Coming October 25: PeerSpot Awards will be announced! Learn more
Buyer's Guide
Business Process Management (BPM)
September 2022
Get our free report covering Camunda, ServiceNow, Appian, and other competitors of Pega BPM. Updated: September 2022.
633,184 professionals have used our research since 2012.

Read reviews of Pega BPM alternatives and competitors

Abdurrahman Gori - PeerSpot reviewer
Technical Manager at a comms service provider with 501-1,000 employees
Real User
Top 5
Component reusability saves us development time, but the learning curve is too steep
Pros and Cons
  • "The best feature is the automation."
  • "The only drawback is the time that it takes to have a complete set of workflows implemented on the Camunda platform."

What is our primary use case?

We use Camunda for the automation of the workflow and business process designer. We use the module cockpit and the workflow engine to orchestrate the process. We are a consulting company and we're not doing this for internal purposes. We mostly do this for projects, and these projects are for our clients.

The environment where we work is very dynamic and is changing a lot. So based on the circumstances, we mostly work on the delivery parts, as in project deliveries. At the beginning of the year, we have a clear scope, clear targets, but down the road, we face a lot of challenges where we face many dependencies. We need to constantly go around the dependencies and change things back and forth.

We have a lot of experience in the development, on the ERP, and so forth. We have seen that investing in a tool like Camunda is valuable, especially because it's an open-source product. When you do the customization, you'll be enriching and increasing the automation possibility of the product. So, the value is always increasing.

What is most valuable?

The best feature is the automation.

Camunda supports microservices and you can do multiple things. The most important thing is that you can reuse components that you have within the product. For example, let's say that I developed a workflow for a quality review; that is a workflow that can be reused in any new process. I can just ship it, plug-and-play, copy it, and reuse all of the features and components that are there. It means that I won't be spending too much time in terms of development to put it in place. To me, that is the most valuable thing about the product.

What needs improvement?

The only drawback is the time that it takes to have a complete set of workflows implemented on the Camunda platform. This is from drawing the modeling and the workflow up to the production release.

The support definitely has to be improved.

Second, it needs to be more intuitive. As it is now, to develop an automated process in Camunda, you would need to involve a front end developer, backend developer, and sometimes, someone who has experience with modeling. Where in Appian and Pega, you would be able to simply reduce these overheads by creating the process, the flow, and converting it within certain boundaries into the automated process.

The visualization part can definitely be improved. You can see the process moving live, but if you have a complex design where you would like to show the process in a different shape, that takes a lot of customization and a lot of coding effort to put this in place. The visualization needs not a little or a medium amount of work, but rather, it requires a lot of improvement. At the end of the day, we have the process, we have the workflow, we have the event, we have everything. However, what the people see at the end of the day is what they believe. So sometimes we know that we do have a lot of data and a lot of information, but we fail to represent this information in a way that meets or addresses the business requirements. Better visualization capabilities would help in this regard.

For how long have I used the solution?

I have been working with Camunda BPM for almost two years.

What do I think about the stability of the solution?

I would say that it is stable, at least up to a certain extent. Whenever there is an update to the product available, we go ahead and update it to the latest.

What do I think about the scalability of the solution?

This is a scalable platform. We have about 600 users and about 20 superusers. The superusers are developers, admins, and process engineers. They are a mix of process, business support, mobile app developers, and so forth.

How are customer service and technical support?

Support is an area that is in need of improvement.

First, they don't have a strong knowledge center. If there is a challenge or there is an issue and you would like to look around, it's not straightforward. Their knowledge center does not address most of the challenges that a person who goes through the cycle from scratch. In building the process and building the products and building the workflow, a person will go through a painful process if they don't have enough experience.

When I say enough experience, I mean a minimum of 16 to 18 months. If someone doesn't have this experience on Camunda, it will be difficult and they will suffer to get things up to speed. The learning curve is too high, so they can do more if they enrich their knowledge center.

The second problem is that the support services from Camunda are not straightforward. When we communicate with them, they have to evaluate you. Sometimes they charge you per workflow, but there is no standard model. It is difficult for us because we have an agreement with the client that at the beginning of that project, we put in our estimation as to the required resources in terms of the infrastructure resources, and in terms of logistic resources, and support. With Camunda, because of the undefined or non-standard costing, that becomes a challenge.

So sometimes we go to a client and we see that the support costs will be much higher than the benefit of the digitalization. That's an example where we decide to do only the modeling for that client using Camunda and the classic workflow development will take place. This is the case, especially for small and medium businesses. For enterprise clients, definitely, we always go with full-fledged support.

Which solution did I use previously and why did I switch?

I have limited experience with Appian and Pega BPM, but my most in-depth experience is with Camunda BPM. We did a pilot project with Appian for one or two months and we did one with Pega for about one month.

During our evaluation, we have seen that there are pros and cons to all of them.

We also used K2 as one of the platforms, as well as Microsoft BPM. The Microsoft product was a combination between Dynamics and SharePoint and so forth, it was really rigid. Similarly, K2 has a lot of limitations.

This is important because once we get the business requirements, we adapt to the system. We don't force the business to change, especially in this region. We are in the Middle East, Gulf area, and working with the government sector means that they have their own standards that we need to comply with. They have their own procedures where the tools, the IT, and the process have to be adjusted to meet their requirements. For example, consider a supply chain and the procurement process. This is different from one organization to another.

This is the main thing that holds us back from investing in a system like Pega. Pega, to a certain extent, is good. It has most of the capabilities. It also gives you the room to customize to the extent that you feel fit. However, the cost is too high. When we talk about the licensing costs and the customization costs, it's extremely expensive and out of reach.

How was the initial setup?

The initial setup was not straightforward. The complex part was to load or update the backlogged events. So if I have a process, which is already past the flow to a certain stage, after the implementation, if I did not start from scratch, you would need to make the data or the workflow that you have current with the process. Making it current with the live process monitoring is a nightmare. It takes a lot of development effort, a lot of data validation, and a lot of workarounds to bring this up to speed.

I have not seen that there is too much support in being able to bring in existing services. For example, if someone has an existing process, an existing instance with existing data, which is not linked, there is no explanation of what the best approach is and how to load and how to bring this into the new process and make it current, covering the backlog.

This is especially true if the backlog is something that would be crucial for some of the processes that are down-line. For example, in the case where you have a successor process where it depends on the predecessor too much in terms of the decision, and also in terms of that project. Normally, we deal with delivery on projects, so we look at the delivery and the forecast and the delays. So to see the project delays, sometimes we need to go back in time to see whether the delay was in the first stage or on the second stage or on the third stage. Based on this analysis, we always create our baseline by the end of the year and reiterate on our scopes at the beginning of the year.

What about the implementation team?

We have an in-house team of two resources that maintain the product.

What's my experience with pricing, setup cost, and licensing?

The cost of this solution is better than some competing products.

What other advice do I have?

My advice for anybody who is considering Camunda BPM is that they implementing a PoC first.

I would rate this solution a six out of ten.

Which deployment model are you using for this solution?

Hybrid Cloud
Disclosure: My company has a business relationship with this vendor other than being a customer: partner
Mason Turvey - PeerSpot reviewer
Robotic Process Automation Engineer at a logistics company with 5,001-10,000 employees
Real User
Stands out with its integration capabilities, but the backend modeling can be streamlined a little bit
Pros and Cons
  • "It has good integrations. We were looking for out-of-the-box integration with both on-prem and publicly accessible data sources. We needed integration with the cloud, OData, our REST API feed, and then on-prem passthrough to go to a SQL database or on-prem APIs through Azure local deployment, etc."
  • "The tool itself is pretty good, but the main area that we struggled with was the backend. The frontend development is really good, but the backend modeling can be streamlined a little bit. There are good integrations, but tying them through the data layer and then up into the frontend could be improved a little bit. It does read/write on the data source, and you can configure it to just write or just read, but there is a little bit of work involved."

What is our primary use case?

I've done a lot of personal projects, but we haven't yet implemented anything at an enterprise scale. We're just toying around with it and seeing if we can find a good solution for our needs. What we're focusing on is bringing apps to market faster than what a typical application development team takes, which can be a six-month to a year timeline. We want to see if we can do more proof of concepts, prove ideas, and provide value to our business as they ask for it.

What is most valuable?

It has good integrations. We were looking for out-of-the-box integration with both on-prem and publicly accessible data sources. We needed integration with the cloud, OData, our REST API feed, and then on-prem passthrough to go to a SQL database or on-prem APIs through Azure local deployment, etc.

What needs improvement?

The tool itself is pretty good, but the main area that we struggled with was the backend. The frontend development is really good, but the backend modeling can be streamlined a little bit. There are good integrations, but tying them through the data layer and then up into the frontend could be improved a little bit. It does read/write on the data source, and you can configure it to just write or just read, but there is a little bit of work involved. 

For how long have I used the solution?

I have been using it for less than a year. We started around December of last year looking into it.

What do I think about the stability of the solution?

It is as stable as you make it. If you're following good software development practices throughout the process and you're doing good checks and balances and maintaining solid architecture principles, then it is pretty stable. If you don't do that coming into it and you don't establish COE in standards, you can definitely get yourself into trouble.

What do I think about the scalability of the solution?

The way Appian manages its software makes it directly scalable to new systems. Especially with the cloud distribution, Appian is going to integrate with any new hardware architecture that comes out, and you don't have to do any updates for code. If you're on the cloud, then deploying it is very easy, and scaling that outwards for capacity is also very easy. One limiter that we had for scalability was on our side. Our on-prem data had to feed through that, and there were scalability issues with the demand on the server, but that was more on our side, not on Appian's side.

In terms of its usage, right now, we are exclusively looking at it from our analytics and intelligence standpoint, and we don't have anybody dedicated to Appian. We have more teams who focus on low code efforts and are playing around with it to figure out the capabilities and the standards that we want to work with it. We are building out the integrations that we need to scale it up. So, there is nobody fully dedicated to it, but there are definitely people playing around with it. There are only a handful of people right now. There are probably four to five at most at any given time.

We don't have a plan in place to increase its usage because we don't know. We haven't really found an incredible use case where we can deploy it. Once we set up the infrastructure and get business buy-in with a few demos, we can talk about scaling.

How are customer service and support?

I did not go through tech support too often, but when we reached out to more of a technical account managing team, from an enterprise level, the support that we got was pretty solid.

Which solution did I use previously and why did I switch?

We didn't have a BPM in place beforehand. 

How was the initial setup?

Its initial setup is a little bit more on the complex side. It takes more of a data engineer mindset to set it up the right way. The benefit of a low code tool should be that you can put it in the hands of business users and let them scale with it. From the frontend perspective, it is really good, but when you have to go into the data and actually integrate it, it takes a dedicated IT team to really set it up. I'm not sure if there is much they can do to fix that because it really takes domain expertise to set up data sources, but that's the blocker that we've seen.

What's my experience with pricing, setup cost, and licensing?

I'm sure it is cost-effective, but right now, we're just toying around with it. So, I don't have any hard numbers.

Which other solutions did I evaluate?

We were looking at other solutions as competitors when we did our initial investigation. If I recall, we talked to Creatio. They're a smaller name in the space. We talked to LANSA. We also talked to Pegasystems, but we didn't really get much of a response from them. We talked to Retool as an option. They're not much on the BPM side. They're more on the frontend development side. So, we factored them out pretty quickly.

We didn't really come into it looking for a BPM solution. We came into it looking for a low-code application development solution. All of those fit the bill, and they had various benefits and drawbacks. Where Appian stood out was the full stack integration. They have the data integration layer for both on-prem and public sources, and then there is the full stack, including RPA integration, integration with different systems, frontend development, and data modeling. They also offered a BPM solution, which was really nice.

What other advice do I have?

I would advise setting up your standards beforehand and identifying which teams are going to be responsible for the governance side of things. You need to identify a tech focus team that's going to be handling that. Once you have that built pretty solid, going from there, if you're targeting a citizen development model, then you can start pouring out into citizen development. If you're sticking within IT and app development and building a low code team, you have to set standards beforehand and make sure everybody is on the same page.

I would rate it a seven out of ten. It is a pretty good solution. I haven't yet seen any major drawbacks. There are other competitors that offer more specialized solutions, but as a general solution, it takes the lead.

Disclosure: I am a real user, and this review is based on my own experience and opinions.
Flag as inappropriate
Suresh Thota - PeerSpot reviewer
Enterprise Architect/Enterprise Digital Solution Architecture at Mashreq
Real User
Top 10
Offers the ability to create a case file identification
Pros and Cons
  • "It provides a solution for integration orchestration. This solution is for any organization in the banking, telecommunications, healthcare, manufacturing, and all domains and industries."
  • "The initial setup is actually a really complicated process."

What is our primary use case?

Our primary use case is completely banking driven. We select the account to open, determine the complimenting and storage core, cooperate on their calls, do analysis for the core customer, uphold compliance policy and anti money laundering payments, and all the functions we define in the process.

Currently, we are using it on-premises with a roadmap for into the cloud. We call that the private cloud, because this is a bank space so we are not going to the public cloud due to regulations and compliance policy.

What is most valuable?

The features that we have found most notable are similar to what we have with IBM BPM. Because we have done the automation so that when a document comes from the customer as a soft copy, there is an optical character reader ensuring that the data will be integrated with the BPM. We thought of the human interaction, checking everything, and you can create a case file identification like in BPM.

What needs improvement?

From the optimization perspective, this is better than what we have currently with BPM where we are also doing automation. We can move where the cash mechanism and the external cash mechanism are, where we put the cluster to a policy, where the service will be available. Even when service fails, it will be taken within a cluster of seconds, as things are on the optimization solution provided by the BAW.

Other improvements include a couple of reusable artifacts. These were not there with BPM and now BAW provides that.

We've got a list of features that feed from IBM. We get them on a weekly basis in the subscriptions. These are the benefits we are getting from IBM - small snapshots level, how you are going to deploy automation, integrated data set ups. That is a pipeline where you can do automation, the process for operational specifications, where it goes to the end-to-end automation process level.

A lot depends upon the customer. Let's say a customer wants to get a good system where you can crop in and automate the process, that feature was not available in IBM. So we spoke to them and they released the setup for tax availability for BAW. We are working on features based on our requirement specifications.

For how long have I used the solution?

IBM Business Automation Workflow is a new solution that we implemented four months ago. 

What do I think about the stability of the solution?

This is a new product, so we are getting a couple of bugs on the product level. We have spoken to IBM and it's up to the product vendor to provide product complications, like deployment snapshots and where we have automation in the process. We keep talking to the IBM guys to write a PMR and get it refurnished. 

We use the auto-scaling mechanism. So maybe the volume is too high for utilization and we use the load balancing, distributing the load balancing to multi-use cloud packages. We use that for the availability.

The solution is being used country-wide. That means five to eight million people use it on a daily basis. Globally, we implemented it for the National Bank because it exists across all the countries and all the 128 branches in the different countries.

What do I think about the scalability of the solution?

In terms of scalability, we have implemented auto-scaling. There are on-premises flows, and on-prem/cloud users, and settings on the IBM cloud.

How are customer service and technical support?

Customer service is good. It's the leader from a customer service perspective.

Which solution did I use previously and why did I switch?

Before using BAW, I was using BPM for development, designing architecture, and providing a solution for the automation workflow process. I worked on automation without manual interactions.

How was the initial setup?

The initial setup is actually a really complicated process. We did the proper enterprise access to the server. Then we have the front desk, principal, policies, standard regulations, practice assessments, and the architecture, then with the business IT, the whole concept is complex.

What about the implementation team?

We have two types of set ups, micro-services and services in the interaction section. For the services in the interaction section we use the IBM Integration but for the micro-services we use IBM Connect.

What's my experience with pricing, setup cost, and licensing?

We don't have other costs, except for license and support. If you buy the software you can get one year support free of cost. When it is upgrading the PMR and product level issues, there are technical discussions with the vendors. So those things are free of cost provided by the vendors.

Which other solutions did I evaluate?

We evaluated a couple of vendors like Pega, and Oracle BPM. We evaluated four vendors. We choose IBM at end of the day for their support team, costs, and availability. These factors are a concern for a vendor from a traceability metric perspective. We chose IBM since it is available for implementation and we already have an agreement with them as partners.

What other advice do I have?

IBM Business Automation Workflow is a good tool provided you can use it cross-platform where there are a lot of features. Another good thing, which other products, like Pega and Oracle don't have, is that it is a very optimizing solution providing the IBM BPM process orchestration.

On a scale of one to ten, I would give IBM Business Automation Workflow a nine. 

Since I have been working with multiple vendors on multiple projects in the billion dollar  project range, I see that it works for end-to-end functionality.

It provides a solution for integration orchestration. This solution is for any organization in the banking, telecommunications, healthcare, manufacturing, and all domains and industries.

Which deployment model are you using for this solution?

On-premises
Disclosure: My company has a business relationship with this vendor other than being a customer: Partner
Vice President at a healthcare company with 10,001+ employees
Real User
Top 5
Flexible and user-friendly with helpful pre-built schemas
Pros and Cons
  • "It was pretty easy to deploy."
  • "The biggest challenge we had was the cost and the licensing."

What is our primary use case?

We deployed Salesforce for global shared services, for global business services, where we consolidated and standardized on case management software. It's a marketing cloud. We used Einstein as well. We had a pretty large Salesforce deployment. If it was for all internal customers around our global shared services and business services, which was connected with the contact centers. We built contact centers in Manila, Prague, Bogota, and Tampa, among others. Salesforce was the platform that we consolidated all our processes on. We brought it together with Genesis and Interactive Intelligence around the call centers so that we brought everything together.

When we first did the assessment, it was global and it was for putting in a standardized software platform for all the corporate functions of HR, finance, procurement, payroll, and compliance. We standardized all their processes on Salesforce, and then we did that around case management and knowledge management as well. We did that across all those call centers, and that was our Salesforce deployment. We had to EBOM that with ServiceNow and Workday and all the financial systems, SAP, et cetera. We use Salesforce as one of our enterprise platforms.

What is most valuable?

The flexibility around the deployment is the most valuable aspect of the solution.

The user-friendliness and the interactiveness of Salesforce are great. The tools that came built with it are useful. Between Genesis and Salesforce, there were some schemas that were prebuilt. In terms of the implementation around the popups on the Genesis system and the Interactive Intelligence, they had some pre-built Salesforce schemas which made it very simple. 

With AI for Einstein, the bot capabilities, self-service capabilities, were great. We built a global portal that was Einstein, and the bots were key for the self-service capabilities that we were trying to deploy as part of this transformation to digital, and we basically put all of our documents and we digitized just about all the processes. There was a lot of our documentation as well and we put everything online. Einstein helped in the evaluation of these products. It helped navigate for the users, the end-users, which were all internal. We had some external too, as we ended up providing that service for third parties around invoicing and procurement. That said, Einstein helped in the user effectiveness and efficiencies around the interactions.

What needs improvement?

The biggest challenge we had was the cost and the licensing, and we ended up getting an ELA, so enterprise licensing agreement. That took a lot of negotiations and a lot of pressure, however, we were able to get good pricing, the community licensing, and they bundled in Einstein. They bundled a lot of capabilities for us with the ELA.

For how long have I used the solution?

I've used the solution for the last two years, although it was deployed in 2017 or 2019.

What do I think about the stability of the solution?

The stability is very strong. We haven't had any issues. There are no bugs or glitches. It doesn't crash or freeze.

What do I think about the scalability of the solution?

The product is scalable. 

How are customer service and support?

We ended up getting premium support. Due to the fact that it was a critical environment, the call centers, we ended up getting the premium support that was built into the package that we provided. We did get the higher level, higher SLAs, to make sure that there was business-critical support.

How was the initial setup?

We had a large Salesforce deployment in our pharma and medical device organizations. Therefore, we ended up getting enterprise licensing. We ended up having a good set of knowledge. We ultimately used Deloitte to do our development, and Deloitte had some very, very strong capabilities in Salesforce, specifically around case management. That got us going pretty quick. We had a very successful deployment in Salesforce.

From a capability standpoint, Salesforce has really met our needs. It was pretty easy to deploy. We kind of stuck to the basic versions and tried not to customize. We did configurations, however, we tried to stay native for most of Salesforce.

What's my experience with pricing, setup cost, and licensing?

You really have to work hard with the licensing. they are open to negotiating, however, it takes a while to get there. 

Which other solutions did I evaluate?

We evaluated Salesforce, Appian, Pega, ServiceNow, Remedy, and we ended up selecting ServiceNow and Salesforce.

We selected Salesforce over Pega as we were able to consolidate everything on it. Then we selected ServiceNow for the IT side of it.

What other advice do I have?

I'd advise to definitely not customize. As they rolled out the new versions, which were every six months, there had to be some significant testing and verification that happened. New companies need to have a good, strong third-party provider that is very experienced to assist. We used Deloitte. We did investigations. We evaluated Accenture, KPMG, and some others - even IBM - however, basically, we decided on Deloitte and that was a good decision for us.

You need to have a really good partner who has a center of excellence, or experts, that could give you a lot of insights into what they've learned that could jumpstart your deployment. I'd advise new users to just stay standard and really focus on the licensing. Otherwise, it could get really costly. 

I'd rate the solution at an eight out of ten. We are quite satisfied with Salesforce. 

Disclosure: I am a real user, and this review is based on my own experience and opinions.
Flag as inappropriate
Client Partner at a computer software company with 10,001+ employees
Real User
Top 20
Good support, easy to set up, and scalable, but tedious to customize and has closed infrastructure
Pros and Cons
  • "Setting it up is fairly easy. If somebody has knowledge of the system, he or she will be able to do it fairly quickly."
  • "From the testing perspective and minor enhancements perspective, customization is something that is a little tedious as compared to new tools. In addition, various open-source tools that are available are not working with IBM BPM."

What is our primary use case?

A banking client is using IBM jBPM for Customer Due Diligence, and they are having user screens developed in Brazos. I think they are treating it like headless BPM, but it is not actually headless BPM. So, some of the screens and the navigation are from the old jBPM technology itself, and they have some of the customizations on top of that by using Brazos screens.

What is most valuable?

Initially, when it was developed eight or nine years back, it was really good because of the features and usability.

Setting it up is fairly easy. If somebody has knowledge of the system, he or she will be able to do it fairly quickly.

What needs improvement?

From the testing perspective and minor enhancements perspective, customization is something that is a little tedious as compared to new tools. In addition, various open-source tools that are available are not working with IBM BPM.

Some of the flows that are developed are end-to-end flows rather than modular flows. With a complex system, such as Customer Due Diligence, there are a lot of reviewers and profiles, and people need to log in and use the same flow again and again, which makes the maintenance of the tool difficult.

The security and testing side of things can be improved. If something can be done to make the latest tools and technologies available for doing the testing from the performance side and security side, it would add a lot of value. Currently, it is very difficult to put all of those tools on top of the closed infrastructure of IBM. Some of the new tools, such as Camunda, have solved this a little bit with the security scan that needs to be done in the DevSecOps pipeline that we are using nowadays.

What do I think about the stability of the solution?

IBM is known for stability and reliability.

What do I think about the scalability of the solution?

From a scalability perspective, it is already being used as a very complex system, and it is working okay. The new solutions, such as Camunda, say that they are good from the scalability perspective, but it has not yet been proven, especially in the financial world. That's the reason we're rating Red Hat and IBM higher in this regard.

How are customer service and technical support?

Initially, there was a lot of to-and-fro communication with the IBM team. Without them, it was not possible at all. Their support was good. 

Because it is very IBM-centric in terms of technology, getting the right people is very difficult. That's the reason why people go to the support team more for getting answers. This is something that is good in other offerings available in the market where the customization can be done very easily, resulting in fewer calls going to the support team. 

Their support is very good. People are good, and everything is good, but in this modern world, there should not be a need to go to the support most of the time.

How was the initial setup?

Its deployment was good and easy, but the problem was that we were not able to get the people with the right skills. It is not like Java technology for which you get a lot of people with skills. It requires very specific skills, which was another challenge that the client was facing. That's why they asked us. 

We don't own the entire application. We have just done a small part of it. They are now looking at what needs to be done and how they can modernize it.

What's my experience with pricing, setup cost, and licensing?

Licensing is managed by the client, but we know it is yearly.

Camunda is relatively cheaper. There is not much difference in pricing of IBM and PEGA. For large licensing, there are discounts as well.

Which other solutions did I evaluate?

We are currently checking out various BPM solutions and seeing how IBM BPM stands with respect to other BPM tools that are available. Red Hat is now IBM, and we found the Red Hat BPM to be a little bit more open source. So, the problem the client is getting may get resolved by Red Hat BPM. Our recommendation is Red Hat BPM and not Camunda, which is an okay solution, but it is a new kid in the market. From the robustness perspective, we are leaning towards Red Hat BPM, but the client has not taken a decision yet.

There are two types of BPM products available. One is the platform solution, and the other one is a little bit open-source kind of solution. Camunda is kind of open-source.

What other advice do I have?

If you are looking for a good solution where you don't need to do multiple enhancements and there is a good troubleshooting and support team, you can definitely go ahead with this solution. If you are looking for a lot of customization after implementing a BPM suite, then I would recommend Red Hat BPM over IBM BPM. For example, in the financial industry, we have critical processes that keep on changing because of regulatory changes. For such cases, Red Hat BPM is more suitable.

I would rate IBM BPM a seven out of 10.

Which deployment model are you using for this solution?

On-premises
Disclosure: My company has a business relationship with this vendor other than being a customer: Partner
Buyer's Guide
Business Process Management (BPM)
September 2022
Get our free report covering Camunda, ServiceNow, Appian, and other competitors of Pega BPM. Updated: September 2022.
633,184 professionals have used our research since 2012.