Hyland OnBase vs ServiceNow Orchestration comparison

"The retention module is one of the most valuable features. Whatever we scan onto the system can be identified and we are notified when the records are due to be disposed."

"It provided data security features, allowing restrictions on sensitive documents, such as who could view or modify them."

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

"The most valuable features are that it's very secure and provides audit trails for our documents."

"Integrating Hyland OnBase with our systems enabled us to automate document designs and templates, which was extremely helpful in the finance and banking industry."

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

"I like the cloud and its integrability."

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

"The solution effectively automates business processes."

"It is a very stable product, highly affordable."

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

"It's scalable."

"The data visualization is good."

"Provisioning of new systems is among the most impactful features for automating complex workflows with ServiceNow Orchestration."

"The interface of the solution is very user friendly and it is easily accessible via a simple URL. This makes it easier to complete the UI based tasks but using other features require expertise in languages like Java. But along with that, there are limitation in terms of network connectivity testing and administrator faces regular challenges in conducting connectivity tests due to these limitations."

"The iTerm suite is also crucial for visibility and optimization."

"We need to troubleshoot why our reports didn't get downloaded in a day. There is a workflow feature which powerful but also complicated."

"I find OnBase's monolithic architecture to be expensive, and adopting microservices could be beneficial."

"The application could potentially be more open-source, allowing integration with more solutions."

"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."

"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."

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

"The migration is a bit difficult in the tool."

"There is still room for more integrations. Or, it would be nice to bundle multiple products together rather than selling everything as a model as that turns out to be a bit costly."

"The third-party integrations are challenging when the tools are not from ServiceNow partners. This presents issues when integrating solutions from other vendors."

"I would like a user experience module to be added."

"The deployment requires awareness among the project staff."

"The automatic remediation needs enhancement, particularly integrating ServiceNow with tools like SolarWinds and Logic Monitor. It is functional, but it needs improvement."

"We cannot perform GUI automation using the tool."

"ServiceNow Orchestration needs to improve multiple aspects in which their event monitoring system is one. The solution lacks event monitoring systems which makes them non-competitive. They need to include improvements in a similar manner that they did in Sweden."

"Efficiency of some features could be improved."

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

"OnBase is reasonably priced."

"The tool's price is high."

"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."

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

"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."

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

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

"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."

"It is not very expensive."

"Pricing is custom to every customer."

"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."