few improvements from Appian. The product competes well with peer platforms, however, when you compare past that scale, there is room for improvement.

I would like to see more features for enterprises. They would also benefit from adding documentation and training on their site. 

I have been working with Appian for 13 years.

Appian is stable because it is on the cloud and it has options, actions, and latency. 

The solution is scalable when compared with the support of the infrastructure. It has proven to be scalable as far as the authentication time has been procured.

Technical support with Appian is good, however there is room for improvement.

Positive

The initial setup is straightforward. When compared with other solutions, Appian is much faster. It is easy to install. It is simple to transfer from the cloud, allowing you to get started immediately with the solution.

The process took us two days. If someone were implementing on-premises, it may take longer.

The licensing of Appian is less expensive when compared to other BPMs in the market. 

Appian is a good solution if you are going to implement BPM or automation into your organization. It can work on a small scale and scale larger afterward. 

I would rate Appian an eight and a half out of ten overall.

Our client, a telecom company, has use cases related to the telecom domain, and it's around workflow management kinds of use.

Their workflow, which can be easily built into a BPM, is one of the best features.

The development time for Appian is far less than high code languages, like .NET, Java, or some other languages. 

We delivered the first application within 12 weeks, and that was a really big project. If we went with some high code tools, definitely it should have taken more than 15 or 18 sprints, and every estimate, in that case, would be a two-week sprint. It took only around 40% of the typical development time.

The initial setup is easy.

It's very stable.

You can scale the product well.

We have a partnership with Appian. We have worked with Appian to deal with issues. They have already incorporated many things into their platform. One of the things we have discussed, which I can highlight, is related to Excel manipulations. They have incorporated their Excel manipulations so it's far better than the earlier version. Earlier, we had to go with a plugin for even a simple Excel or spreadsheet calculation. Now, they have included all those things in their own out-of-the-box functionality.

It's definitely a tool and does not require high code language. There could be a scope of enhancement for capturing the variety of use cases. One thing, for example, is Excel manipulation, which they now provide in their out of box functionality, however, that can still be improved. 

It's a stable solution. It's reliable. There are no bugs or glitches and it doesn't crash or freeze. 

We have a good number of developers in our company. We have around 75 Appian developers, and overall, if we talk about the Appian's practice, it's around 100 people.

We are dealing with a couple of different Canadian clients.

It can scale quite well.

Technical support is helpful. Their SLA is very good. IIf your system, your cloud, is down, which normally does not happen, however, in some cases where, due to some heap memory or some other kind of things, they can assist. I just faced one or two instances in the last three years where their servers dropped due to the heap problem. They responded within their SLA, two hours, however, usually, they fix those types of things in 20 to 30 minutes.

Usually, what we use, is Appian Cloud. That's provided (or set up) by Appian itself. If we talk about the Appian deployment from the lower environment to the upper environment, from the development perspective, and developer perspective, it's very quick. They have in-built DevOps, so it's a one-click deployment from the lower version to the upper version.

Appian helps with the implementation setup.

I'm nearer to the technical side, so I don't deal with the pricing. In general, it's not an expensive product. We can say it's an affordable product. I can't say it was expensive. It depends on what the usage is, however. If you are using Appian where it's not required, definitely you will feel like it's expensive, however, if you are using Appian on a fuller scale, then definitely you will not feel like it's an expensive product.

We would recommend this product to others. 

From a low code BPM platform, I would rate the solution around nine out of ten.