Hyland OnBase vs ServiceNow Orchestration comparison

"Hyland OnBase has drastically improved our business processes and made everyone's jobs easier."

"Hyland OnBase is valued for its security, especially for those in the finance domain who require data confidentiality."

"With Hyland OnBase, every document is unique, and access can be restricted and audited depending on user permission, allowing a company to take control of their information and be more productive."

"This solution is easy to implement and easy to use as long as you know what your business requirement are or the specifications are straightforward."

"The product's initial setup phase is not difficult."

"The solution is very developed and we are not taking full advantage of its functionalities."

"The solution's most valuable features are integration and flexibility."

"I like the flexibility and its modular nature that allows us to create solutions that meet our business needs."

"I use it to orchestrate processes and integration features to gather and update data during specified timeframes or exchange data in real-time when changes occur based on certain criteria."

"The automation ServiceNow has provided saves us a lot of time and resources."

"The data visualization is good."

"It's probably the best product out there."

"It's scalable."

"Employee onboarding, de-boarding, and other service-provision features make the process easier and it saves us a lot of time."

"Employee onboarding, de-boarding, and other service-provision features make the process easier and it saves us a lot of time."

"It's scalable."

"Software malfunctioning usually occurs when we receive documents from external sources."

"For user experience, they would have to do more with the interface. It is not easy to work with and is a little messy. It is getting better, but it is not yet good enough. Other products are comparatively doing better in terms of the user interface. I have been hearing about Box, which is very easy to use and learn for the users. OnBase has to work on this aspect. It should have BPM capabilities. We compete with tools that provide the BPM feature and support those standards. They can do better in terms of the pricing model. It is a really expensive tool in Latin America. They should have different prices for different regions."

"We are struggling with duplicates and would like to have OCR functionality when using this solution."

"An area for improvement would be the training - getting our people up to speed on how to use it required more training than we expected due to the complexity of the solution."

"Hyland OnBase can be improved by reducing the many different applications that need to be used when being an administrator for this product."

"For user experience, they would have to do more with the interface. It is not easy to work with and is a little messy."

"The look and feel could be better. The integration with the user could be better. It could also be more user-friendly."

"As the system grows in terms of number of modules, features, and functionality, options can be confusing and they can conflict with other options that you enable."

"We cannot perform GUI automation using the tool."

"If I compare the interface of ServiceNow Orchestration with Boomi, it is easier to use Boomi than ServiceNow Orchestration."

"There should be connectors to cover at least the top industry applications, and they should be easier to configure in a plug-and-play fashion."

"The only challenge I see is it requires a lot of technical expertise to implement these tools and modules and all those things."

"If I compare the interface of ServiceNow Orchestration with Boomi, it is easier to use Boomi than ServiceNow Orchestration."

"We had a few use cases where we couldn't find solutions in Orchestration and had to go with the publishers to solve them."

"If I compare the interface of ServiceNow Orchestration with Boomi, it is easier to use Boomi than ServiceNow Orchestration."

"It is a highly complex platform to work on."

"The tool's price is high."

"OnBase is reasonably priced."

"The solution costs around $6,000 per month."

"They can do better in terms of the pricing model. It is a really expensive tool in Latin America. They should have different prices for different regions."

"There are a number of different types of licenses. There are concurrent licenses, individual licenses and imaging licenses."

"In terms of price, this solution is at the higher end of what you'll find."

"It is quite expensive because we've had some customers come back and say it's quite pricey because in order for them to go ahead with Orchestration, they must have already been paying for Discovery, service mapping, and a few other things."

"It is not very expensive."

"The cost of the solution is based on the number of plugins, conductors and integrations used and is charged annually. The licensing cause has been increasing gradually which makes it difficult to access. Initially offer free features but over the time the charges rise which make it an expensive solution with limited features. Along with that, the integration issues persist and require additional middle where and internet connectivity for effective usage."

"ServiceNow doesn't give a clear cost indication. They have different contracts with different organizations and it's all about negotiation, so you don't know how they are doing at the cost level."

"This is an expensive product, but it is the best in the market considering the features and lack of competitors."

"Pricing is custom to every customer."

"The solution is costly and orchestrations are very expensive."