IBM BPM Reviews

Everything is possible with the solution. We use it for order, personal and production processes. We make use of it in the healthcare and food markets. There are no limits to its use. 

Owing to my lack of a technical background, it is difficult for me to state which features are most valuable. 

I would like to see the solution be able to interact with other customer software solutions. I am referring to interaction with SSP or other applications from the IT customer management database, in respect of integration in the IBM BPM.

I have been using IBM BPM for six years

The solution is stable. 

The solution is scalable. While this varies with the needs of the customer, we have very good technicians and developers for IBM BPM. As such, it depends on our know-how, although I can say that our customers are satisfied. 

I am not in a position to comment on the support. 

I have never installed the solution and am not aware of the process involved. 

I believe we have 20 persons on the BPM team, consisting of a manager, support people and several developers. 

We use the solution both for our own needs and those of our customers. We have a contract with IBM for the solution, meaning that we offer both cloud-based and on-premises solutions. We provide these products and are partners to the vendor. 

The performance is fine. 

I believe we have 40 customers who make use of the solution.

I would certainly recommend the solution to others. 

I rate IBM BPM as an eight out of ten. 

We use the solution as a business process management platform.

The integration and design are valuable features.

The interface is limited and should improve in the future. We are having to develop an extended application to avoid the limitation in the interface design.

I have been using the solution for approximately 10 years.

I have found the solution to be stable.

The solution is scalable.

We have contacted customer service when we had some issues and it took quite some time. They could be more responsive.

We have an in-house team that does the implementation of the solution.

When considering the features of the solution the price is expensive compared to competitors.

I recommend this solution to those who have enterprise companies. If the business is small then the price of the solution would not make sense financially because it is expensive.

I rate IBM BPM an eight out of ten.

We have four clients that use this solution. We use IBM BPM for business processes. 

The price and the overall installation process could be improved. 

I have been using this solution for a couple of years. 

IBM BPM is both scalable and stable.

The technical support is fine. 

The initial setup takes three days. It can be a bit complex. 

We have two admins that handle all maintenance-related issues.

I would absolutely recommend this solution to others. Overall, on a scale from one to ten, I would give this solution a rating of nine.

More than anything, we use IBM BPM to orchestrate processes. We don't have a culture of BPM, so we don't do process modeling and monitoring for improvement. Nonetheless, we get a benefit from the BPM.

Our developers have created some application views. I'm not sure if BPM is meant for application views, but they have done that to model and automate processes.

I am an architect and although I haven't worked with it directly, I am trying to help. The problem seems to be that we don't have the skill set to support it.

This product does the job in terms of executing the workflow. It might be overkill for what we are doing, but we use it to automate some of the backend processes or system processes.

Our developers are complaining that it's too complex to maintain. They are struggling to remodel or maintain existing interfaces and integration. 

I've been through the interfaces but the developers find it difficult to get into the code to maintain it, modify it, and customize it.

We have been using this product for more than 10 years.

We have been looking at implementing Signavio. It looks promising in terms of what we want to do, but we are not sure if it's the right direction to go in.

I would rate this solution a five out of ten.

We are consultants and integrators. We are also a partner of IBM. We implement IBM BPM in financial institutions for automatic support, process automation support, process digitalization, and process management. Our business cases are all around financial markets.

One of the reasons for adopting this solution ten years ago was its ease of use. It had a lot of off-the-shelf functionality, and it did not need to be developed specifically for the project that we were implementing. That was the main reason for adopting it in the beginning.

IBM BPM lacks openness, that is, the ability to become open for new options in terms of APIs, front-end development, and ecosystem. IBM BPM has been quite closed.

One of the main improvements would be to somehow embed the rules engine into IBM BPM. Merging IBM BRMS and the rules engine with IBM BPM would be helpful. If there was some simpler way to define rules without having to put IBM BRMS on top of it, it would be good. It's something that we can get out of Camunda but not out of IBM BPM.

I have been using IBM BPM for around ten years. 

It is quite resilient to failure. It's a good solution in this sense.

It is quite scalable.

For common day-by-day support, they are good. For things that are a little bit more complicated and require highly-skilled knowledge, it can become complex and difficult to obtain support.

The initial setup is complex. It takes several months, and it requires expertise from IBM technicians most of the time.

Its initial setup could be improved. If there was a way to set it up in two or three clicks or there was a way to create a space or cloud infrastructure that can be available in several clicks, it would be a product gain. It would be nice to have something available as platform-as-a-service (PaaS) in cloud infrastructure. I don't know whether this functionality is currently available because we have stopped investing in this technology. 

It requires consultants for deployment. 

I would rate it an eight out of ten. 

We evaluated this product for governmental processes automation trials. Although they didn't actually commit to production, in evaluating this product against others based on Microsoft technology like AuraPortal, I can say that this is definitely better in terms of capability. This is especially true in citizen developers. It also has multi-platform support including Linux and Unix, which can't be achieved with the .NET stack.

Integrating with other products is easy for a variety of set APIs.

The use case was in education and we were able to complete a POC within one week without expert knowledge.

This tool is very useful when it comes to enterprise-grade automation and governmental processes for the security aspects, performance, and reliability.

Evaluating the tool isn't a hard job for the cloud trial. We were able to do our trials on the tool in a very short time and received feedback from different teams within the organization.

Using the standard notations in the diagrams makes it a lot easier when sharing processes across business teams.

Generally, we recommend this tool for any enterprise-grade project.

Web Designer is a valuable feature that is better than the desktop version. The desktop version requires integrations between the workstation and the main engine, whereas, with Web Designer, all of the constraints have been removed. The user experience enables citizen developers and business users to design and review simple business processes. 

Importing and exporting between multiple environments is more difficult with other tools. This is a great feature for productivity.

IBM BPM is one of the leaders without question.

We would like to see this product cloud-native, as the market now is moving to both hybrid cloud and multi-cloud deployments. Being cloud-native helps in moving towards this strategy.

We would like to have more flexibility in distributing the workload across different data centers and different locations.

IBM BPM needs to be containerized and managed by K8s. IBM has a great chance in this, especially after the acquisition of RedHat. Making the BPM cloud-native will give great capabilities.

This is the improvement that should be made to all the current tools as Kubernetes is the defacto standard now.

We have been using IBM BPM for a few months.

We use IBM BPM for AC Kronos process management to use for calls and users. 

I like the APIs and the BPM Coach is a good tool. But if I had to pick one, it would be the API.

The push notifications are also good. 

The debugging needs improvement. There is some confusion surrounding the debugging.

They should also improve the APIs.

I have been using IBM BPM for four months. 

It is scalable. No bugs or glitches. 

We don't use it in the production systems right now. We're just using it in the pilot mode. 

Our teams work on scalability and I think it is good. It's based on IBM vSphere, and the scalability is good.

It's used by around 10,000 people and around 15 developers.

IBM's technical support is not enough. We don't get good responses from technical support.

The initial setup was straightforward. It's automatic, then you compress it.

It took us around one day to install it. 

My advice would be to use an open-source solution. It would be more valuable than IBM. Our company is based on IBM. IBM is good for our needs but I wouldn't recommend it for an old age company. An open-source product would be better. 

I would rate IBM BPM an eight out of ten. 

We use IBM BPM for process management for our users. With it, we don't need to load items under a sandbox using IBM BPM and it has a good general user experience with business processes.

IBM's APIs are very good. We use them often. I really like the API.

The IBM coaching tool gives us a lot of great benefits.

The solution offers great notifications.

The performance of the system is great. It's very reliable.

Finding errors and bugs in the system is not easy. We can't seem to use the events or logs to find them, so it makes it difficult to debug the system. They really need to work on their debugging features to make is much, much easier. It would improve the solution considerably and should be something they add in a future release.

The solution is pricey and time-consuming to manage.

Technical support needs to be much more helpful. 

It would be useful if IBM could hold calls to help companies with system learning so we could better wrap our arms around the product.

I've been using the solution for around two years at this point.

The solution is quite stable. We find that it doesn't crash and it's quite reliable.

I'm not sure I could speak to the scalability of the solution. I personally have never tried to scale it, so I'm not sure how it works.

My understanding is that our team is not well supported by technical support. Due to the fact that it's not very good, we need to rely on our own research and try to troubleshoot from our end.

Before IBM, we didn't use any other kind of business process management architecture. We chose IBM due to our existing architecture. Whether or not we used a different software that helped us complete similar tasks, I cannot say.

As I recall, the initial setup was pretty straightforward. We found it to be rather easy.

The solution is on the expensive side.

We're just customers; we don't have a business relationship with IBM.

We're not sure which version of the solution we're using is. It may be Version 10. 

We don't use IBM BPM for production. We are using IBM BPM in the pilot system instead of the production system. I've been using the pilot system for about one year.

I'd advise others considering business process management software to think about open source. The industry is moving in that direction, and it may be better for many companies.

If they have enough money and time, IBM is still a very good choice.

I'd rate the solution eight out of ten.