Appian Reviews

I work for the largest distributor of Toyota Lexus in the Middle East. My area is related to car motors. I'm an IT senior general manager and we are customers of Appian. 

The workflow engines are a valuable feature. We use them to bridge the gaps of processes within our core systems that are either too difficult or too costly to develop within the core system. We bridge those gaps using Appian. 

We'd like to see the employee experience improved, something we can integrate with SharePoint. Right now we're looking at the Power BI which belongs to Microsoft. It has a lot of good features for low-code no-code development kinds of things. I'd like to see the ability of the software itself to integrate with the core systems. It's a gap that Appian hasn't fulfilled. 

I'd like to see integration with Microsoft products as an additional feature. Microsoft Team, or something like that. It's not there or if it is, it requires some work to enable easy integration with SharePoint. 

I've been using this solution for eight years. 

The scalability and stability of this solution are good. 

I'd say that the technical support is good. 

We visited the workflows that are provided within SharePoint but they did not fulfill the kind of things that we were looking for, or the problems that we were trying to solve at that point of time. We were planning to work on specific domains, specific areas, but you cannot make it work for complex things. 

The setup is not completely straightforward but not too complex either. The deployment itself wasn't too difficult, but this is something where features evolve and the things within it over time start moving. Adapting to any new feature while continuing to work is not simple. It makes things more complex. There are around 5,000 people using the product and we have five people dealing with maintenance. 

The price should be lower. It's not too expensive but I believe the price could be better. 

The product needs to be supported by top management for it to work. This is one of the things that we faced at the very beginning. Second, from a technical point of view, you need to have a dedicated team taking care of this from a product management point of view, not necessarily from a technical point of view because that can be outsourced. I recommend not doing the development in-house, rather to outsource it with one or two partners and the corporate team. I recommend going for the full cloud-based solution architecture rather than having part of it inside and part of it outside. If there is no issue with data sharing then I would recommend going for a fully cloud-based solution. It gives an advantage and reduces a lot of management headaches. 

I would rate this solution a nine out of 10. 

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. 

I mainly use Appian for end-to-end process automation.

We use appian for IT services implementations of our esteemed clientele in CX transformation, process automation ,EX transformation and app modernization areas

Appian's most valuable feature is that we can create end-to-end process cloud ntive  workflows with minimum turnaround.

Appian could be be further improved by making it a strict, no-code platform with in-built process packs.

I've been using Appian for six years.

Appian is stable.

Appian is scalable.

Appian's technical support could improve, especially their response turnaround.

Positive

used multiple options. Since i represent  product agnostic  IT services organization, cant comment furthur on this

The initial setup was relatively straightforward, and deployment took around an hour.

NA

first year itself break even happened.

no

Anybody thinking of implementing Appian should have an enterprise-wide roadmap. If you're doing an enterprise-wide digital transformation, Appian is worthwhile, but not for just one or two use cases because the license costs are higher. I would rate Appian as nine out of ten.

They are different zones because we have customers spread across various industries. It's spread across BFSI, manufacturing, and retail. The use cases are multifold. Appian is a solution more for finding solutions within the businesses, which are industry-specific, and business-specific. If it is retail, then we use Appian for onboarding solutions, customer onboarding, case management, and multiple.

Appian's most valuable features are the quick time it takes to develop for the market. It's easy and faster than other BPM solutions. 

I have been using Appian for more than 10 years.

I have found Appian to be stable.

Appian is a scalable solution.

We have premium support from Appian.

I rate the support of Appian a five out of five.

Positive

The initial setup of Appian is straightforward.

The number of people needed for the implementation depends upon the use case, the business area, type of customer, and type of engagement. It varies from a minimum of three to a ten-member team depending on the complexity of the project.

Appian has different models of licenses, such as enterprise-wide or user base. The price is less expensive when compared to other solutions and the various models are an advantage.

More flexibility in the licensing model is still needed because initially there were customers who are looking at only one or two use cases of business areas, but now the business areas are changing and there is a larger scope. One license model may not fit everyone. They need to be a little more flexible on the licensing model.

I would advise others there are multiple solutions in the market, low code solutions, BPM solutions, and case-finding solutions. There are multiple factors that make a good solution, such as ease to use, configuration, faster time to deploy, development and deploy scalability, and manageability. These are all factors that I would consider when purchasing a solution.

I rate Appian an eight out of ten.

We use this solution to provide us with real-time data on all connected systems — for a continuous process workflow.

Within our company, there are roughly 45 people using this solution — mostly developers. We have two admins that handle all maintenance-related issues.

Appian has enabled us tо аutоmаtе busіnеss рrосеssеs much faster sо thаt оur usеrs саn rерlісаtе thеm аnd use them on a daily basis to improve their productivity. 

The most important and the most notable feature is that it provides us with real-time data on all connected systems in terms of how they're integrated with each other and how they are performing in a workflow manner.

The graphical user interface could be easier to use. It should be simplified. When we're dealing with a large number of complex applications, the user interface is not the best. There could be a simpler design especially when it comes to providing a view on handling large users/user groups. 

I have been using Appian for two years.

This solution is very stable and robust. The updates definitely work. I've never had to roll back an update.

It works very well actually across systems. It can work across multiple complex systems, as well. There's no problem when it comes to scaling up and scaling out. Still, the interconnections, in terms of provisions of real-time data, can be a little clunky as the current graphical user interface has some issues.

The initial setup was fairly simple and straightforward. It's pretty much plug-and-play.

Deployment time depends on the environment and the use case. It can take anywhere from two weeks to six weeks.

When it comes to connecting multiple systems, Appian fares much better compared to Pega.

First, you have to understand the business logic behind all of your systems before you start developing and interconnecting the systems, and the process flows across the systems. That's the best advice I have.

Overall, on a scale from one to ten, I would give this solution a rating of eight.

In terms of the traffic, the user interface should be improved so that it provides real-time data for complex connections between systems. If that is improved, I would give this solution a higher rating. Otherwise, it's a very stable and very robust product.

Appian is basically for workflows and workflow approval.

In a banking scenario, suppose as a customer, I apply for a loan. That loan needs approval from a manager. In addition, I will need to provide documents like my Social Security, personal details, company details. There are levels of information that can be maintained in the back-end. If you are the manager you can check that I provided all this information and, based on the criteria, you can approve a loan of 300 or a loan of 400, all within the back-end.

An advantage of this tool is the area of workflows, mainly for back-end users. It is not for end-users.

Another advantage of this tool is its reports and records. You can maintain dashboards, layouts. If you with a Java solution, it takes six months time. If you use this tool, you can finish in one or one and a half months' time. It took us six and a half months time to develop a small application in Java, but within this tool, we developed it in one and a half months, including the records and reports.

Also, there is a version coming out every six months with performance improvements.

You can develop a back-end UI and back-end reports using this tool.

It needs a better UI. There has been a lot of development in version 18.1 but we still need more for it to compete with other BPM tools.

Stability depends on the development. If you do proper development the stability is okay. Whenever you are getting data from the database, you have to write more code rules, more views. It will take a long time. Going forward, you can have performance issues. Initially, it works fine, but going forward, you are hitting performance issues whenever you create the views to get the data from the database. That's what I found in my previous project.

I used Oracle BPM. I switched because, as a developer, the market was becoming completely saturated and I was not getting any jobs.

The setup is straightforward. No complaints, no issues.

I hear the price was hiked a little recently. Initially, it was low. But it's okay compared to Pega.

IBM has Business Process Manager, Oracle has its BPM as well.

If you are looking for back-end solutions, this tool is 100 percent a fit. So Appian BPM for the back-end and, if you want a front-end, I don't suggest using Appian BPM. The Appian back-end is only for internal users, not for end-users. For end-users, you can use Java.

Being able to model requirements in BPMN 2.0, get agreement from business and IT, and then have Appian BPMN 2.0 compliant engine execute the diagram. This has created executable requirements and speeds up the SDLC process greatly.

• Transparency of process flows, including number of instances of the process in-flight
• Identification of bottlenecks,
• Average time to completion of tasks and process, etc.

The employee onboarding process went from a mass email saying who is arriving for their first day, and just hoping all the things necessary got set up: phone, computer, badge, desk, login accounts, role specific access and accounts, etc. The Appian platform took from a blind mass email to full transparency with reporting, and greatly improved efficiency and effectiveness, as well as making continuous improvement possible.

Form creation and SAIL proprietary language still basically require programming. The claim a BA type can do everything is hogwash. They should be honest and say a developer is needed for web service integrations, etc. and complex forms; and a BA type can do the rest - requirements, architecture (collaborating with architects), design, process model, testing, deployment, and support. That is incredible powerful, but to say a developer is never needed is a lie.

Two years.

Very few.

No.

Poor. Very helpful at times and willing to go above and beyond, but very expensive, so overall poor.

Yes. IBM, Oracle, and Activiti open source. A different organization I was with selected Appian.

Complex: Data strategy and authorization to push data to the cloud was a big hurdle. How organizational data is going to be pushed to Appian, updated by Appian, and pushed back to the organization with or without approval steps needs to be planned and executed strategically.

It is expensive, but powerful. I would recommend comparing against cheaper licensing products and open source.

No.

Have 20% of a programmer as a resource, plan the round trip data integration, and get all approvals needed.

The solution is used to automate internal operations. We had industrial and equity-based financial clients.

The product improved our operational efficiency. The deployment takes one or two weeks. The rollout takes two to three weeks.

The solution’s turnaround time for development is better compared to other tools. The solution enables fast development. The traceability of the processor is good. There is much more governance and regulations on the processers. The tool reduces the time of the processes by 30% to 40%. The solution’s low-code aspect has greatly impacted the development and deployment speed.

One of the major reasons we are using the product is that we can reuse the modules. The developers can reuse all the modules. It enables us to make subsequent developments in less time. The prebuilt modules can be deployed within two to three weeks. The tool is very flexible. Compared to other platforms, the Appian product team was agile in quickly customizing things for us.

It is difficult to set up the on-premise version.

I used the solution for more than three years.

The solution is very stable. I've never faced any downtime. The response time is also great.

It is easy to scale up the product for a large number of users. We can scale up to 100 users within 20 to 30 minutes. I rate the scalability a nine out of ten. Our customers are enterprise businesses.

The technical support is not excellent, but it is good.

Positive

The initial setup of the cloud version is quite easy. I rate the ease of setup of the cloud tool a nine out of ten. It is difficult to set up the on-premise version. I rate the ease of setup of the on-premise tool a five or six out of ten.

The tool is quite costly. It's not affordable to the general public and most companies. People would prefer a low-cost version that comes with reduced functionalities. The solution would be more accessible to the users if the vendor provided it at half the cost. I rate the pricing eight and a half out of ten. The price is quite high.

I haven't faced challenges with new implementations. If an organization has a long-term goal of automation and wants to explore automation, Appian is a good choice. The product is quick, agile, and very robust. It provides everything we need. It's not like the other platforms where we have to buy multiple things on top of the actual product. It is a holistic automation tool. Overall, I rate the solution a nine out of ten.