Nintex Process Platform Reviews

The solution has the capability to handle robust execution.

The solution's flexibility can be improved. K2 needs to be fully code-free, and they should try Endeavor to make it code-free. It will help to hide the complexities of smart objects.

Improvements can be made because we are implementing one solution and need a solution that integrates into itself. It's very tedious to manage, so they should ensure that everything is integrated and taken care of.

We have been using K2 for three years.

The solution is scalable. Approximately 100 people use it in our organization.

The customer service and support team are good. The premium support is good, and their response is fast.

K2 is reasonably priced and you pay for licenses. It costs less than half a million, and you own your licenses yearly. Additionally, you pay 400,000 for support and maintenance, but similar tools charge per user. So you are paying roughly $80 per month for one user, which can be quite costly if you have a large organization.

We are currently evaluating Camunda and Integrify.

I rate the solution a six out of ten. K2 is not mature and still needs a lot of stabilization. My advice to new users considering the product will be to use it without customizing it. After installation, use the vanilla workflows, and you will get fast performance. However, if you customize it, you will run into challenges.

K2's best feature is that it can solve complex tasks, issues, and projects with little coding.

K2's support for DevOp team corporations is weak.

I've been using K2 for two and a half years.

K2 is very stable - there have been almost no problems in the time I've been using it.

The initial setup is straightforward because it can be deployed on a DB server, application server, and web server.

For the initial hundred users, the cost is $21,000 per year, which I find too high. There are soft thresholds for this initial license, like the number of forms and environments. 

I would give K2 a rating of seven out of ten.

It is very easy to create and deploy. It does not take your time like SharePoint Workflow. There is no need for the IT people to do it. SharePoint Workflow, needed a programmer to do it. So there are vendors looking forward to Nintex because it is easy to create by the end-user.

They have an expensive license for vendors. They have two types of licenses. It is the standard and enterprise. Some actions in the enterprise, are not available in the standard. We need all the features to be in the standard license. Around fifty features are not in the standard license. That is why it is a problem for us. I am looking forward to when they have the same features in the standard license as the enterprise license.

I have been working with Nintex Workflow for the past twelve years.

Nintex Workflow has great stability.

Nintex Workflow is definitely scalable.

Technical support is great to work with.

The initial setup was straightforward.

We did everything in-house and it is extremely user-friendly. 

The price is too high currently for the license structure. There are two types of licenses standard and enterprise.

Nintex Workflow is user-friendly and saves time I would rate Nintex Workflow a ten out of ten.

Our searches are automated for the approval process, and we have automated our dual management process with K2.

We have 41 processes automated within K2.

It was only a process automation tool for workflows and approval, but now since being bought out by Nintex, we will have many other products available to use. For example, the RPA part of Nintex can plug into K2 and be used together.

The most valuable features of this solution are that it's no code, it's very flexible, and it's easy to design.

Currently, it's taking quite some time to deploy a package, it needs improvement. If they can simplify the deployment then it would be helpful. 

I would like to see a versioning tool included within K2 similar to Visual Studio to do your versioning of programs. It would be very useful and assist us a lot.

If they could also include an RPA as a tool, or integrate it with RPA products. It would be beneficial, as we wouldn't have to purchase anything else.

I have been using K2 for eight years.

We are using the latest version.

It's a stable solution. It is one of the features I like most.

It's a scalable product. We have approximately 4,000 AD users for this solution in our organization.

We have had no problems with the technical support at all.

Previously, we used Lotus Notes for workflows and approvals. 

The initial setup is very straightforward.

I have a development team of four people on safety.

There is an initial fee when purchasing and a fee for maintenance afterward.

It is not an expensive solution.

We have plans to continue using this solution and I would definitely recommend it.

I would rate K2 an eight out of ten.

We are currently using K2 Five classic. We have several use cases. The main use case is the vendor request. We process all requests that come in from existing or new vendors through K2. Our legal department uses it for checklists and other things. The approval process, onboarding, and all other related things are also done through K2. It is used for onboarding, termination, suspension, access, and many other things. All these things are automated.

It is for process automation, and it saves a lot of time and resources. Some of the things used to take weeks, and now they can be done in days and hours. Previously, we needed a spreadsheet, and now everything is done through a form. Everything is automatic, and eventually, the returns are pretty good.

The workflow engine of K2 is its main strength. Its workflow engine is probably one of the best, and that's the reason why Nintex bought K2. It can clearly handle any complex process or scenario.

K2 is almost low-code. It is a no-code or low-code solution. You don't have to read a whole lot of code. It is pretty much GUI based. Their support is also excellent.

The biggest advantage of K2 is SmartObjects, which allow you to separate the data from the application. It is a standalone application that allows you to build a data source from different places, which a lot of other applications also do. It is called SmartObjects technology, which is pretty powerful. If I have data from different applications, such as JD and ServiceNow, I can just create a SmartObject based on a data source and use it. I have some forms that have six, seven, or eight applications in a single form with data from different places.

K2 is a workflow solution, and there is no RPA solution with K2. This is where K2 lacks a little bit. It is just a heavy workflow solution. It doesn't have a supplemental product like RPA. If you want to use RPA, you have to use Blue Prism, UIPath, or something else. If you use Nintex, it has an RPA solution. 

It is a form-based application, and they are doing everything electronically. The initial investment in K2 is heavy because it is a BPM software. It does not have a low cost because they charge you the same for one workflow or 100 workflows.

I have been using this solution for seven years. I also used to work for K2.

It is used across the board. Almost everyone in the accounting department uses this solution. We also have a bunch of different legal departments, and they also use it. It is being used from the bottom to all the way up. When someone submits a request, it can go to the VP and all the way up. Because it is an approval process, it depends on how high it goes.

Their support is excellent.

The on-premises setup was fairly complex four years ago because we had to build the servers. You have to build test servers, staging and production environments, and all kinds of stuff. When you go for the cloud solution, you don't have to maintain any of those, which is why we are moving to the cloud solution. Our initial investment was quite a bit, and we're trying to move to the cloud solution.

The initial investment in K2 is heavy. Currently, the expenditure is $28,000 for a year. After we go to the cloud, it is going to be per seat and probably cheaper. Currently, there are unlimited users.

I would rate K2 an eight out of ten as a BPM solution. 

We have predominantly been using the solution as the front end for automation solutions. I'm a program manager. We don't have a direct link to K2, but we work closely with them and carry out a lot of maintenance and other work through them. So it's quite a deep-rooted relationship.

The biggest selling point for us was that the solution had out of box connectivity with UiPath and we didn't have to write any custom code to be able to invoke UiPath bots and automation solutions. That worked well for us in the past but when you talk about other specific functionalities, like the applications or authentication on native operating systems for mobiles and those kinds of things, K2 is lacking big time. The solution doesn't really have a good set up and I think as more and more businesses want app rather than desktop systems or web systems, K2 is not necessarily the best solution going forward.

The solution is heavy and cumbersome and it has a very stringent way of doing things. It's not difficult but at the same time it's not flexible enough. If you don't do it properly, you can't render it on mobile properly and it just runs into a lot of issues. I think what we need is a more flexible platform that can actually give us that option, a second option or a main option, to move away from K2. We run into issues at times and it's mainly around the way we design applications and mainly around how we want to use applications. It restricts us in a very specific way to be able to fully utilize the capability. I think K2 is a bit far from being a perfect mobile development platform. We'd like to look at Microsoft as an option.

I've been using this solution for three years. 

Scalability is a kind of dependent thing. Essentially, it would require infrastructure and IT development to be able to do anything with the infra scalability or the platform scalability. We haven't tried it. We do know that when we want to sync up different environments, it's not that straightforward. I mean it's not complex, but it has a lot of activities. It's not a straight sync up between the two servers. You have to do a lot of tasks including download packages. It's a bit annoying because it takes up too much time from the ops team to be able to sync the two environments, especially when you're uploading packages that at times are not compatible. Again, it could be dependent on the way we've set it up on-prem. I don't necessarily know if that's a K2 issue or if it's an infra issue on our end, but assume it's likely both.

I haven't dealt with technical support because our ops team does that if they ever have to.

I'm a massive fan of K2 even though it's given me a bit of trouble in the past. Essentially, I think there are good features in there as well. It really comes down to your personal requirements, I believe. It's supposed to be a kind of designer-based application, work flow creation application or platform but I personally think that it takes a lot more technical ability to be able to design applications on K2. It requires more than somebody off the street, you need someone who can actually do a bit of design work and be able to spin up a really good application. It's not marketed properly, it's marketed as a designable application platform. But it's not necessarily, it requires a bit of programming knowledge.

The other thing I guess would be whether you want to pay for the licensing cost. There is a price for the K2 environment, does that suit you and your organization? That's something which you need to consider. Finally, K2 is also really hard to find, to be honest, and it comes at a premium so there's that maintenance cost as well or even development costs, which may be a lot higher than any other application that you may use. 

It's given us applications that are stable once you get it right. We haven't had many issues in terms of applications falling over or not responding, things like that. It can be a bit slow if it's database-intensive applications. Again, that could be a mixture of both infrastructure and also K2 application.

I would rate this solution a six out of 10. 

We use the solution for a lot of things. However, one of the main things we use it for is approval workflows.

I really like the visual representation. It actually looks like a flow chart, which is nicer than a SharePoint Designer workflow, which doesn't have that ability.

The solution is a bit too expensive. It could be cheaper.

I've been dealing with the solution for two or three years at this point.

The product is quite stable. I haven't had issues with bugs or glitches. It hasn't crashed or frozen on me. It's reliable, as far as I can tell.

It's my understanding that the solution is scalable. If a company needs to expand it, it should be able to do so.

We have about 1,500 users on the solution currently. Anyone who can access SharePoint can access this product, and that is pretty much the entire company.

I've dealt with technical support in the past. They could be better. They aren't as responsive or knowledgeable as they could be. I'm not completely satisfied with their level of service. That's just my own personal experience. They have tried to be helpful, and the issues I had with them were a long time ago.

The initial setup, as far as I understand it, was not complex. It was very straightforward. However, I personally didn't install it. It was installed when I came to the job.

The cost of the solution is quite high. If they could work to reduce it for their customer, that would be ideal for us.

We pay on a yearly basis. It's my understanding that we pay approximately $11,000/year.

We're just customers and end-users. We don't have a business relationship with the company.

I am using the latest version of the solution, whichever it is. I'm not sure of the exact name of the version.

I don't know how the product compares with other solutions other than the older versions of Workflow such as SharePoint Designer.  I know that with Online, SharePoint Online, there are other workflow management tools that you can use if you would like to.

In general, I would rate the solution at an eight out of ten. We're mostly happy with it.

We use it for internal process automation.

The solution helped us automate several processes we used to do manually.

It supports SharePoint in the platform, and it's easy to customize to the maximum extent.

The integration could be improved, and we are looking for a solution on Office 365, not on-premise SharePoint. In addition, we cannot use the same solution on cloud, and we have to purchase it all over again to get it on cloud.

We have been using this solution for three years. We have a perpetual version, so we stopped renewing it last year. It is deployed on-premises on Sharepoint.

The initial setup is straightforward.

I rate this solution a seven out of ten because of its limitations.