Panaya Test Dynamix Reviews

I have been using this solution for test and defect management and testing automation.

We use Panaya with SAP. We are using the SaaS version.

Without Panaya, it will be difficult to manage a large number of test scripts. It can be a mess to manage them in a spreadsheet or a document, and we can easily lose them. Panaya is very useful for being organized and structured in managing test scripts. Without it, we would have difficulties managing scripts in a good and structural way.

It provides us with actionable insights in real-time into every aspect of our project. We can have a very quick view of the test progress in real-time. It is very useful. In one click, we can see some of the KPIs that are available to us in real-time, which is great.

The dashboard's progress overview is very important to challenge people and show them how much we've progressed. It is important to have this KPI and get it in real-time. Its dashboard can highlight what was missing from your change or upgrade process if you have more defects follow-ups.

It gives a good picture of where you are and what you have tested. You have good control of your scope and your progress in the scope. You can show this progress to everybody, and you can challenge them to be on time with Panaya reporting. So, we feel safer with everything in Panaya, but when some people work in Panaya and some don't, it becomes more complex because you have double management. That's our difficulty right now.

With Panaya, people are more autonomous, so we save time. Before Panaya, we needed more people to coordinate tasks and activities. With Panaya, we can bring more autonomy to testers and the team.

The test repository to follow the test progress is most valuable because we can easily create and manage a huge number of test scripts. We can copy and paste, replicate, and drag and drop many tests scripts. We can create test scripts en masse. When you have a high volume of tests, the tool is quite useful. It works well when you want to manage a lot of tests, such as you have 1,000 or more test scripts.

Panaya Recorder is another valuable feature for manually recording test evidence. It saves a lot of time. It saves approximately 20% or 30% of the time to run a script, but the duration also depends on the size of a script.

It is quite easy to use. It is quite flexible, so it is easy to organize or create specific fields for our tests for defects. There is good flexibility. 

The setup of Panaya Recorder is a bit complex. Panaya is a SaaS application, but you need to install some components on your computer. You need to set up your computer to allow Panaya Recorder to work. There are five or six things to do each time you install Panaya for any user. If you miss something, Panaya Recorder doesn't work. So, it is complex to install.

Its reporting can be better. We cannot create some of the reports with different data. It is a little limited. There is no possibility for us to build specific reports based on specific fields and so on. We can use some templates for reports, but they are in a simple format. We cannot arrange things in the way we want.

It has a pretty fine dashboard, which is good, but when you want something specific, you cannot do it. We should be able to share this dashboard with many people, but currently, only testers have access to Panaya. It is not easy to share this dashboard in real-time with a large group of people because they need a license just to see the report, and it can be very expensive.

Its licensing should be improved. There should be more license types. There should be an advanced license and a basic license. Some users use Panaya in a very basic way to check defects or reports, but some users will use it in an advanced way. They need to be able to give different types of licenses and also better pricing because it can be expensive.

We tried to have some automation with the tool to make some tests with Panaya, but it looks like it takes time to prepare automated scripts. We are still learning how to do this. It is hard to do, and it takes time to create automated tasks. It is not really an easy task. We need to invest a lot of time to build these automated scripts in Panaya. We should use more automation from Panaya.

I have been using this solution for seven months.

Its stability is very good. It has a very good performance. 

You can easily replicate and reuse what you have done before, which is good. We can manage thousands and thousands of tests. It is great in this way, so Panaya works well right now for us.

Our initial plan was to use Panaya to manage the test script, follow the progress of the test, and use Panaya Recorder to save some time. We also wanted to use Panaya for defect management, issue management, and issue follow-up. The cost of the license was a little expensive, and we didn't deploy Panaya to a large extent to many users. We limited Panaya to a group of 40 people, which created some constraints because some people don't have access to Panaya. They are only involved in a small way in the tests or in the defect resolution. Because of the number of licenses or cost constraints, we have some groups that are using Panaya, and there are some other groups that are not using Panaya. So, we now need to double-track everything. We have to manually replicate the status and progress in Panaya.

In terms of people responsible for the maintenance of this solution in our organization, we have three people so far. I am a test manager for a big SAP program. There is a project owner who is responsible for organized setup. We also have an administrator who is responsible for creating access in Panaya and giving authorizations.

We have two types of support. One is the customer support that we can contact. They are always there. We have also a customer success manager who is dedicated to us. He gives us some advice.

Their support is good. I would rate them a nine out of 10.

We were using a tool attached to Jira for test management about six or seven years ago. We switched to Panaya to save some time. We wanted to run several tests, and we wanted to save some time with Panaya by automating tests. So, the main reason was the automation that we can do with Panaya. We have just started to implement this. We'll see if it works fine.

Panaya is a SaaS application, but you need to install some components on your computer. Its setup is okay and flexible, and you can structurally test the way you want it, but the setup of Panaya Recorder is a bit complex. It is because there are too many things to do. It takes time to install Panaya Recorder, and if you change something, it doesn't work.

It takes less than a week to prepare a test. If you need to add a new user, it takes a little time to install all the components and features on SAP.

Our ROI will come when we repeat some tests. This is our first project, so we are still learning. We saved a little time, but because it was quite expensive, we couldn't move all people to Panaya. So, now we have two flows to manage.

It is expensive. Because of its cost, we couldn't deploy Panaya to a large extent.

Its licensing should be improved, and there should be more license types. There should be an advanced license and a basic license.

I was not involved in it.

It can show you exactly what to fix and test when it comes to SAP upgrades. This feature can be helpful, but I didn't work on this functionality myself. The technical team has used it. We work with a partner on our process, and they have used this functionality at least once.

It can help us achieve failure-free upgrades. We have been using it only for the last six or seven months, and we didn't use this functionality much. We are still defining our scope. It could reduce the amount of testing required to implement changes or upgrades.

Panaya can enable you to go live with changes or upgrades to SAP without impact or issues. It is helpful but only if you have a large group of people who are using Panaya. Half of our test management is in Panaya, and half of it is not in Panaya. If you have everything in Panaya, you feel more comfortable and secure with the fact that everything has been tested and avoid any problems or issues.

Panaya auto-generates test and defect documentation, but we don't use that. I don't know if the functions to do this work well in Panaya. It also has a module to manage requirements or design a task. These functions exist in Panaya, but we don't use them.

It helps us to be more efficient in testing the right way but not too much. It did not affect the amount of testing we are performing. 

I would rate Panaya a seven out of 10. I know that Panaya has new enhancements in the pipe, to give us more functionalities in the future.