Control-M Reviews

Control-M is one of the scheduling tools where we can schedule the jobs overnight in contact center operations. I do not have any hands-on experience with Genesys Cloud CX. I have experience with Genesys on-premise. So far, I have not had an opportunity to work on the cloud. As of now, I'm working in one of the ANZ banks, which is located in Australia, where we are migrating from on-premise to cloud, and it is in progress. In the last quarter, they initiated the migration's first phase. It will take around two years to complete the migration. Until then, we are part of on-premise engage support.

With Control-M, I use it to automate jobs overnight. For example, if there is database purging, we will automate the job. We will set up the job in Control-M, and the job will initiate the process. Overnight, it will complete the process as per the schedule. To reduce manual work, we automate the scheduling jobs in Control-M. Not only in the database, there are a couple of Genesys jobs as well. CMI data processing and a few dialer jobs are placed on Control-M. This is for dialing processing to update the contact history data and calling list data. We will upload this data to the BH, and then to Control-M. Control-M will process the job as per the schedule, say eleven o'clock or eleven thirty. There are three schedules in the present environment. It will run automatically. If there is any patching on the Control-M servers or database servers on the end-user application side, we have to stop the applications and stop the job. Once the activity is completed, we will resume the jobs and reorder the jobs.

In my organization, Control-M is deployed on the cloud, and they recently migrated from on-premise to cloud. The console is the same, but where we are trying to access the application, we are using the CPC, the cloud environment variables. We try to launch the bank using Azure.

Control-M is one of the best solutions to automate jobs, and it should optimize manual work. It processes with the automation scripts, which helps the contact center operations run smoothly. That is the main purpose we use it for: following the schedule for callbacks and automating the scripts where it is necessary for the operations.

From my operations end, Control-M is worthy. I am not sure about the exact pricing, but it is very valuable. Control-M is the only asset where we can run all contact center operations for automating the scheduled jobs. There is a separate team that handles all the admin and maintenance processes. We are authorized only for our applications, our Genesys applications. We have restricted access where we can access our Genesys and nice jobs. For these two clusters, we have visibility to access the jobs, and we can manage them from our application end.

The positive impact I have seen from using Control-M so far is quality. It has smooth operations and scalability. Even though it is more optimized, optimization is a necessary requirement. The benefits would be to reduce manual efforts. It is flexible to operate technically and to understand the platform and solutions.

Control-M could be improved or enhanced in some areas. There are several optimization solutions out there, but Control-M is feasible. We can easily adapt and learn it. It is easy to operate in scheduling, operating, and monitoring, so it is easy to access. Even though the user interface is simple, it is very familiar to techies who can handle it. If we had complete control of the console, then we could deep-dive on the restricted access and have the specifications of restrictions. That way, we would gain more knowledge on it. As of now, it is user-friendly.

To improve the scalability, the user access controls are important. For the failover jobs, where we can see the output and the log section, there are a lot of redundancy events. We would appreciate it if they could improve event generation and optimize the log events to read the applications. If they update that, it would be great. Our market is different from the outside. Based on the initial integrations and commitments, they have been configured in such a way. Different organizations might be following different norms.

I have used Control-M for the last four years.

I would rate the scalability of Control-M a seven out of ten. It is feasible.

We are not authorized to engage with customer support from Control-M. There are teams that do. Usually, if anything comes to us, we review it on our side. If there are any errors related to our application and if it is not, then we straight away engage with the Control-M team. They will reach out to the support team if required. Otherwise, if they have the knowledge to resolve it, they will resolve it.

Initially I worked on an HSBC project where they were using the same Control-M. In previous organizations, they were not using any scheduling tools. It was an insurance company. As of now, I have only used BMC Control-M.

I did not have the privileges for the complete initial installation and configuration of Control-M. I initiated our application jobs, where we initiate the scheduling of new jobs, making orders, progressive, and taking over from the monitoring phase. We can do that from a specific application cluster. For a complete installation, I think it would be easier. If we get control over things, it is easier for learning quickly.

With Control-M, I have learned that there are depending teams. Control-M is one of the best solutions. Each team has several jobs. Each application might have built the jobs. If there is any cycle, like patching windows, in the specific cluster, if our Genesys jobs are running on the cycle, those jobs might failover. There are dependency applications we have to engage with, and ask them to follow up. Dependent applications might be impacted. It is a challenge to communicate with the vendors and collaborate with all the relevant application stakeholders and inform them to put their jobs on hold. If there are any jobs related to them, we have to engage with them and follow up to hold the process. Once the activity is completed, we have to roll back the application and resume the jobs. There are some challenges while performing the monthly cycle patching. They recently migrated to cloud, but we may not involve them in the cloud. That would be the best solution on the cloud. All those optimizations mean we may not need to follow up with communications. We will just inform them via email or inform all the restricted users and permissions. It is easy. Once the cloud is in place, these are all challenges.

Overall, there are challenges in communicating with internal and external teams and coordinating. That requires manual resources to follow up on every cycle patching. Before Control-M, I would use something that is easily accessible and can integrate with BMC Control-M. Rather than other solutions, I would prefer Control-M.

When I was deploying the applications, there would be a lot of permission relevancy. Based on those permissions, we have to engage with the admins, the Control-M team who have the privileged access. We ask them to join us on the deployments, and we try to gain the privileges. We take over from our application configurations. Once it is completed, they revoke the access. For change deployments, we gain privilege access, admin privilege access, from those who are authorized in the bank. We have specific teams. We cannot control their applications. Each team has their own privileges. Whatever we require, we usually ask them to provide the privilege access, and we will take it from there. Overall, we are not authorized in Control-M, for four years in the market. We are just on the application side; we are end-to-end Genesys operations. There are a couple of jobs in Genesys, and those we deploy in Control-M. From our Genesys applications end, we have a pretty good experience using Control-M, where we can schedule the jobs, run the jobs, and troubleshoot the jobs if required. I have this much knowledge about scheduling, monitoring, and troubleshooting the jobs. For the specific applications, each application is required for the specific operations, permissions, and privileges. If I get the opportunity, we will go through it end-to-end. I have completed the certification, the initial Control-M certification, where we can gain access. I would rate my overall experience with Control-M a seven out of ten.

Control-M is a scheduling tool that I have been using for the last three years. Earlier I used Autosys as a primary scheduling tool. When I started Control-M, it was a new experience because Autosys was over the cloud and we used to log in to the browser. Control-M is specifically for the application where we are using it now. The good thing is that there are so many connectors available.

Although I have one year of Autosys experience, Control-M presents a vast opportunity for us as a developer. Currently, I am in a data warehousing project where all the tools are legacy tools such as Informatica, SalesScript, Control-M, and database. When we are moving to the cloud, Control-M is still valid and relevant. We are transferring our data to the cloud and using Control-M as a scheduler. We are not using native cloud scheduler to date because all the developers here are accustomed to it.

We are almost using around 60 to 70% of the features. Control-M is providing us with so much capability to use during our daily problem-solving.

The good thing is that there are so many connectors available. Control-M provides lots of features, and we are almost using around 60 to 70% of them. Control-M is providing us with so much capability to use during our daily problem-solving.

When I joined this project and was very new to Control-M, there was one problem that even the seniors were facing sometimes. Suppose you are using Informatica; there are lots of Informatica developers in the market or some other tools that are very known to everyone. Even though Control-M is used by lots of people, the documentation in the beginning was very hard to search for on Google. This is why we had to reach out to people who were experienced, and it was a tough job for us because a few functionalities are not properly written in the documentation.

Another area of improvement is related to multiple versions of Control-M being used. In dev, one version exists, and in production, one version exists. In production, the stable version is used. Sometimes when we change over, there are multiple domains in Control-M such as Planning, Monitoring, History, and Forecast Tools. When we hop from one domain to another, sometimes we open a job, and the detail dialog box or detail window is not able to open.

Some features which are hidden are not properly documented in Control-M itself, or maybe documented but not properly given or described with examples. This is a problem. Sometimes we are forced to connect to senior developers who have used it for five to six years or more to learn about it.

I have been using Control-M for the last three years.

There is no maintenance on my end. In the last three years, I have seen two upgrades that were done by the admin team. Control-M is using the new versions, and as a developer, I am using it.

Control-M processes about 10,000 jobs starting every day in our production environment, and adding new jobs is very simple. We don't feel any pressure on Control-M because it is processing multiple jobs in parallel.

Regarding contacting technical support about Control-M, we tried, but at that time, we didn't get any response. We reached out to our client head, described our problem, and received assistance.

As a developer, I created an account in the BMC community to get help support. We post there nearly because sometimes we need solutions very quickly, and we don't have time to connect with the guys in the Control-M help desk.

Neutral

Earlier I used Autosys as a primary scheduling tool. When I started Control-M, it was a new experience because Autosys was over the cloud.

Regarding the initial installation and setup of Control-M, I still have not installed it. I need to connect with one of my friends who are working in the ops team, as I am in the developer team. We never install Control-M here in this project.

I need to connect with one of my friends working in the ops team, as I am in the developer team. They have the access to install, uninstall, or configure anything.

Regarding pricing, I cannot comment. As a developer, this is not in my hands, and it was decided by the client.

If Control-M is selling their product to new customers who have never used anything, then who will support the new customer? The customer may not have the senior engineer who has used Control-M earlier, so the documentation matters. Control-M can improve this in the way that others have; for example, Databricks, Google Cloud, and Azure have so much documentation.

Whatever we wanted, we have it. Control-M is not executing anything; it is just a scheduler. It schedules an Informatica job, and Informatica is running on its operating system, managing all the logs, and showing us that the job is completed. I have not seen any lagging. This can be answered by the ops team better because as a developer, I own a few applications, and when they start and end, my duty is done. Overall, I would give Control-M a rating of eight out of ten.

On-premises

Other

Control-M is primarily used to automate and monitor critical operational and database-related jobs, such as backups, batch processing, and application workflows. It helps reduce manual interactions and provides centralized monitoring while improving reliability and ensuring that dependent processes execute in the correct sequence. Overall, Control-M is a valuable tool for maintaining operational efficiency and reducing scheduling-related risks.

The primary daily use case for Control-M is scheduling and monitoring automated jobs, such as database backup jobs, archive log backups, and maintenance tasks and batch processing workflows. It is also used to monitor job dependencies, track failures, and receive alerts so that issues can be resolved quickly with minimum manual interactions. Control-M is used daily to automate and monitor database maintenance jobs, backup workflows, and batch processes. The centralized monitoring and alerting capabilities help ensure that critical workflows complete successfully and on schedule.

Beyond job scheduling, Control-M is used for end-to-end workload automation, monitoring critical business processes, and managing cross-application dependencies. It helps ensure that database maintenance jobs, backup processes, file transfers, and batch workloads execute in the correct sequence with minimal manual interactions. The centralized monitoring, alerting, and restart capabilities help reduce operational overhead and improve service reliability. Control-M provides good visibility into workflow status, making it easier for supporting teams to identify and resolve issues quickly. Control-M is a key tool for workload automation and operational monitoring. It helps automate repetitive tasks, manage job dependencies, provide proactive alerts, and ensure critical business processes run reliably. This has significantly reduced manual effort and improved overall operational efficiency.

Control-M is deployed as a centralized workflow automation platform that supports multiple applications and databases across several environments throughout the organization. Different application teams use it to schedule and manage their batch workloads, while operations and support teams use the centralized monitoring and alerting capabilities to track job execution and respond to issues. The platform enables workflow architecture across Windows, Linux, Unix, database, and application environments while providing a single point of control for all critical business processes.

Control-M is relatively easy to integrate with different technologies and operational requirements. One of its strengths is the broad support for multiple platforms, applications, databases, and file transfer processes. This helps organizations bring diverse workflows under a centralized automation framework. It provides integration capabilities that reduce the need for custom scheduling solutions and manual coordination between systems. As DevOps, one opportunity is to continue simplifying onboarding and integration.

Control-M has been integrated with the Oracle database environment to automate backup and log backup and maintenance jobs. This integration significantly reduced manual interaction, improved scheduling reliability, and provided centralized monitoring and alerting. As a result, the organization was able to identify and resolve job failures more quickly and ensure that critical database operations were completed on time. Database integration is most relevant to the role. ServiceNow integration has also been implemented. When critical jobs fail, alerts are tracked and managed more effectively through ServiceNow integration, reducing response times and improving operational visibility. Cloud integrations with Azure have been utilized. Integrating Control-M with Azure-based workloads enabled automation and monitoring of cloud-hosted processes alongside on-premises jobs. This provides a unified view of workflows and improves operational efficiency across environments. One of the most valuable integrations has been with the database environment.

The most valuable features of Control-M are its centralized monitoring, workload automation, job scheduling, job dependencies management, and proactive alerting capabilities. Control-M allows teams to schedule and manage complex workflows across multiple platforms from a single interface, improving visibility and operational control. It supports both calendar-based and event-driven scheduling and provides automated notifications for job failures. It enables quick recovery and rerun of jobs when issues occur. These features help reduce manual effort, improve reliability, and ensure critical business processes run smoothly.

The best features of Control-M are centralized job monitoring, workload automation, dependency management, proactive alerting, and cross-platform scheduling. These capabilities help automate critical business processes, reduce manual effort, improve operational visibility, and ensure reliable execution of batch workflows across multiple systems. The ability to quickly identify and troubleshoot and restart failed jobs is particularly valuable for operational teams.

Control-M is much more than a simple job scheduler. Its real value comes from workload automation, dependency management, and centralized monitoring across multiple systems and applications. Once workflows are properly designed, it can significantly reduce manual effort, improve operational reliability, and provide better visibility into critical business processes. Features such as automated alerts, job restart capabilities, historical tracking, and cross-platform integration make day-to-day operations easier and help teams respond quickly when issues occur.

Control-M is a reliable workload automation platform. There is an opportunity for improvement in troubleshooting failed jobs in complex workflows, as this can sometimes be time-consuming, especially when multiple dependencies are involved. Improved root cause analysis, more intuitive error messages, and enhanced reporting capabilities would help operations teams resolve issues faster. Additionally, a more modern and responsive user interface would improve overall user experience.

From an operational support perspective, complex dependency chains can be difficult to troubleshoot, and error messages could provide more actionable details. Reporting on dashboard customizations could be more flexible. The user interface could be more modern and user-friendly, and faster search and filtering capabilities for large job environments would be beneficial. While Control-M is a robust and dependable automation tool, troubleshooting failures in complex job workflows can sometimes be challenging. Improved root cause analysis, richer alert details, and enhanced reporting would further improve operational efficiency and reduce investigation time for support teams.

One improvement that would be valuable is the use of more intelligent monitoring and analytics capabilities. For example, predictive alerts that identify potential job delays and failures before they occur would help operations teams act proactively and enhance root cause analysis. Artificial intelligence assistance for troubleshooting recommendations and more customizable dashboards would improve efficiency. Additionally, simplifying the management of complex job dependencies and providing clear visual workflow views would make day-to-day operations easier.

I have been using BMC Control-M for the past six years.

Control-M should be highly rated for building, scheduling, managing, and monitoring production workflows. Its strength lies in providing a centralized platform where complex workflows can be designed, scheduled, and managed across multiple systems and applications. The dependency management capabilities help ensure that workflows execute in the correct sequence, while real-time monitoring and alerting provide visibility into job status and exceptions.

Control-M is extremely important for database and DevOps initiatives because many business processes depend on multiple interconnected systems, including applications, databases, and file transfers. Control-M provides a centralized way to coordinate these workflows and manage dependencies across different platforms. This helps ensure that tasks execute in the correct order and that downstream processes only begin when prerequisite activities have been completed. From a team efficiency perspective, it reduces the amount of manual monitoring and interaction required to manage complex workflows. Automated scheduling, centralized visibility, and a proactive alerting system support focus on issue resolution and process improvements rather than routine operational activities.

Control-M provides strong controls around user access and authorization, auditing, and workload management through role-based access. This helps ensure that users only have the permissions required for their responsibilities. Audit and activity tracking provide accountability and support complex requirements. Control-M also supports secure authentication, encrypted communications, and detailed monitoring of job scheduling, job execution, and workflow changes. The focus on governance and automation rather than uncontrolled oversight is appreciated. Control-M should be considered from governance and security standpoints. Features such as role-based access control and auditing demonstrate Control-M's emphasis on governance.

Based on my experience, the artificial intelligence-related capabilities appear reliable for operational assistance, workflow insights, and accelerating routine tasks. The outputs are generally useful and align with the information available within the platform. For business-critical activities, human review and validation remain important, especially when making operational decisions or implementing workflow changes. No major reliability concerns have been observed, but as with any artificial intelligence-enabled capabilities, external validation is necessary to ensure accuracy and context. What provides confidence is that Control-M combines artificial intelligence capabilities with governance, monitoring, auditability, and operational control. While outputs from artificial intelligence would still be validated for critical decisions, the combination of artificial intelligence with governance, auditing, and control mechanisms increases confidence in the platform's recommendations and outputs. I would rate Control-M an eight out of ten overall.

We use Control-M for enterprise workload automation, cross-platform job scheduling, and orchestration of critical banking processes. One of our most important use cases is End-of-Day (EOD) processing, where Control-M coordinates and monitors complex job dependencies across IBM i, Linux, Windows, databases, and core banking applications. It provides centralized visibility, improves operational efficiency, and reduces manual intervention and operational risk.

Control-M has significantly improved our visibility into end-to-end business processes that span multiple platforms and systems. It has enabled faster identification and resolution of process execution issues through centralized monitoring and alerting. Additionally, by automating tasks that were previously performed manually, Control-M has substantially reduced operational errors, increased process reliability, and improved overall operational efficiency.

Control-M is a very robust solution. The product is stable and robust, providing reliability in operations.

One area where Control-M could be enhanced is by providing native scripting capabilities directly within the platform. Today, when we need to perform complex logic, data manipulation, or multi-step workflows, we must develop scripts externally (for example in Bash, Perl, Python, or other languages) on the target execution server and then invoke those scripts from Control-M. It would be valuable to have a built-in scripting environment that allows users to develop and execute workflow logic directly within Control-M, without relying on external scripts or operating system dependencies.

For example, a workflow could execute a query against an Oracle database, process the results, generate an Excel report, send it by email, and then trigger additional processes on other platforms such as IBM i (AS400), Windows, Linux, or cloud environments—all orchestrated through a native Control-M scripting language.

This functionality would reduce implementation complexity, improve portability, simplify maintenance, and provide greater flexibility for advanced process automation.
Additionally, greater access to variables, conditional logic, and workflow programming constructs within the platform would make Control-M even more powerful for organizations managing complex enterprise workloads.

Another area for improvement is licensing flexibility. Some capabilities that many customers may consider part of the core workload automation experience, such as extended log retention and archiving, currently require additional licensed components. A more integrated approach could provide greater value and simplify adoption.

One improvement that could be made to Control-M is the way jobs captured through SBMJOB on IBM i (AS/400) are handled. On the Extractor side, it would be helpful to have a more flexible and efficient way to manage extraction rules.

On the Interceptor side, having a single folder per AS/400 library is not very practical. It makes it more difficult to organize jobs, use conditions effectively, and manage our workflows, especially when they are affected by the New Day process

Our institution has been using Control-M since late 2022. However, I have been familiar with the product and its capabilities since 2010 through my professional experience managing enterprise workload automation and job scheduling environments.

Control-M is very stable for us and very robust.

Control-M has proven to be highly reliable and capable of supporting large-scale enterprise workloads. From a scalability perspective, I would rate it around 8 out of 10.
The platform scales well in terms of the number of jobs, workflows, and systems that can be managed centrally.

However, when integrating new applications or platforms, significant development effort is sometimes required on the target systems. Complex automation scenarios often require external scripts or custom integrations, which can increase implementation and maintenance effort.

For this reason, while Control-M is highly scalable from an operational and workload management standpoint, I believe there is room for improvement in simplifying integrations and providing more native workflow development capabilities. Reducing the dependency on external scripting would make onboarding new systems faster and further enhance the platform's scalability.

We typically work through our implementation partner, who serves as our primary point of contact for support and manages most interactions with BMC on our behalf.

Overall, I would rate BMC's technical support 7 out of 10. The support quality is generally good, and issues are ultimately addressed. However, we have observed longer-than-expected response times in some cases, particularly when incidents require escalation to higher support tiers. The escalation process can be slow and sometimes extends the overall resolution time.

Despite this, the expertise of the support teams has been satisfactory, and we have no major concerns regarding the quality of the technical assistance provided.

Yes. Prior to adopting Control-M, the institution used HP Operations Orchestration for the automation and orchestration of core business processes, as well as IBM Advanced Job Scheduler for IBM i workload scheduling. We transitioned to Control-M to consolidate workload automation across multiple platforms, improve end-to-end visibility, enhance monitoring and dependency management, and provide a more centralized and scalable enterprise scheduling solution.

The initial implementation was relatively complex. A significant part of the effort was not the Control-M installation itself, but the application and process changes required to adapt our existing workloads to operate within the Control-M framework.

Many of our existing processes had to be modified to integrate with Control-M, which increased the complexity of the initial deployment. This was especially true for legacy applications and workloads that were not originally designed for centralized workload automation.

However, once the foundational integration work was completed and standards were established, onboarding new applications and developing new automated workflows became much easier and more efficient. Today, implementing new processes is significantly more agile than during the initial adoption phase.

Yes. As the customer, we worked with a BMC Business Partner that provided both the software licensing and the implementation services. Our experience was positive overall, as they supported the deployment, knowledge transfer, and initial configuration activities, helping us successfully adopt the platform within our environment.

Control-M does not sell any perpetual licenses right now. I have to constantly renew my contract as a software subscription license. I think the pricing is a little high, but the solution is very robust and stable. I mean, I am paying for a Mercedes, and I am getting a Mercedes. My overall rating for Control-M out of ten for the solution overall is a seven. It is pricey, but it is stable. On the other hand, I have to work a lot to adapt my software to run with Control-M.

On-premises

I work as a Control-M administrator in my current organization where I manage jobs, monitor jobs, and schedule jobs. As a specific example, I handle file watcher jobs and OS jobs. Regarding my main use case for Control-M, we have recently worked on the CV project where we migrated our jobs to the OCM.

Control-M offers workload automation, which means we do not have to perform it manually all the time.

I find it valuable that we can provide access to users, and we are managing access within Control-M.

Control-M has positively impacted my organization as users, including the developer team and infra team, are coming to us to schedule jobs, and we are delivering jobs on time, which is really impactful.

Control-M helps deliver jobs on time by requiring us to put the start time of 22:00 CET when scheduling jobs that need to run at that time.

Control-M can be improved with features using Airflow or AWS in Control-M modeling, and we can use AI-generated Control-M in the future, as AI is becoming prevalent worldwide.

Control-M can be enhanced with a chatbot so that new joiners can use it for their questions on how to schedule jobs or set the timer calendar in Control-M, leveraging AI for this purpose.

Regarding Control-M's AI capabilities, I think security is crucial.

I have almost 3.10 years of experience in this company.

Control-M is stable.

For Control-M's scalability, we are using it as control resources, where some jobs run simultaneously, allowing us to utilize control resources efficiently.

Control-M provides excellent customer support as it supports all teams, including the backup teams, middleware teams, and all other teams to process their transactions.

It is easy to integrate Control-M with technologies for our DataOps and DevOps processes as things change, making implementation straightforward.

I have seen a return on investment in terms of time saved.

My experience with pricing, setup cost, and licensing was great, as I have almost three years of experience in forecasting, and we are implementing it in our organization as well.

I evaluated other options before choosing Control-M.

Control-M helps me build, schedule, manage, and monitor my production workflows effectively, and this capability is important for my data operations and DevOps work.

Control-M is currently used extensively in my organization, and we have plans to increase its usage as we are getting new projects; AI is coming into the picture, and we are migrating our tool to Airflow.

Almost 10,000 plus users are using Control-M.

I would advise others looking into using Control-M to realize that it is a great tool which provides automation, eliminating the need to run jobs manually. I would rate this product a 9 out of 10.

On-premises

Control-M is a scheduling software for scheduling jobs, and I have been using it for four to six years.

The best feature of Control-M is that it is a SAP module we use to schedule jobs in SAP for the delivery of goods, and mainly it's time-oriented. Time-oriented features and whatever reports we can fetch are very easy in Control-M.

It is easy to integrate Control-M with technologies for DataOps and DevOps. Currently, our next project is underway regarding the integration.

Control-M supports DataOps and DevOps initiatives by enabling us to update batches we get from the BMC tool, and we are currently using both for development and testing purposes. I hope it will be beneficial for us moving forward. If we implement a DevOps project in our application, it will save significant time by reducing human intervention as jobs will be scheduled automatically.

Currently, the solution saves us around 15 to 20% time during the primary phase.

Regarding areas for improvement, there are some additional features that you must give concerning the available features. The job scheduling time is a little bit consuming, and it should be simplified into very straightforward steps, such as a web-based application for all the scheduling jobs, as this would be helpful.

There are a few bugs I found while implementing Control-M, which are minor issues. We can minimize those bugs, such as applications not running at scheduled times. If there's a time schedule, we might get a report with logs, and 98% of the time it runs on time, with only 2% being slightly problematic regarding job execution.

Regarding stability, Control-M application is stable, and there is no second thought on this. If any error arises from a job that hasn't run, we simply need to address that issue. I rate its stability as eight.

I rate scalability as eight.

I rate the support for the solution as a seven, around 7 to 8, specifically a 7.5.

I have not yet migrated from Broadcom or Redwood or any similar solutions, but we have conducted workshops and other preparations for that.

It is simple to integrate Control-M, particularly in the cloud. We need to have the host or an agent to run commands with the application name, and it is comparatively easy when compared to others.

It's not cheap; it's a little bit costlier compared to others due to database processing and finishing jobs, which have some dependencies, so I don't think it's cheaper.

Control-M, which is the BMC workload automation tool, is mainly used for scheduling. When we integrate Control-M into a SAP basis, we can automatically fetch records. We have to schedule and run jobs at a particular time, going through phases such as initial phase, build phase, and delivery phase. In that process, we handle job scheduling, workload management, creating OS and file transfer of database jobs, and reporting and configuration management involving automation capabilities.

Currently, our client is using BMC's Control-M software, so we must go as per the client's requirements. We are not in a position to decide whether we can proceed with it or not because the client uses Control-M for batch scheduling.

I definitely recommend BMC; Control-M is excellent for handling very large batch scheduling jobs. We have many jobs to complete in our daily activities, and this is one of the best tools. I would also recommend it to my partners for different clients who need batch scheduling; Control-M is a very good tool or application.

Primarily for email and SNMP, as well as monitoring tools, we use Control-M compared to other solutions or vendors. I would rate this product an overall eight out of ten.

On-premises

My main use case for Control-M is job orchestration throughout the company. A specific example of how I use Control-M for job orchestration in my organization is the management and coordination of the sequence of business-critical jobs that need to be run on a regular basis.

Control-M has positively impacted my organization by simplifying the existing routine and making it very easy to manage jobs. Control-M has saved time, reduced errors, and provided other measurable benefits, especially in terms of time when a business customer requires a new job flow, as it is very easy to customize and implement. I believe time saving is the best output we have achieved now.

The best features Control-M offers are that it is SaaS and very easy to manage. It has a very user-friendly interface, is very easy to customize, and allows me to check the result of the jobs' outcome.

The user interface stands out to me because it is specifically designed for the particular user's needs, making it not so complicated to change or update anything within the system.

As of now, we do not have any major requests, complications, or complaints about Control-M. Everything we have received from our internal clients can be implemented with existing tools and features, and if something new arises, the BMC team is putting it into backlog and providing us with a timeline for implementation, so I cannot say that something really critical exists right now that needs to be improved.

I have been working in my current field for more than fifteen years.

Control-M is stable.

Control-M's scalability is at a very high level.

If we are talking about direct support from BMC, it is quite good. I would rate the customer support an eight out of ten.

I previously used another solution, and we decided to replace it with Control-M because the strategic direction has changed.

I would say the pricing and setup process is quite straightforward.

The biggest lesson I have learned from using Control-M is that it can be implemented with the right team in very fast and quick terms, given specific expertise.

Control-M has saved time, reduced errors, and provided other measurable benefits, especially in terms of time when a business customer requires a new job flow, as it is very easy to customize and implement. I believe time saving is the best output we have achieved now.

I would say the pricing and setup process is quite straightforward.

I previously used another solution, and we decided to replace it with Control-M because the strategic direction has changed.

We are working with the integration with Ansible, for instance, and with other platforms in order to increase our automation processes and simplify any manual routine work.

I would rate Control-M an eight out of ten because it is quite simple, easy to scale, understandable, and it is a friendly user platform.

I would rank Control-M's AI capabilities, particularly its governance and security, at a pretty high level. In terms of Control-M's AI capabilities, its accuracy and reliability of output are high standard; I would call this platform quite reliable compared to other systems.

Control-M is extensively used by my organization, we have thousands of jobs, and it definitely is one of our strategic directions.

I need to split the users into admin users and those who are requesting to update some jobs; there are dozens of them in each department.

I advise others looking into using Control-M to be very accurate and specific with the scope. The cloud provider we use for our hybrid deployment is open information that you can find easily on your own. My overall rating for Control-M is an eight out of ten.

Hybrid Cloud

Other

I primarily use Control-M for scheduling workload automation to ensure that jobs and schedules run according to the specified time and dependencies across different environments including Windows, UNIX, and SAP.

Multiple servers previously required jobs to run sequentially on a manual basis. Control-M provided a user interface where agents could be installed to run jobs sequentially rather than manually. Once the Windows job completed, the UNIX job ran, followed by the SAP job, and then the Windows job ran again.

Control-M's pipeline integrations are a valuable tool that is utilized on a daily basis.

Control-M's best features are the ease of scheduling, the user interface, and the ability to integrate with numerous tools.

The user interface is intuitive and the primary integration utilized is ServiceNow, which helps create incidents and establish a data pipeline between ServiceNow and Control-M.

Control-M has ensured that schedules and job batches run on time with no organizational impact or delays, including critical processes such as payroll.

Since implementing Control-M, a significant reduction has been noticed in billing process times. Billing processes that previously took approximately two hours are now completed within one hour, resulting in substantial savings of full-time equivalents.

Control-M pricing is on the higher end, and if the cost could be reduced, it would be beneficial.

I have been using Control-M for around two years.

Control-M is stable.

Control-M's scalability is strong, and the support for scaling is also strong. Scalability has not been an issue.

Support for Control-M is excellent.

IBM Tivoli was used previously before switching to Control-M, which provided a better solution and superior integration capabilities.

The deployment of Control-M took three months.

Two hundred fifty staff are required for deployment and maintenance, divided into teams at levels L1, L2, and L3. Some team members are responsible for monitoring, some for creation of new jobs, and others manage the administrative tasks of the controller.

A return on investment has been achieved. After deployment and product stabilization, staffing was reduced from thirty full-time equivalents to twenty full-time equivalents, resulting in a significant reduction. Additionally, because jobs have been streamlined, many manual processes have been automated, resulting in savings of approximately five hundred thousand pounds.

The pricing, setup cost, and licensing for Control-M are good.

Other options were evaluated before choosing Control-M, including Redwood RunMyJobs.

Control-M support is excellent and the user interface is outstanding. For those seeking a stable and dominant tool in the market for scheduling and workload automation, Control-M is the recommended choice. This review has been given a rating of nine out of ten.

On-premises

Control-M serves as our main business use case for business application batch job scheduling. Control-M is not a user-interacted system; it is a batch scheduling system where our applications interact with Control-M rather than users. We do not use Control-M as a DevOps tool, but we utilize it for all our applications, which are batch-based applications. Control-M orchestrates workloads across multiple environments. Control-M is handling complex data pipelines and analytics processes effectively.

The features of Control-M that I prefer most are Control-M/EM, Control-M/Server, and Control-M/Agent, which make up the Control-M batch scheduling system.

Control-M is easy to use because our key application is a batch-based application, so Control-M performs the job for us by handling all the automation and related tasks.

The measurable benefits my company has achieved with Control-M include improved SLA and reduced errors, as manual batch job runs lead to numerous errors and failure to meet the SLA.

Since we have been using Control-M from day one for batch scheduling, we do not have a percentage showing improvement because we have not used manual scheduling at all.

Regarding AI or automation, we would appreciate the opportunity to explore the AI functionalities because the application we are currently using does not support AI. It would be beneficial in the future if Control-M were to have AI capabilities.

I have been using Control-M for around eighteen years.

Control-M is a stable product stability-wise, and we do not encounter many issues. The only problem occurred when we upgraded to the latest version, which resulted in CPU spikes in Java, and this was resolved with support and a patch.

The support for that issue was adequate. We called support and eventually received a solution after reaching out multiple times, and the issue is now fixed.

Control-M's scalability is adequate. It is a scalable product, and we have not over-engineered it, so it meets our business needs.

We provide direct feedback to our support partner for Control-M, so nothing comes to mind at the moment. I consider the current support to be adequate.

On a scale from one to ten, I would rate customer service and technical support as seven. A score of seven is decent enough. I am not saying Control-M support is a perfect ten, but I consider seven to be a good rating.

Positive

It has been a long time since we looked at other solutions, so I do not remember what we considered.

We do not handle Control-M deployment ourselves. We simply install it, and it is a stable environment, so we do not keep deploying it regularly.

BMC's service team supports our deployment and migration strategy well, with professional service and good support during our recent upgrade.

The biggest return on investment when using Control-M is ensuring that all batch jobs for our business applications meet the agreed SLA, which justifies our investment since we use this tool for a critical application.

Control-M is not inexpensive. Looking at other tools in the market, they are offering competitive prices, but Control-M, as a BMC product, is definitely not inexpensive, and BMC could improve their pricing strategy.

We have looked at other products when considering switching, but I cannot name them. I do not see a major difference between the products we looked at while considering Control-M. Pricing-wise, the other products were less expensive.

I would rate Control-M as a seven as a product. My advice to other companies considering Control-M is based on all our lessons learned, especially regarding issues we encountered during migration and implementation, which should be taken into account. I have assigned a review rating of seven to Control-M.

Public Cloud

Other

Control-M provides automation workflows for the telecom environment. A specific example of how I use Control-M to automate workflows in my telecom environment includes application workflows such as billing, billing systems, infra setup, backup, storage, and requests, all of which are taken care of by Control-M.

With the 9.21 version of Control-M, I find quite good features with MFT and API integrations, as well as Azure and Kubernetes.

MFT has made the biggest difference for my team; it has been the main feature we are using as of now, with a lot of configurations with managed file transfer in place.

Having a secure file transfer is very crucial in today's world of cyber security threats; that is the additional part or the best functionality available with Control-M.

Control-M has positively impacted my organization by providing a platform to automate the workflows in complex environments while having data security in place, which has really helped the organization grow positively.

For Control-M to improve, the vendor support can be more improvised. If a solution is not existing, providing a patch for a vulnerability would be more helpful than always stating to move on to the higher version of the application.

I have been using Control-M for the past 13 years.

Control-M is stable.

Control-M's scalability is good.

Customer support is good.

We migrated from Autosys, CA Autosys to Control-M.

We switched to Control-M from Autosys because Control-M has better integration options and the GUI is far better.

My deployment took place around 14 years ago; it is a very old deployment that we are using, and we have been upgrading the system now and then.

The migration was smooth, so we were able to migrate on time and on budget without any disruptions.

We have around 1600 Control-M users in our organization for our particular license; the users vary from first level support to monitor jobs, some application users with browse access, and a few admin users.

A part of the admin team of Control-M, around 25 members, takes care of deployment and maintenance.

I do not have experience with the usage and investment calculations myself; however, discussing benefits, the employee count is reduced, and we can achieve quite a lot of FTE saving by having Control-M integrated.

My experience with pricing, setup cost, and licensing indicates that the pricing is on the higher side with respect to the license, but overall the tool is good.

We finalized Control-M without evaluating other options.

The biggest lesson I think I have learned from using Control-M is that the technology is vast, and we need to keep exploring, learning, and integrating more to ease out our life.

Control-M is used widely in our global environment; we have a licensing of around 75K, and currently, we do not plan to increase the usage.

I assess Control-M as a good tool for building, scheduling, managing, and monitoring production workflows; it is important for my DataOps and DevOps initiatives, but I have not explored DevOps deeply.

I assess Control-M as a good platform tool for modernizing and transforming our business; it removes human dependencies for mundane tasks and eases out the workload, which is easily possible with Control-M.

It is very crucial to free up IT personnel to focus on essential operations; this allows them to focus on the latest technologies and also implement POCs for the latest technology integrated with Control-M, which ultimately helps optimize the complete workflows.

I would advise others looking into using Control-M to explore Control-M. I rate this product an 8 out of 10.