We performed a comparison between SAP Signavio Process Manager and webMethods Integration Server based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Business Process Design solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."This product has helped us to work within standards for process planning."
"The most valuable feature for me is the collaboration point of view, where everybody has a single view, or source of truth, and everybody sees the same thing. Everyone can comment, contribute, and discuss the processes itself, which makes it easier to funnel down the most value adding comments and make the relevant changes to the processes. This leads to the next best iteration or version of your process."
"I like the collaboration and the real-time aspects of it."
"We can use workflow manager to create forms."
"Process Manager supports end-to-end transformation. Students can better understand end-to-end activity and processes as well as how they are run. For teaching, it's process discovery, then modeling, and finally optimization and simulation, partly. Typically, we showcase some simulation of the processes, and this is where we finish. That is why we validate that it's properly designed, but also what are the outcomes of modeled processes. There are also options for discussion on process optimization."
"I would say the collaboration features are very useful to us, because we are a European organization, so we are not in one location. This is an easy way to share with other people and ask them for feedback. That is the use case for us."
"The solution provides data mining and AI features."
"The most valuable feature for me is usability."
"The ease of mapping... is the single largest feature. It gives us the ability to craft anything. A lot of single-purpose technologies, like Mirth, are good for healthcare messages, but we use webMethods not only for healthcare messages but for other business-related purposes, like integrations to Salesforce or integrations to Office 365. It's multi-purpose nature is very strong."
"The most valuable feature of the webMethods Integration Server is the built-in monitoring, auditing, RETS, and SOAP services."
"Ease of implementation and flexibility to hold the business logic are the most valuable features."
"They are the building blocks of EAI in SAG products, and they offer a very good platform."
"The most valuable feature is stability."
"I feel comfortable using this product with its ease of building interfaces for developers. This is a better integration tool for integrating with various applications like Oracle, Salesforce, mainframes, etc. It works fine in the integration of legacy software as well."
"Application integrations are offered out-of-the-box, and that is extremely important to us. This is one of the main use cases that we have for it. It is about 60 to 70 percent of the workload in our application today."
"The comprehensiveness and depth of Integration Servers' connectors to packaged apps and custom apps is unlimited. They have a connector for everything. If they don't, you can build it yourself. Or oftentimes, if there is value for other customers as well, you can talk with webMethods about creating a new adapter for you."
"The product's pricing could be improved."
"There is room for improvement in the reporting function. At the moment, for example, while it is possible to report on how many users you had in the last month, you can't use it to tell you how many users you had from the first week to the second week. This is really a drawback because when you have an activity to promote Signavio or BPI, it would be good to be able to measure how many people you had in the system."
"It is difficult to quickly digest the vast power of the suite and make use of those capabilities fully."
"It would be beneficial to have a defined leveling or hierarchy system to facilitate better understanding and analysis. More openness and flexibility would enhance its capabilities."
"There are some small graphical bugs, but they are addressed immediately by Signavio to their product development team."
"It is not easy to learn the product."
"It could use a better user interface, one that is more efficient."
"Two executives cannot work on one modeling process simultaneously."
"There should be better logging, or a better dashboard, to allow you to see see the logs of the services."
"A while ago, they were hacked, and it took them a very long time to open their website again in order to download any service packs or any features. I don't know what they could do differently. I know that they were vulnerable, and there was some downtime, but because they were down, we were unable to download any potential service packs."
"The initial setup of the webMethods Integration Server is not easy but it gets easier once you know it. It is tiresome but not difficult."
"Other products have been using AI and cloud enhancements, but webMethods Integration Server is still lagging in that key area."
"The stability of the various modules of the product suite have been a bit of a concern lately. Though their support team is always easy to reach out to, I would prefer it not come to that."
"Version control is not very easy. The packages and the integration server are on Eclipse IDE, but you can't compare the code from the IDE. For example, if you are working on Java code, doing version control and deployment for a quick comparison between the code isn't easy. Some tools or plug-ins are there, such as CrossVista, and you can also play with an SVN server where you have to place your package, and from there, you can check, but you have to do that as a separate exercise. You can't do it from the IDE or webMethods server. You can't just right-click and upload your service."
"Forced migration from MessageBroker to Universal Messaging requires large scale reimplementation for JMS."
"The Software AG Designer could be more memory-efficient or CPU-efficient so that we can use it with middle-spec hardware."
More webMethods Integration Server Pricing and Cost Advice →
SAP Signavio Process Manager is ranked 6th in Business Process Design with 57 reviews while webMethods Integration Server is ranked 3rd in Enterprise Service Bus (ESB) with 60 reviews. SAP Signavio Process Manager is rated 8.2, while webMethods Integration Server is rated 8.0. The top reviewer of SAP Signavio Process Manager writes "Has many functionalities and is used to model processes to the former operating model". On the other hand, the top reviewer of webMethods Integration Server writes "Event-driven with lots of helpful formats, but minimal learning resources available". SAP Signavio Process Manager is most compared with Celonis, ARIS BPA, Camunda, Visio and ADONIS, whereas webMethods Integration Server is most compared with IBM Integration Bus, webMethods.io Integration, Mule ESB, TIBCO BusinessWorks and Boomi AtomSphere Integration. See our SAP Signavio Process Manager vs. webMethods Integration Server report.
We monitor all Business Process Design 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.
