We performed a comparison between IBM BPM 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."One thing that I love about them is that they make it easier to integrate with other systems, especially with the use of smaller files."
"I like the APIs and the BPM coach is a good tool. But if I had to pick one, it would be the API."
"IBM's deployment box is one huge black box. We can create all the services with our own code or without a codebase, however, we have a huge amount of space with practically no limitation."
"The designer feature, compared to other solutions is easy to use."
"There is a component of this BPM pool - I can't recall the name. What it does is, it allows you to create various scenarios and then run them quickly, before actually putting them onto a tool. So I think that part of the tool is really fantastic, because that enables you to create scenarios, create simulations, before actually going out and putting it into the tool itself"
"Initially, the process architecture studio was very helpful and it was compliant with BPMN standards."
"It has an elaborated way to explore the IBM BPM processes."
"It continues to keep up with the changing needs of the business. That is the strong value proposition of BPM. It's not a one-time automation."
"The content management is great."
"Flexible and the ability to divide search screens, and to search for documents. The ECM feature inside the system is great."
"It provides us the capability of producing business processes for documents that are launched immediately when a document comes into the repository."
"It's very easy."
"It is easy to set up workflows that notify the user depending on certain events."
"The most valuable features are those involving decision making, analysis, and anything related to event documents because those processes are related to content as well."
"A valuable feature includes seamless integration with the document management system, along with robust capabilities in analytics and reporting."
"The most valuable feature is the content manager part of the file as it is very stable, robust, and reliable."
"This is technology, and there's always room for improvement. It would be better to have a single solution. Trying to have an overview in terms of this solution brings together the concepts of BPM processes, customer journeys, and an automation part for KPIs. All of this working together and coming up with a single solution with privacy is more commercial than anything else."
"The user experience, while it has improved, should continue to improve."
"Integration with web services, especially in the standard version of the product."
"IBM BPM uses JavaScript as a programming language for the server-side. I don’t know why it’s not Java, as it’s more powerful and the JavaScript part is translated into Java anyway."
"Performance in the development environment space. I know that they have been taking it off the desktop version and putting on the web, and it is not 100% yet."
"I would like to see a lot more case studies."
"Except for the Lucene the index - we had a couple of issues in the Process Portal where the Lucene index went out of sync, and we had to work at least 15 - 20 hours to have it back in sync with the database."
"It's a bit technical, related to the instance of migrations. It's a tough thing to handle, in every new release, in every upgrade, that we have to do things in the applications or in the product. I think IBM is working on it but I know there are a lot of requests coming in from different organizations on this."
"There is a need for more open and flexible integration capabilities, allowing seamless collaboration with a broader spectrum of business process management solutions, beyond the confines of IBM's document management offerings."
"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."
"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."
"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."
"We are now using microservices but there are some areas where the coordination with FileNet is problematic."
"90% of the feedback we receive states that the UI is not very user-friendly."
"The service as it currently stands is out-of-date and lacks flexibility."
"Once a workflow is launched then it stays static forever, which is a problem because if there is a change in the business then you cannot change the workflow."
IBM BPM is ranked 6th in Business Process Management (BPM) with 105 reviews while IBM Case Foundation is ranked 22nd in Business Process Management (BPM) with 12 reviews. IBM BPM is rated 7.8, while IBM Case Foundation is rated 7.8. The top reviewer of IBM BPM writes "Offers good case management and its integration with process design but there's a learning curve". On the other hand, the top reviewer of IBM Case Foundation writes "Streamlined business process automation with user-friendly design". IBM BPM is most compared with Camunda, IBM Business Automation Workflow, Pega BPM, Appian and Apache Airflow, whereas IBM Case Foundation is most compared with IBM Business Automation Workflow. See our IBM BPM 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.