We performed a comparison between IBM BPM and OpenText MBPM 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."This product does the job in terms of executing the workflow."
"It provides value and simplifies processes."
"Initially, the process architecture studio was very helpful and it was compliant with BPMN standards."
"Integration is a big plus for me."
"I liked its robustness the most. It was a very robust platform in my experience. It seemed like a very stable and powerful tool for handling lots of concurrent users and hammering at the system."
"The solution is stable."
"It has reduced a lot of manual errors and processes."
"The functionality to design UI to be responsive and can run on multiple devices."
"Not just the solution's automation capabilities, but we like everything about it since we are more of a system integrator."
"Performance on large scale requirements could also be improved."
"The initial setup was complex. It is not always easy to launch a new platform and it needed better coordination with IBM."
"We are a government organization, and we are the largest government power sector in India. We generate around 30% of power in India. Therefore, our processes are quite complex. Although IBM BPM is a low-code or no-code software, if you want to have extremely complex workflows, just the business process diagrams are not helpful in creating those workflows. While implementing complex workflows, only the process flow diagrams did not help us. We had to write a lot of Java scripts and Java queries to achieve what we wanted. Its integration capabilities with the SAP environment have to be improved. At present, we are only talking at the web services environment level. Its price also needs to be improved. It is currently expensive. Previously, Active Directory required a heterogeneous environment, but now they want a homogeneous environment. We had onboarded employees through Microsoft Active Directory, and now I have to implement Microsoft AD only from the cloud for my vendors."
"Better integration with other products in the automation suite."
"We thought there might have been a little more discussion early on about, "Hey, if you're doing this, set it up this way," or some best practices or some guidance that we didn't get."
"You must have good experience to work with it. It is not that easy. Its installation is complex, especially in the new version for business automation, and it could be improved. It has a safety application embedded inside it, and you need to do a lot of configuration to install it. I have been working for two days to resolve an issue."
"We need process monitoring. It is somewhat complex to monitor all the processes which work."
"We would like better performance and more visibility on each step of the tool."
"The user interface could be better in OpenText MBPM."
"There are shortcomings in the solution's support and documentation part."
IBM BPM is ranked 5th in Business Process Management (BPM) with 105 reviews while OpenText MBPM is ranked 41st in Business Process Management (BPM) with 2 reviews. IBM BPM is rated 7.8, while OpenText MBPM is rated 7.0. 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 OpenText MBPM writes " A solution offering good automation capabilities while needing to improve its support and documentation". IBM BPM is most compared with Camunda, Pega BPM, Appian, IBM Business Automation Workflow and Apache Airflow, whereas OpenText MBPM is most compared with Camunda. See our IBM BPM vs. OpenText MBPM 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.
