IBM Blueworks Live Reviews

We are using Blueworks Live mostly for process innovation and transformation. With most of our clients, we are using to it to capture the process as is, analyze it, and spatially, the analysis phase helps us. We then come up with a model. The other great feature from the tool is since it is integrated with IBM BPM it helps me import the process, making sure the business is always connected.

We have been using it mostly as an end-to-end enterprise transformation tool. We start with our discovery workshop and Blueworks Live plays a key role. We use this tool to discover processes, analyze those processes, and define them from a tool set perspective: Whether the process should got into BPM, ODM, cognitive, IAB, etc. 

This helps during the UAT phase because it becomes easier to clean the business process model in Blueworks Live, then fitting it on a process which is in IBM BPM or a rule which is in IBM ODM.

With the current account, or engagement, we have been doing a large process transformation where we have Blueworks Live with IBM BMP, BPN, ODM, and Watson (for its cognitive features). There is also Robotic Process Automation from Automation Anywhere, IAB, and third-party integrations with SAP.

The product is business-friendly. That's the key thing that resonates with most of our customers. By giving the demo of the tool in the first 15 to 20 minutes, businesses start to get a feel of how they can use the tool. 

It's intuitive, and it connects really well with business teams.

Collaboration is key. Therefore, you don't have a document sitting on a shelf for multiple years with nobody looking at it. It is a live document. Whatever you have, it is live and accessible to everyone. 

Multichannel: You can use if from your mobile device or you can be on the desktop. It doesn't matter. You are always connected. It is cloud-based, so you don't have to install anything. People don't have hassle of installing, then updating, etc. It's always on the fly available for you on demand.

This becomes key, and it is a big differentiator.

We utilize the collaboration features of this solution, such as editing pathways and uploading documentation, especially the documentation which is a key part inside the solution. There are a lot of accounts with whom we work and they have all standard operating procedures. We are converting them into Blueworks Live models, uploading their documentation and screenshots along with having people to chat with on the fly. When the process is published, there are multiple people using the same process. This has become a key goal from the tool's perspective.

There are a couple of things which are not there right now:

1. The ability to create a very structured rule. With the capability that we have right now, Blueworks Live is more process focused. We should be able to enhance it to include a lot more of decisions as well. Right now, we can create a simple decision, not a complex decision, in tools like the business console, modeler, etc. 
2. In the file management feature, we get 50MB of space. Maybe that needs to be given out as an option to customers who want to purchase the extra space.
3. While using the tool, it is a lot like creating a structure in BPM and Compliant, though not like 100 percent the same. The rule part as well becomes much easier when you are not using IBM BPM as a run-time engine, but Blueworks Live only for process discovery. If you want JBoss as a run time engine, it becomes a more compliant tool set and will help to increase your footprint.

The stability is pretty good. It is highly available, which is key. You don't lose your work and can autosave. People do not keeping focused and save their information. Therefore, the information automatically getting saved, so it helps from a stability perspective.

We have the ability to use the tool from our iPad or on the fly. Also, when we are at the airport, we can still login and use it, which helps a lot.

It's a cloud-based solution.

We have used technical support, especially for Blueworks Live. There is an option to create a process app, which can be either a check list or a workflow. 

We were facing some technical issues with the execution of our workflow. We wanted to assign the task to a group of users, not to a single user. This is where we reached out to IBM support to help us out and improve the next release of Blueworks Live.

It's two minutes from a setup perspective. We get the I.D. created for our clients, give them the URL, and they are all set to go.

Based on the licenses purchased, from a footprint perspective, you can have as many people as you want. You have multiple different categories of licenses to keep the cost low. 

My hierarchy works only with IBM, but we do work with other products as well.

My first process model had 142 activities. This is humongous from a single process perspective. To model, it took us three days to complete. It helped with our process version control issues.

When we are working with one of our financial clients every quarter to do their financial reporting, the process changes. They had a lot of material weaknesses, so there are process changes. We keep on creating snapshots, so it helps us to to move them from a BPM implementation tool and put a governance structure around it. Creating snapshots helps us form a governance perspective.

We use a document repository. There are multiple places for how we upload documents, either by going to dashboard interface or by taking pictures/screenshots that can be put in the documentation tab. It goes into the file management of Blueworks Live. You can review them later, clean them out later. You have one single source where you have lot of documents which are used across multiple processes. Everything's stored there. It helps in that way, making it lean and having your documentation updated.

Discovery workshops and collaborative sessions with customers.

Very collaborative, and business users understand it really well, which means we can then help them automate their business processes.

We don't use the document repository.

In terms of utilizing the collaboration features, really we use everything. We use it for creating the as-is and the to-be business process model; for activities, decisions, documentation.

We are you using the product as a process mapping tool and as part of a larger process improvement project. We use it with IBM BPM and IBM ODM. We get an automated workflow solution for our customers, an improved workflow automation. We're helping our business.

I think it's pretty good. I can't think of any additional features it needs.

Stability is pretty good. It has never broken on me. I've been able to do my job.

Scalability is pretty good. 

Pretty good, pretty responsive.

Pretty straightforward.

I rate it a nine out of 10 because it does the work.

I've recommended Blueworks Live to many people, for collaboration.

We use Blueworks Live to put all our critical processes in one depository, within the bank.

We've been using Blueworks since IBM acquired it from Lombardi, so quite a while, and we're still using it, but there are quirks with it. That's why I'm here, at the Think 2018 conference, to actually talk with people, try to get some things fixed.

We use it as a process mapping tool.

We upload all our policies into Blueworks Live. It's used throughout the business for audit purposes, for backup purposes for employees.

In terms of it helping with process version control issues, I administrate our licenses. I don't actually build the processes themselves. So I don't know all the different processes within all the different departments, how they work and how they run everything.

For me the most valuable feature is that it's one depository for our bank. So it's not like everybody has their critical processes on SharePoint or on their desktops. Everything is centrally located. It's very intuitive, easy to use. The support that I get from IBM is always great. My sales guy, Steve, he always picks up the phone when I call him. It's good to have somebody like him onboard.

I wish Blueworks Live had simulations built in, but it doesn't. 

It also lacks a feature of reporting; ad hoc, drag and drop reporting. A lot of senior people are always asking for reports, and there's no reporting feature within IBM Blueworks.

The APIs are great, except the normal business user doesn't know how to create APIs. So it's hard because IBM comes to us as the business users and tell us to create reporting with APIs, except we don't know that, so we have to turn around and flip it to our IT people.

We'd like to be able to bring it on to our server. Because it's in the cloud I don't think that's going to happen.

We'd also like to see it be Six Sigma or Lean compatible, a lot of people have asked about that.

Right now, our challenge is - I work for Citibank. Citibank wants all its information on our side of the wall. This solution is on the cloud. So I'm hoping... I just heard something about the private cloud, but the issue is that we want to bring this on to our server. That's what we're working towards right now because I guess Citibank feels a little iffy that all our information is mixed with everybody else's, and it's vulnerable.

So far, though, the solution has been stable.

It's pretty big. We want to make this our go-to process diagram application. There are other vendors that we looked at. So far, IBM is the one that we're mostly interested in, but like I said before, there are flaws. There are groups, especially in compliance - even in our engineering - they want to see where we can improve in a process, where we can cut things down. They want to see where we're doubling employees doing the same work. So we're trying to save dollars by using this.

We were looking at cost effectiveness, if it's intuitive or not to the employee. We went with IBM because it's intuitive and because of the cost.

Originally we were with Lombardi, and IBM honored the contract that we had with Lombardi. That was great for us.

Straightforward, but I had to get our IT people involved. Before, what happened was, you would log in to blueworkslive.com. That meant that any employee from our bank could go home, log in, and all our process flows were there. So what we did was we worked with IBM and we worked with our IT people, and now we've integrated so that we have to be actually logged in to our Citi mainframe in order to get into Blueworks Live. So that's one good thing about it.

TIBCO, they were at the bottom of the list. Sparx, they were at the bottom of the list too. The top two were IBM Blueworks and an application called AG ARIS.

Use it. Test it, use it. It's great.

It also has a lot to do with my guy at IBM. If we had this, and I had to call in to a number all the time, and it was just support out in India... It's great, but it's a pain sometimes. The guy that I deal with, I call him - he's a sales guy, and I call him with my problems - and he puts me in touch with exactly who I'm supposed to speak with.

It's a good tool. I like it.

It was for business process, modeling and analytics, and it performed really well.

It has improved the way the organization functions. We were using it for design and modeling purposes. We didn't actually follow through with the tool into an operational process. So it was very much a discrete workshop-based activity.

We didn't use the document repository, at least, not extensively. We used it as a mapping tool.

• Real-time modeling and design work
• The ability to perform workshops with clients in real-time with the tool
• Getting instant output

In terms of the collaboration features, from the point of discovery, it was useful to go to load up the policies and the rule sets that the client had. And in terms of exploring options and being able to model a variety of different processes, that was incredibly useful as well.

Building out my first process model took quite a while, because I hadn't done it before. But the teething problems were very limited and very short-lived. Within 24 - 48 hours, we were pretty much in full flight.

As for process version control issues, that wasn't something we were particularly suffering from.

We didn't really explore the opportunities for process execution. So moving from the modeling to the process orchestration, it wasn't very clear how we would do that from a BPM perspective, and then into the larger tool set perspective. But I can't talk with authority on it. We just never actually got there.

Some of the import functionality was a bit restrictive, in terms of loading data in from other data sources. Something as simple as Excel, loading data tables from Excel, wasn't great. And vice-versa. Some of the export and import functionality with something like Visio - which, I know it's a slightly different tool - but being able to work seamlessly with those other tool sets would've been quite useful. I know it was something that was in the pipeline to be looked at. So that would be useful.

Really stable. We didn't have any stability issues at all.

I don't know about this actually. We didn't experience any problems with it, but we didn't use it at scale. It was fairly localized. I wouldn't have any concerns with using it at scale though.

We didn't use technical support.

We were using a previous solution, it was called "paper and ink." So we needed to something slightly more, well, less 19th-century and slightly more 21st-century.

When selecting a vendor, what's important is a vendor that understands and is able to provide a clear solution for the problem that's in front of us. In this particular instance, it was an answer to a question we didn't even know we were asking. We had what we thought was our set of requirements, and then we found we actually had a different set. Meaning, we had that first set of requirements and then some others. We were able to not just take one step but take several steps at once. So, having a vendor that understands the problem and is able to deliver the answer is important.

Straightforward. It was just really intuitive. It's not a particularly complicated tool to set up. There are fairly limited configuration requirements. It was reasonably straightforward.

We really only evaluated IBM in this particular scenario.

For what it did, for what we used it for, it was relatively complete.