Try our new research platform with insights from 80,000+ expert users

OpenText ProVision vs TIBCO iProcess Suite comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive SummaryUpdated on Dec 18, 2024

Review summaries and opinions

We asked business professionals to review the solutions they use. Here are some excerpts of what they said:
 

Categories and Ranking

OpenText ProVision
Ranking in Business Process Management (BPM)
45th
Average Rating
6.4
Reviews Sentiment
7.2
Number of Reviews
3
Ranking in other categories
Enterprise Architecture Management (28th)
TIBCO iProcess Suite
Ranking in Business Process Management (BPM)
40th
Average Rating
8.0
Reviews Sentiment
6.5
Number of Reviews
2
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
 

Mindshare comparison

As of January 2026, in the Business Process Management (BPM) category, the mindshare of OpenText ProVision is 0.6%, up from 0.2% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of TIBCO iProcess Suite is 0.8%, up from 0.3% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Business Process Management (BPM) Market Share Distribution
ProductMarket Share (%)
TIBCO iProcess Suite0.8%
OpenText ProVision0.6%
Other98.6%
Business Process Management (BPM)
 

Featured Reviews

reviewer1944672 - PeerSpot reviewer
Senior Director, Head of Process & Functional Architecture, Intelligent Automation at a real estate/law firm with 10,001+ employees
Good attribute attachment but problems with collaboration
I primarily use OpenText ProVision to create our end-to-end process repository and library for different parts of the organization, capturing the collaboration process to get the right inputs OpenText ProVision's best feature is the capability to attach a variety of attributes and extract and…
SA
Senior Software Development Team Leader at sejel
An easy-to-use solution with great integration
It involves a lot of investment. The learning curve is not similar to other products, like K2. Regarding the user interface, I have to access workflows and define and manage the processes on the variant of a Windows application, which is not accessible if you don't have access from the client to install it on the workstation. And most of the solutions we're currently evaluating are web-based. Our customers and developers have complained that the UI is a little bit confusing. It has lots of elements. It's not user-intuitive compared to other products. Other than that, the licensing model is our main concern.

Quotes from Members

We asked business professionals to review the solutions they use. Here are some excerpts of what they said:
 

Pros

"The stability of the product is very good."
"OpenText ProVision's best feature is the capability to attach a variety of attributes and extract and analyze that information."
"All the features come as part of a standard license."
"It's very simple to use and the integration features between Java and other services within the workflow are very easy."
 

Cons

"Integrating with or interfacing with other tools like data management tools would be very helpful."
"OpenText ProVision's collaboration management is quite complicated and difficult to use."
"Lacks the ability to have your own in-house developments."
"Our customers and developers have complained that the UI is a little bit confusing."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

Information not available
"The price could definitely be lower."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Business Process Management (BPM) solutions are best for your needs.
881,114 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Also Known As

Metastorm ProVision
iProcess Suite
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Delta Technology, Export Development Canada, Rompetrol, Salt River Project, AMEC, U.S. Air Force, HP Consulting & Integration
Delta Air Lines, Detroit Water and Sewerage, DVLA, E-Plus, FedEx, Geisinger Health System, ING Turkey, Kempen & Co., KPN, LCL, Merck, Merial
Find out what your peers are saying about OpenText ProVision vs. TIBCO iProcess Suite and other solutions. Updated: December 2025.
881,114 professionals have used our research since 2012.