Bizagi Reviews

We adopted Bizagi for an Agile project. We involved users by participating in whiteboarding sessions.

The user interface is very good, making it easy for business people to understand. The speed to deploy is efficient, making it easy to adopt. The toolset is intuitive, so we didn’t need their support much. It helped engage users in sessions effectively.

Governance is lacking, as with many easy-to-use tools. The scalability could be improved as well. For more mature environments, the integration to live systems is lacking, which affects its applicability.

In the last 12 months, I did not deal with Bizagi, but my experience with it is longer than that.

In terms of stability, it did the job for us.

If I rate scalability from one to ten, I would probably give it a six. It could be better with scaling.

They mostly offer online email support and do not have phone support. The toolset is very intuitive, so we didn’t need to contact their support much. I feel comfortable saying it is 'not applicable' because we didn't reach out for their support.

Neutral

Currently, my role involves using a tool from SAP.

The initial setup was easy and not too complex.

We provided it to all the architects and business analysts, and they used it in sessions with the business.

Bizagi's pricing is very aggressive, and it was one of the reasons we chose it. It was less expensive than some of the other tools.

In the last 12 months, I have not dealt with any tools besides Sparx. I have heard about others like Teradata a long time ago.

I would recommend Bizagi depending on the maturity of the organization. For those just starting, it's a good tool to get into business modeling. In more mature environments, I might not pick this toolset because it doesn't integrate with live systems well. Overall, I would rate Bizagi between eight to nine.

Basically, it is a kind of approval mechanism for financial budget reviews. Every year, each department of the functional unit verticals gets some budget. On top of the budget, they will submit the expenditure. All the expenditures will route to the right reviewers upon approval. It will be routed to the financial department for further clearance.

It is open source. That is the main advantage, and it does not require any kind of license. For small and mid-range requirements, we can go ahead with Bijacki. Compared to Bonita and Camunda, there are not many basic workflow orchestration modalities. That is their selling point. It is definitely a cost-saving and time-saving solution. It improves visibility and quality, and basically, it avoids human errors.

Definitely, right now, it is purely open source, and we don't have much community support. If they add a few more capabilities like AIML and DocGen AI, these features would be good. Reporting capabilities can be improved more, and community support should be increased. Otherwise, people cannot onboard that particular technology easily.

I have worked for two years on this particular Bizagi.

I don't see anything like that.

There is no direct scalability option. We can install the same, and using a load balancer, we can improve the scalability features.

I would rate it as an eight out of ten. It is a community product, there is not much support we can expect. Everything relies mostly on the community, user community, and freelancers who post improvements and all. We cannot expect major customer support.

Positive

Compared to Bonita and Camunda, there are not many basic workflow orchestration modalities. That is their selling point.

The setup is straightforward. There is no complexity in that. I can do it myself.

I would say it provides a 30% return on investment.

I can say it is a kind of Java platform. We can integrate with any kind of system using simple Java code. The overall product rating is nine out of ten.

Bizagi process automation platform has helped my company enhance operational efficiency, though I have only used it for developing process maps.

I am the only person using it in my company as far as I know. Other people create process maps using Excel or other tools.

Bizagi is very simple and easy to use, which I find most valuable. It allows users to create clean and neat process maps.

I have only used the platform for developing process maps rather than automation.

I have not explored ways Bizagi can be improved beyond creating maps. If I explore automation and integration with other processes, then I may be able to identify potential areas for improvement.

I would appreciate additional features for the free version. Currently, the elements in a process map are limited to activities, decisions, flows, and start/end points. The decision map could be improved to allow more than three options at a decision point.

The installation process was very short, involving registration followed by downloading and installing the software.

The updating process for Bizagi has been fine. The updates have not interrupted anything, and I have not observed any major changes in usage or functionality.

The initial setup for Bizagi was straightforward. The downloading and installation process was simple.

I have not integrated Bizagi with other enterprise systems in my environment. I use it exclusively on my machine.

I have not explored pricing for Bizagi because I am using the free version with limited features.

On a scale of 1-10, I rate Bizagi a 9.

I am a user of Bizagi and UiPath. I will continue using Bizagi just for process modeling and simulations. I have not integrated Bizagi with my existing systems such as CRM, ERP, or legacy databases because I use it as a standalone tool, so there is no integration with other software. At this time, I use Camunda, Bizagi, and Adonis, and regarding UiPath, I want to clarify that I am using them myself.

I have been generally satisfied with Bizagi because I'm quite satisfied with the free versions since I can model the process and simulate. It's not really good for process documentation because the diagram, when exported to pictures such as SVG or PNG files, the quality is not as good compared to Camunda. With Camunda, I can export in PNG or SVG, and the quality is good, especially if exported to Word or PDF or SharePoint.

The process modeling feature in Bizagi has helped in designing workflows tailored to my business needs because it's good for process modeling, but I think it's not really user-friendly because the interface is quite complicated compared to Camunda. It's similar to Excel for process modeling, with many buttons, tabs, and menus. For process simulations, it has very good features, as I can calculate or simulate the logic, and then the cost and time with Bizagi.

Bizagi is really helpful for us to justify a process improvement initiative because we can simulate a to-be process and see how much we can save time, save resources, and how a to-be or a new process can run in the correct logic based on BPMN modeling.

I would improve the interface in Bizagi, mainly because it's not really intuitive and responsive. At some occasions, it's lagging and not really good-looking. I expect that Bizagi will have more collaboration options with a more intuitive interface and web-based platforms in the future.

I have been using Bizagi for around two years.

It is easy to install Bizagi because I already have the files from older versions.

I am not planning to use the paid version for either Camunda or Bizagi in the future.

I am using the free version. I don't have an idea about Bizagi's real-time analytics and reporting capabilities because I just use the process modeler. On a scale of 1-10, I rate Bizagi an 8.

We automate some specific processes from HR, purchasing, investments, etc. I use Bizagi to develop the process documentation according to the VPN. We use the information provided to create automation in another tool, not Bizagi. We use this for modeling and documenting the whole process.

Bizagi is a natural VPN notation compliance tool. I could export my information to another vendor that uses another tool, and they wouldn't have problems importing it. I saw other products they were sending to me, and those products included some additional notations or damage that Bizagi could not read. The natural notation is the best feature of Bizagi because it makes it compatible with other products.

Bizagi's UI should include shorter steps for documenting controls, documenting properties, changing some attributes in the object, and adding additional text.

I have been using Bizagi for three years.

Bizagi is a very stable solution.

In my opinion, Bizagi is better than Sparx. The manner in which Spark operates is the same as ten years ago. Bizagi has evolved in terms of ease of use and adapting the tool. Bizagi is investing in a lot of new user experiences that Sparx is not using.

The solution’s initial setup was very easy.

The solution's deployment took less than an hour. We just launched the version. We saw that the environment was similar to other tools like Visual Studio from Microsoft or BlueWorks from IBM, and we started dropping boxes and connecting. It was very flexible and easy to understand, and we started documenting the whole thing.

Bizagi is totally free for modeling.

We are just focusing on modeling our processes. Initially, I was looking for a tool that allowed us to model and automate the processes. We had a conversation with the vendor, but Bizagi was not the tool for automating the processes because of some specific metrics in the company. Nowadays, we use Bizagi just for documentation. Bizagi is a very flexible and intuitive tool.

Overall, I rate the solution an eight out of ten.

I use the solution for process modeling of finance processes.

The visualizations and attachments provided by the product are valuable.

The product does not have third and fourth-level process modeling. We have to publish the same process level as the main process. Only then can we go to the next process.

I have been using the solution for two to three months.

The on-premise software has some bugs. We get signed out every time.

The tool is scalable. Around 100 people are using the solution in our organization.

We also use Visio and other Microsoft-based process modeling software. Bizagi stands out in terms of process modeling. Bizagi is also better in terms of the licensing cost.

Previously, we were using the on-premise solution. Our company has bought some licenses. So, we are using the cloud solution too. The initial setup was easy.

Adding a license is somewhat difficult. We were using a free version first. Then, we purchased a license. Implementing the license is difficult. The paid version costs us about $20,000 for 100 users annually.

People who want to use the solution must first use the free version. Overall, I rate the tool an eight out of ten.

I am a professor at a university. I work with people who have different engineering majors, like computers and electronics as well as master's for ICT management. Most of the time, we use tools like Bizagi, Lucidchart, and IBM Blueworks for modeling, 

Two types of students are using it:

1. The first type of student studies engineering. The degree is more technical, e.g., understanding of flows, BPM, and business process manager notation. I use it for teaching students how to understand icons, basic notation, and utilizing tools, or different roles when understanding the whole organization and how it works. This is more a technical understanding, e.g., teaching them a flow diagram.
2. For an ITC master's degree, post-degree, or something-related, I teach student more about strategy and how to save time: 
   1. optimizing time and resources
   2. modeling a better workflow
   3. modeling better flow for lean thinking
   4. using less documentation and only the documentation that you need
   5. using less technical resources as well as less time and fewer human resources to do the same thing between different departments or areas inside an organization. 

For the master's program, most of the time, it is about how the resources that are linked with the requisite technology are necessary and how, as an ITC manager, they will need to balance between needs, time, money, and all the expenses. For example, you can do this if you go farther than you need to when you model any process inside your organization.

96% of the time, I am just using the modeling part: thinking about a process, the options that I have in mind, or the options that reflect the needs for that organization. It doesn't matter if it is educational or real-world; modeling different scenarios for process roles and responsibilities, time, and communication tools; or when you add some tools and processes that are more complex inside one another. 

As a university, we have an organizational chart that is more like a public office. Then, we have a functional organization. This means that we have the technical and IT staff in one department, the human resources in another, and finance and quality are combined. Most of the time, decisions come from the financial and administrative staff. They were the first functional group working with Bizagi. 

After the pandemic situation, we had more staff and digital tools. I am a leader for the curriculum, proposing new ways and tools to teach. For a master's, that involves a whole line of courses related to the management process, automation, implementation, project management, and service management with IT 4.0. The entire modeling process is easier to integrate with transversal projects, which means that we connect tools and experience from different courses. 

We also sometimes document positive results. For example, in my class, you are explaining how different roles and responsibilities are related in one process for IT 4.0, which is the service management framework that IT uses for different environments that you can represent in the middle of the flow. This is in order to get the key performance indicators for other indexes or indicators for determining your model or reality, when you go from theory to practice, and how the practice is going versus strategy. Whether it involves another subject, other teachers, or another group of students connected with the knowledge, you get not just the theory but also the usefulness of the tool.

Most human beings are visual, thus understanding a fully complex process is harder. When you can represent a logical flow with a lot of variables, such as human resources, technical resources, and some specifications for the time of response that you need for every step, then it makes your planning, strategy, monitoring, and control easier after you run your strategy. It works for academic purposes, but it has also worked for our curriculum, communications, logical flow, and keeping track of the right plan and flow that you have to do. Then, for academic purposes and our administrative staff, it also works for reengineering and remodeling where it has been useful.

It can be useful, as a tool, to improve your communications and the control of your processes. For example, when you have to explain a process to seven or eight stakeholders who think differently as well as have different experiences in different functional departments, it is not easy. Sometimes you are using a lot of technical terms, and other times, you are dealing with management terminology. The visual representation helps you create a better alignment and understanding for different roles and stakeholders of your workforce.

Connecting stakeholders with processes has affected our operations a lot. For example, we have different providers. Some of them are private and some of them are from the public sector, e.g. Ministry of Education. They have different roles that watch our processes in order to get the high quality accreditation. When you need to document those processes, you can also use the solution's tools to help you better model your processes, communicate, and publish in different formats. It helps stakeholders, especially in the public sector, better understand the inputs, time, resources, and tools needed during your whole process. When they can understand better, you can request more time and funding by providing a better perspective about how everything is organized and planned. 

All the icons and toolbars are light. The graphical interface is easy to understand. It is close to the standard documentation for the international notations that we use. It makes the learning process faster for my students, but also for most people, it is the same.

The orchestration is one of the things that I enjoyed the most when I was using Bizagi modeling. It provides virtual representation for most of the things that you will need in real life. Then, when you need to explain, publish, export, and present your ideas to all stakeholders, it will match the vocabulary names, resources, and all the segments and parts that you arrange in the middle of your BPM. That is easier to understand for different levels and functions inside your organization because it is closer to reality.

The learning curve was faster than I was expecting since it has standard language in the graphical interface, e.g., the way that the icons and more technical things are there. So, it is well-aligned with international standards, which is a huge advantage. The learning curve is really short, at least for the modeling part. The technical part might be deeper. 

One part of the university has changed its regular desktops to Linux. This is a weak point because Bizagi doesn't run on Linux. I would like the opportunity to run the software inside of Linux.

I have been using it for eight or nine years.

Even a cloud solution is heavier. Whereas, my experience with Bizagi is that it is faster. For example, in Colombia, the country where I teach, the average bandwidth of the internet is not as it is in the US, Canada, or other countries where I was working with these kinds of tools. When you use the cloud, you need to optimize resources. With Bizagi, I haven't experienced lags, so I didn't think that I was losing time waiting for processes. Sometimes, within other tools, I need to wait or have to wait longer for exportation, like a simple PDF files exportation or maybe Exchange files to connect with other programs or other software. However, with Bizagi, the processes are lighter and faster.

We have more than 20,000 students inside of our university.

I enjoy the way that it looks because it is similar to a real-life scenario. For example, 10 years ago, I was working with a computer-aid design (CAD) system for engineering. The differences between digital representation and the real world were huge. Possibly with the parametric design from building information modeling in 3D, 4D, 5D, and now 6D, the gap is less. You can better represent different aspects, variables, and parts of reality.

I have also used IBM, Lucidchart, and Camuda tools. Some of these are available for a limited time trial, and others are available almost in full for academic institutions at a low cost. For example, Lucidchart has an agreement with Google Workspace inside of academic campuses. Every tool has its advantages and disadvantages. Bizagi is the tool that I use the most.

It is easy to install the desktop version.

When I got to the university, they were using different tools. One of those was Bizagi. I wasn't there when they were analyzing whether to start with Bizagi.

It shortens the time spent between ideas and the final deliverable, i.e., the final blueprint or visual results for your presentation. 

The learning curve is short. It makes your timeframe for launching a product or service better, giving you the chance to win when compared to your competitors. When you save time, you are saving on technical and human resources.

The modeling part of the software is free. Most of the time, it is used for this purpose. 

I think that we took a license. I have used the full version, but most of the time, I have been using the free version.

We checked out Bizagi, Camuda, diagrams.net, IBM Blueworks, and Lucidchart. 

In general, Bizagi is fast. If I compare it to the modeling part of IBM, IBM is heavier, possibly because they have more variables. Also, IBM is charging more.

You should consider the possibilities Bizagi offers in regards to communication, exportation, and importation. It gives you a general idea of how you can plan your workflow and integrate with different tools. This is one of the advantages that Bizagi has.

Most of the time, the people using Bizagi are technical. They are thinking about what the data model represents and the next stage, e.g., how the model connects with the data and data model. The solution provides a fine edge between graphical strategy, representation, and the big picture; and how we can think about time, resources, and the general picture.

I would rate the solution as eight out of 10.

My main use cases for Bizagi are IDP solutions, primarily, where the UI/UX is needed, and also BPMN process has to be clearly defined.

I have used Bizagi's Process Modeler feature, using the Modeler only while Studio is being created. We are using it for each and every process even though we are not developing something in Bizagi. If we are developing it in the Power Platform, we are still doing that process mapping within Modeler only.

There is a positive impact of Bizagi on my organization. A lot of customers are moving towards Bizagi. The only challenge I see is with the licensing cost, but apart from that, it is able to handle all the processes without any issues.

Bizagi has rich functionalities; compared to other BPMN tools, it has more features.

If the licensing cost can be optimized, that will be better so more developers or more companies can adopt Bizagi.

I haven't worked to the extent to see any additional features needed in the next release of Bizagi. Over a period, I might identify certain features that are needed and should be put in place.

I have been working with Bizagi just in the past two months.

I have not had any problems while integrating Bizagi with my existing enterprise systems such as CRM, ERP, and legacy databases.

The integration and implementation is seamless; there is no issue. Till now, I haven't observed any issue.

I previously used different solutions; I currently use the Power Platform and UiPath as well.

I have chosen Bizagi because it has better features than its competitors; it has its own database, its own AI agent in place for that purpose, and we can create a process mapping and just attach the forms and UI to generate a proper process.

It is expensive compared to other tools which I have in the market.

I don't think Bizagi is the best option on the market; it depends on the process. If we have the entire Robotic Process Automation that needs to be run, then UiPath is better. But in case we need to have the proper enterprise scale application that is required to develop, where UI is there and a proper BPMN needs to be there, then definitely Bizagi is the best solution.

I would definitely recommend it for bigger companies.

I rate Bizagi a four out of five because I have just started working right now and won't be able to give a higher rating yet.

Speaking about the use of Bizagi for process automation in our specific industry, I would say that we have not yet reached that level of automation, and for now, we are just using it for modeling and maybe for doing a few simulations.

Bizagi's integration capabilities have benefited our company's business processes in a smooth manner, but I can't describe it much.

The most valuable features of the solution are the process modeling part and process simulation.

The data in Excel that comes out after running the simulation is a bit complicated sometimes to interpret. It could be a bit easier just to give you an idea of the maximum time, minimum time, and average time since, currently, the tool does not offer so much granularity in the breakdown of time, work, or even the costs. The simulation could be a bit more easy.

I have been using Bizagi for seven years. I don't remember the version of the solution.

Around 100 people use the tool in my company.

My company used to use Microsoft Visio initially. As the transitions are usually gradual in nature, some people in my company still use Microsoft Visio, but the majority of them decided to learn how to use Bizagi. Compared to Visio, Bizagi's interface is good and futuristic, so it can help us with automation.

The product should offer its users the ability to link different models. In Visio, if you model a process in diagram one, then there is a connector that can take you to another model in case the specs aren't enough. In Bizagi, if you have first finished diagram one, then you open another page for diagram two, and then you have to keep going back and forth. If there is a way in which you can create a link, like when you finish one, it goes on to the next one, and it keeps linking automatically, then it would be good.

The product's implementation phase was easy.

The solution implementation process took a while to be completed.

I deployed the tool by myself.

With the product, my company is able to take care of business process modeling and also run some simulations.

My company uses the free version of the product. In our company, we are doing documentation and modeling. When we reach that point of automating the processes, then maybe we shall acquire the paid suite, which will be for automation.

Against Bizagi, my company evaluated the products from IBM. IBM wasn't user-friendly and was a bit complicated. Bizagi's UI is intuitive.

There were no issues with integrating the product within our company's existing infrastructure.

Not many people are required to maintain the product because my company has a team of about five people who help with the installation of the product on different laptops, and I have seen that it has not been given as an issue.

I am sure that the product will support my company if we take up some AI initiatives.

I would recommend the product to others.

I rate the tool a ten out of ten.

In most cases, I've been working with financial companies such as banks. Currently, our client is a bank. So, most of the processes we're developing are payments and support processes.

Its capability for integration and orchestration is huge. It supports a lot of languages. If Bizagi doesn't have specific native functionality, we can develop a component for Bizagi. It can integrate and orchestrate a lot of processes with other systems.

In my current project, we have just five or six processes, but in other projects, we have about 20 processes integrating with Bizagi. I know from a colleague that they have a hundred processes.

We are able to adapt processes we have created with Bizagi as our business grows and more processes are automated. That's a huge advantage of Bizagi. It can scale, and we can adapt a lot of processes. We can create new versions, and we can add functionalities, processes, activities, and integrations. It is very easy to adapt the processes we have created with Bizagi as our business grows.

It improved a lot of processes for one of the projects I have worked on. We were able to eliminate papers, translations, and a lot of other things that take a lot of time. Sometimes, we don't have to automate a big process. We can automate a tiny process, but the impact is so big.

It helps to connect stakeholders with processes. I've been working with different companies and users. It has a lot of functionalities focused on the stakeholders. In the case of the projects I've been working on, the stakeholders are continually working with the developers. They tell us their requirements, and in the life cycle of software, they participate in every step.

Most of the time, we get the benefits that we were expecting. We sometimes also have unexpected benefits. When the users get a new version of the process or new functionality, they feel great because they didn't expect that the tool could solve their problems.

It has reduced our time-to-market. It has saved a lot of time. For our processes, we have to create a lot of documents, print them, and get a lot of signs. That's the process of the company. With Bizagi, we could reduce that time by 50%. Previously, we were spending an hour printing, signing, and organizing the paper. With Bizagi automation, the process takes 10 minutes because we just have to click and fill in different fields. The time that we save is a lot.

It has reduced costs for the organization. The cost savings depend on the process. For one of the processes, the cost reduction was 150 million Colombian Pesos (COPS) per month.

It has freed up employees to do more valuable work. It has saved a lot of time spent doing manual activities. The time saved varies from process to process. For the payment process, the time was reduced from 30 days to 10 days.

Agility is most valuable because we can develop so much faster than other tools. We can make requirements, develop, and go out to production much faster. So, agility in the software cycle is most valuable.

Its integrations are good. In most cases, Bizagi is not the core of the company, and it has to integrate with other systems, which is easy. It has a lot of tools for integration. It has its own web services such as SOAP. Bizagi is so much easier to integrate because it exposes its own services, and it can consume web services from another system.

We have migrated to the cloud, but there are a lot of issues while integrating with the cloud. There are a lot of things to improve with the cloud and reporting. We were previously working with on-premise solutions, and we had access to a lot of things, but with the cloud, they changed a lot of functionalities. Some of the things we know, but with some of the things, we are having difficulties.

They have been working with apps. They have been launching new apps and widgets, but there are a lot of bugs in new functionalities, new widgets, and even new versions. That's an area where they need to improve.

I've been using Bizagi for nine years in different roles. In a company where I was working, they bought Bizagi, and I started as a user. After that, I became a developer, and now, I'm a functional and technical consultant.

The functionality we are using is somewhat stable, but when they have new functionalities, new widgets, or even a new version, they have a lot of bugs and it seems that the users are their QA team. We have to report a lot of things, but that's mostly in new versions. When we have a stable version, we don't have a lot of bugs, but when we want to try new things, there are a lot of bugs.

Scalability is a big advantage of Bizagi. It can be scaled. With the cloud version, they have to provide the infrastructure to scale our processes. When it was on-premises, the company had the responsibility to expand the infrastructure. In some cases, they didn't have the money, and it became difficult to operate.

Currently, we have three developers and two users to check that everything is okay with the process deployments. In total, we have five people.

It depends on the subscription. They have different levels of technical support. Sometimes, we create a ticket, and they take a week or a few days to respond. With the Gold subscription, they have an NSS, and they need to provide a solution quickly. Generally, their support is good. I would rate them an eight out of ten. 

Positive

We moved to Bizagi because the last solution was obsolete. We didn't have any support. So, we had to migrate a lot of processes to Bizagi. In another project, we were using Enterprise Risk Assessor (ERA), and we changed the process to Bizagi. We have a lot of processes in different solutions. We can migrate a few of them to Bizagi, but not all of them.

In my current organization, we also have a BPM tool from IBM. 

It is a cloud solution. It is easy because we don't manage the infrastructure. We just have to configure the environment. It was easy even in the on-premise version.

I handle the test deployments, but production is a different area. A user in the company does the deployment.

In the case of most processes that we automate or migrate to Bizagi, the return on investment has to be analyzed first. Before we automate a process, we have to specify that the return on investment is huge and that we can do it. With one of the processes, we saved a lot of paper. In one month, we could pay for the automation.

In the company where I am working currently, we use the free and the paid version. Bizagi Studio is free, and for production, there is a paid version.

When we were working with the on-premises solution, the licenses were a little bit expensive because we had to buy one by one a package of a hundred licenses, whereas now, we are working with the cloud solution, and it has a different cost. It's a different business model because we pay the license for the developers, but the cost is by the environment, and we have unlimited licenses. The business model is different now, but the benefit ratio is good.

In another company where I worked, they evaluated Bonitasoft and a few others.

I would recommend Bizagi because it's an excellent tool, but I would advise optimizing your processes before automating them. In my experience, a lot of companies automate the processes but don't optimize them before automating them. The advice is to follow the life cycle and optimize before automating because making changes after the automation would require a lot of work.

The initial deployment of processes was complex because we had a lot of integrations and huge processes. With most processes, the first deployment is complex. There are unexpected incidents. Sometimes, the data is not the same as the environment. We have to do a lot of settings with the integration certificates, and it takes a lot of time to make the environment work, but after that, the deployments are short and take about 30 minutes, but the first one is about five or six hours. We also have to test that the deployment is successful. The maintenance of processes/tools is an ongoing job. We are making a lot of improvements continually. We are maintaining the tools and updating them as per the necessity of the users.

I would rate it a nine out of ten.