We performed a comparison between Appian and WorkFusion based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Process Automation solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."Good workflow engines that bridge the gaps of processes."
"Process culture is making noise inside the organization because now, everybody knows that their time is being monitored."
"What I found most valuable in Appian is that it lets you drill down on multiple things through the structure of the reporting and UI side. It's also low-code, yet it results in quick deliverables."
"It reduces development time in half making us more efficient."
"The tech support is quite good."
"Even with an on-premise implementation, the scalability is still high, so it is easy to scale up."
"Recently, we added Appian Process Mining, Appian Portals, and now Appian RPA."
"Appian helps you do a lot of things. It's easy to configure and build an application platform, and it offers a lot of features that you find in an RPA solution. It's flexible so you can reuse it for a variety of use cases."
"We have been very pleased with the speed and decisiveness of WorkFusion, which is able to quickly provide a disposition note or escalate to a human for additional review."
"We need to analyze documents in order to understand them. We don't need to dedicate much time to this because WorkFusion's machine learning capabilities are very good. We can easily extract information and classify these documents. The document processing engine is very important to our organization because it is the center for many use cases, as we need to control the information contained in documents."
"We have seen Workfusion improve on accuracy and compliance... With the Workfusion model, we reduce human error and the need for further QC. We switch more to a QA process where we're testing whether the model is effective."
"If you compare it to its competitors in the market, it is more Java-native."
"The Control Tower enables us to create and use workflows. It helps us run processes. There are a lot of small features, but the Control Tower is a very good feature, wherein we can create bots and schedule them as well as create different instances of them to run in different regions."
"In terms of stability, it's quite good. It's an internal IP product."
"It takes care of simple tasks so users can focus more on exceptions than on regular use cases. They only focus on orders where they need to handle an exception, some information was not given, or there is an issue that they had to focus on. The rest of it goes straight through without human touch. We want to see our employees as engineers, wherein they think and solve problems, not necessarily have to do repetitive tasks. I think WorkFusion helps with avoiding repetitive tasks."
"The Robotic Desktop Automation Express component allows us to do rapid development outside the normal, time-consuming processes."
"There are some restrictions with respect to using external components within Appian. So, for example, if we do not have a particular feature available, there's a long cycle of getting approvals and all of that. That does not offer flexibility, which definitely can be improved on."
"We would like to have more granular control for interface styling."
"A point of improvement would be the SAIL forms. The built-in tool used to generate forms does not have debugging support (to view local variables as they change on live preview, and step-by-step valuation) which is a big drawback for form development. Moreover, the script language used to build SAIL forms does not support inheritance or lambda expressions (functions as arguments of other functions), which makes the code base more verbose."
"It would be nice if you could create your own customized apps when the business needed them."
"The tool itself is pretty good, but the main area that we struggled with was the backend. The frontend development is really good, but the backend modeling can be streamlined a little bit. There are good integrations, but tying them through the data layer and then up into the frontend could be improved a little bit. It does read/write on the data source, and you can configure it to just write or just read, but there is a little bit of work involved."
"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."
"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 biggest areas of improvement would be in facilitating team development, DevOps, and integration with typical tools used in enterprise development (Jenkins, Subversion, etc.)"
"There could be better version control through their web platform. That is something that could be improved on. Integration from the IDE, e.g., from WorkFusion Studio directly into Control Tower, would be nice to have too."
"It is difficult for non-technical users to use WorkFusion. If we really want to build automation, we definitely need Java developers. Their RPA is not for non-technical people. If I look at competing products, like Automation Anywhere, UiPath, Blue Prism, or even Power Automate, a non-technical person can build basic automations and deploy them. Since non-technical people can easily build basic automations, they can be deployed in no time. With WorkFusion, there isn't a similar feature that works well. One needs to write code from scratch to build automation. That is definitely a deterrent if we really want to do quick, dirty automation. I would not rate WorkFusion very high on their no-code, low-code paradigm. In this area, I would definitely expect them to improve."
"WorkFusion comes packed with certain libraries and .jars. At times, you understand that you're using a system in which a library or .jar is outdated and you need to upgrade it... They need to better manage quickly making changes in WorkFusion to accommodate a situation where other technologies are not supporting the platform."
"One thing we didn't like was their OCR solution. We felt it's somewhat inefficient."
"I would also like for it to be NLP-based."
"One of the issues that we are facing here in China, is that we cannot access the material for training because it is on YouTube. In China, we do not have access to YouTube."
"We have executed our robots thousands of times in our enterprise environment. However, in an enterprise environment, WorkFusion has performance problems. It is slow in production."
"We had some issues in the past, but it is fairly stable now. From what I hear, it is more stable in the later versions. With version 10.1.4, there were some issues relating to load distribution. However, it is good now."
Appian is ranked 3rd in Process Automation with 57 reviews while WorkFusion is ranked 14th in Process Automation with 30 reviews. Appian is rated 8.4, while WorkFusion 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 WorkFusion writes "Helps improve our accuracy and compliance, but the analytics module can be confusing". Appian is most compared with Microsoft Power Apps, OutSystems, Camunda, ServiceNow and Pega BPM, whereas WorkFusion is most compared with UiPath, Blue Prism, Automation Anywhere (AA), Microsoft Power Automate and ABBYY Vantage. See our Appian vs. WorkFusion report.
See our list of best Process Automation vendors.
We monitor all Process Automation 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.
