We performed a comparison between Appian and IBM Case Foundation based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Business Process Management (BPM) solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."Technical support is helpful."
"The setup is easy."
"With low-code, we don't need a lot of coding, and then from the plumbing perspective, there is a complete CI/CD pipeline that exists within Appian that can be leveraged for open deployment."
"It has very flexible adaptation and the ability to save and automate processes."
"There is a version coming out every six months with performance improvements."
"It's heavy on business processing in terms of logic, process workflows, and primarily on the process design modeler. Appian is really great at that. In terms of the full stack set from a low-code platform perspective, it's definitely an eye opener since it can be deployed via mobile app and on the web as well."
"Process Modeling enables creation of business process workflows. You can create complex business workflows in a visual manner, and it is also easy to debug/monitor."
"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 most valuable feature is its stability, which is why we are using it."
"A valuable feature includes seamless integration with the document management system, along with robust capabilities in analytics and reporting."
"The client and the IBM content navigation are the solution's most valuable features."
"The most valuable feature is the content manager part of the file as it is very stable, robust, and reliable."
"It's very easy."
"It is easy to set up workflows that notify the user depending on certain events."
"Flexible and the ability to divide search screens, and to search for documents. The ECM feature inside the system is great."
"The content management is great."
"Something I would like to see improved is an SQL database connection."
"Appian has a few areas for improvement, which my organization raised with the Appian team. One is the Excel output which is limited to fifty columns when it should be up to two hundred or three hundred columns."
"We'd like improved functionality for testing new devices."
"Appian could include other applications that we could reuse for other customers, CRM for example."
"What could be improved is more on the front end perspective, like the user interface and the mobile application aspect."
"The ability of the interface to load automatic data is not great."
"I would like to see more complete university tools. For example, with UiPath, I have had a good experience related to a free course in order to provide some users some different levels of knowledge. This extra training helps users not only use the solution but to develop further within the tool."
"There are four areas I believe Appian could improve in. The first is a seamless contact center integration. Appian does not have a contact center feature. The second is advanced features in RPA. The third would be chatbot and email bot integration—while Appian comes with chatbot and email bot, it's not as mature as it should be, compared to the competition. The fourth area would be next best action, since there is not much of this sort of feature in Appian. These are all features which competitors' products have, and in a mature manner, whereas Appian lacks on these four areas. I see customers who are moving from Appian to Pega because these features are not in Appian."
"The solution can be quite expensive."
"IBM needs to update the user interfaces of all its products to make them more intuitive and accessible to beginners. Compared to Microsoft products, IBM solutions are less user-friendly. IBM programs are hard to master. It's a problem in my region because it's hard to find IT staff who can work with IBM."
"90% of the feedback we receive states that the UI is not very user-friendly."
"There are some features that could be enhanced like the document viewer"
"The service as it currently stands is out-of-date and lacks flexibility."
"The place of improvement is merging or combining all of the workflow functionality into one seamless tool. Now, there are multiple installations that are different. Case Foundation, before you can put Case Manager and you've got IBM BPM, and the roadmap is there to merge them altogether. But that's the struggle at the moment, it's having multiple installations and disparate workflow applications."
"Comparing the solution with other interfaces, IBM BPM is much better than Case Foundation. They need to make this solution's interface more user-friendly."
"The cloud version could use more stability."
Appian is ranked 4th in Business Process Management (BPM) with 56 reviews while IBM Case Foundation is ranked 22nd in Business Process Management (BPM) with 12 reviews. Appian is rated 8.4, while IBM Case Foundation is rated 7.8. The top reviewer of Appian writes "Low resource consumption, easy setup, and stable". On the other hand, the top reviewer of IBM Case Foundation writes "Streamlined business process automation with user-friendly design". Appian is most compared with Microsoft Power Apps, OutSystems, Camunda, ServiceNow and Pega BPM, whereas IBM Case Foundation is most compared with IBM Business Automation Workflow. See our Appian vs. IBM Case Foundation report.
See our list of best Business Process Management (BPM) vendors.
We monitor all Business Process Management (BPM) reviews to prevent fraudulent reviews and keep review quality high. We do not post reviews by company employees or direct competitors. We validate each review for authenticity via cross-reference with LinkedIn, and personal follow-up with the reviewer when necessary.
