SAP Signavio Process Manager Reviews

We use Signavio for process modeling, design, and analysis.

The most valuable feature is usability.

The biggest benefit of using this business transformation suite is the combination of all of the modules. There are many components like process intelligence, modeling, designing, and presentation.

The licensing model could be better.

I have been using the Signavio Process Manager for many years. In this company, I have used it for two years and in other companies, I have used it for between three and five.

This is a very scalable solution. Since it is cloud-based, you just have to deploy the link that gives access to it. We use it in 18 different locations in Switzerland and it is no problem to deploy it anywhere, at any location.

We have about 13,000 users.

We are very happy with the technical support. They are fast and the team is competent.

This is a SaaS solution and it was easy to set up.

Signavio has a customer board that has input with respect to future feature developments. This is something that helps move the product forward.

This is one of the best solutions and it is easy to implement. When you are deploying to more than 10,000 users, the usability has to be very high. We are happy with the product and I would definitely recommend it.

That said, I think that the licensing could be improved.

I would rate this solution a nine out of ten.

The primary use case of this solution is to raise process maturity in this UK government agency. The organisation is a 'trading fund' which has both publicly funded and commercial produces and services.

We began, in 2016, with a very low level of process maturity. Some inconsistent and non-standard policies and procedures had been published on the corporate intranet. There were no BPMN 2.0 workflow models or process architecture to any industry-standard; mainly models produced in Microsoft Visio or PowerPoint.

We needed to raise awareness of the value of effective business process management, document processes consistently and promote process performance management across the process governance roles prior to moving into process improvement and automation.

One if the biggest drivers for this was our ISO 9001:2015 certification which is a contractual requirement for some of our biggest customers.

So we are looking for the solution to help raise our process maturity from a zero base through: awareness of the value of process management, understanding what we do and proactive performance management of cross-functional processes - to help break the silos and shine a light on the pockets of activity that are not aligned with business strategy.

We didn't want a solution that produced a static diagram such as is produced by Visio, we didn't want process models to be something that sat on a shelf and were never looked at. With this solution, the models are living: stakeholders can go to them for reference or comment. The whole process architecture can be navigated by drilling-down or following lateral links. Documentation and custom fields can be linked with and displayed in the models.

We are still on a journey with the adoption, but we have some users outside of the core team in functional areas that we have trained to be modelers and they are happily using it.

Signavio has also awoken the organization to the reality of cloud adoption and the deployment of managed SaaS solutions.

An example of how this solution has improved our organization is the modeling of baseline and target processes and architecture for our HR department.  HR are implementing a new IT application (Ciphr). We approached the project with the recommendation to model their baseline processes prior to looking for an IT solution. This enabled them to do 3 key things:

1. Have a legitimate cost and resource baseline for benefits tracking

2. Enable the identification of 'change impacts' on functions, roles, processes, and other process model elements.

3. Provide a basis for 'what if' simulation of target models prior to deployment. 

When the IT vendor arrived to run configuration workshops, HR had the majority of the information they required at their fingertips. This made it easier than it would have been otherwise and now HR recognizes the benefits of using this approach.

Although it was difficult to convince them upfront of the benefits,  HR are advocates for this approach and the Signavio solution.

I would say that this solution gives everyone in our organization everything that they need to effectively manage their processes.

It has helped us introduce process thinking and most people have embraced it. I think that it will help the careers of managers because they can now visualize and understand their processes and how they link upstream and downstream. 

The model validation is valuable because many different people model in different ways to different standards. We have enhanced this by using the Workflow Accelerator functionality to deploy model approval workflows.

The Collaboration Hub allows us to share the models that we've captured and to get comments back, and we don't have to all be in the same room at the same time to do this.  Stakeholders can use their personal devices (even mobile phones) to collaborate and progress workflows.

We are using the simulation capability in Process Manager to accurately model how much things cost and how long they take at present. This enables us to simulate new designs safely at low cost prior to any significant investment in deploying new processes. 

The simulations will allow you to model where you are now, where you think you want to be, and check that it's going to work. 

This solution is very intuitive.

The integration of the Process Manager, Collaboration Hub, and Workflow Accelerator works very well. Now that the organisations process maturity has increased, we are looking at purchasing the Process Intelligence module to allow us to more easily measure and understand our current processes for LEAN six sigma process improvement projects.

We've seem previews of the new 'Velocity Edition' which is the latest release and we are looking forward to deploying the process performance dashboards in the Collaboration Hub.

The solution can enable us to carry out the entire process improvement life cycle from a central hub. We use the Lean Six Sigma methodology for improving processes, but there isn't specific functionality in the solution, at present, to support this. More support for process improvement methodologies such as Lean Six Sigma would be good.

We are trying to get help to up-skill our modelers and show us how to use it fully.

I have worked in many different organisations and have always had a vision of trying to improve processes and having a solution like this that ticks all of the boxes.

3 years.

This solution is stable, the only issues we have had are on our side and not with Signavio.

This solution is scalable. We started quite small and we are still small in the number of users, but Signavio is over-provisioning us. We are gradually ramping it up as time goes on.

The technical support is excellent. They cheerfully guide our own internal support team to resolve issues that lie with us rather than with Signavio's solution.

We previously used IBM Blueworks Live in this organisation and I have used it in other organisations previously.

We switched because we found that the Blueworks interface was inflexible and often produced messy and very limited models.

The initial setup was straightforward. It was easy and fast. 

It is browser-based and cloud-hosted.

The deployment was done with Signavio.

This solution has helped us save time. We have done some studies in simulations where we've contrasted where we were before and where we are now - contrasting the previous unwieldy process models with the new optimised ones with fewer tasks, roles, lower costs and higher quality and speed.

Signavio is about the same price or cheaper compared to IBM Blueworks Live. The Collaboration Hub is an annual cost and enables 1,000 users to navigate published content without the need for a license (you can configure it to certain email or network scopes).

I had not come across Signavio until we undertook an extensive requirements gathering, market research and tender project. Signavio was 'head and shoulders' above the other 40 solutions we evaluated and is also one of the most inexpensive. 

Appian was another solution that was evaluated, but they are very expensive. It's a multi-hundred thousand-pound solution. Signavio is easier to get into and to build up.

There was one other good solution, Orbus, but it's not a cloud solution. It was an on-premises service solution.

Some other solutions could do what we wanted but are very complex and so large that you don't know where to start. Other ones such as IBM Blueworks Live is simple to use but it's limited in terms of the flexibility.

We chose Signavio because it is intuitive, very comprehensive, relatively inexpensive and is a SaaS solution.  It's a very good balance of the most important requirements.

Our head office looks highly professional - it is modern architecture of metal and glass - it looks impressive - so you would expect the processes that go on within it to be super-slick. We are getting there now.

When I joined the organization in 2016, it took weeks to get a laptop issued for a new starter. We still have a lot of work to do to model processes and manage them properly.

We don't use the process intelligence function at the moment, but I think that we need to. We will be speaking with Signavio later today. We are interested in process intelligence, but we don't have it yet.

My advice would be to engage with Signavio. Get them to help understand what the issues are, particular issues for the organization. They are quite good at guiding you to what the best products are to use and how to use them.

Start simple and build on it.

I would rate this solution a ten out of ten. 

We are using it in a mixture, actually. We have got our business-as-usual business analysis activities and we are getting our business analyst to model the processes that they would normally draw up in their day-to-day activity. Instead of doing it in Visio, we are asking them to do it in Signavio to get the depth of the information that we actually need for the process plans.

Things like attributes, the full details of the task descriptions, the full roles and all that is recorded and then filed centrally. What we are also doing is we are trying to expand our scope. This has been a project for us and what we are trying to do is develop it into a product so that we have got backing. We can then go out to different business areas and ask them about some of their processes. We will help them with the challenging parts of the processes. Like we will draw out the plans for them, show them what it looks like and what we can do for them. During that, we would identify pain points and again it is all kept centrally. Then we can feed that back to them. So those are our two main use cases.

For me, one of the main improvements in our organization has been the removal of duplication. We have business analysts across the organization and the business areas that are the ones that are generating the activity. So it is either in a product environment or it is an enterprise technology environment. What we have been able to do through the tool is to identify where business analysts are working on two different things and potentially they can link up efforts. So deduplication for us is one of the main areas things have improved.

For me, the features I find most valuable are definitely in the Collaboration Hub. That is something that we are developing. We are getting more users on there and becoming more familiar with it. The new version is definitely much better that way. The modeling is obviously very important. As a business analyst, when you go from muddling about just using Vizio without using a particular standard and then you go to Signavio you end up modeling to a standard. In a way that can sometimes feel a little bit restrictive. But once you get to understand what the tool is doing for you in terms of giving you the hints and tips and helping you draw plans effectively, it makes a better model in the end.

I see that as a benefit. If you need to do process modeling, I think the tool itself is really good because you can just type in what you want in Quick Model and then that can draw a simple process for you. If you are going from being a business analyst with lots of modeling experience but you had never modeled to a standard and then go to the tool that can be a little bit restrictive initially. Well, then it turns into a benefit because you start using the tool that you are supposed to in the way you are supposed to use it.

One thing I'd like to see changed and improved — bearing in mind we do not use the full functionality — is custom reporting. One thing that I found is in order to get us mobilized, get the processes modeled and get the right information out, we have had to use the API to create some custom reports. I would say making the creation of custom reports easier for the end-user could make it a more versatile solution.

We have not had any stability issues other than recently when they updated to Velocity. You could expect things like that to happen when a new product comes out. Apart from that, it has been 99% stable.

I think the usage can be scaled quite easily. It is very easy to onboard someone. It is also very easy to show them, and there doesn't seem to be any restrictions in terms of the number of users. Right now we are quite small in terms of numbers compared to some organizations. When we need to scale I'm sure we can.

Dealing with tech support has been pretty simple. You raise an issue online, then usually get an automated response back. Anything that is a major issue has been dealt with and gets a higher priority. Anything that is more of a request for something that would be nice if we could do takes a lower priority. We've raised some of those issues as well.

In terms of the relationship with the company, we've got a number of key people that we do speak to. It is a mix of the sales side to the financial side to the technology side. It is nice, but you've got to accept that in a bigger organization and to improve the processes or to give better customer service that you are not always going to be able to speak to one particular person. 

Personally, I've spent a lot of time working in Visio. I've only been at the BBC for five years and then my previous employer worked in Visio. Going back a bit further, I did a piece of work with an SAP installation quite a while back, so I understood the importance of process. Lots of people don't. Over the years, besides working at the BBC, I always found processes for what I do. That is just my approach to things.

When we started going to conferences and were listening to certain people talking about their process, the central repository and such, we tried to understand how that would work in practice. We were using Visio at the time while other people were using things like Lucidchart — you know, free versions, or open-source Business Process Management.

Our priority became to get a central repository. So even without understanding what the tool could do in terms of the modeling, it gave us the central repository and I think the rest of the experience with the tool has been a bonus. It was through going to conferences and having a desire already to use processes more effectively that we made progress. We wanted to translate that to something the end-users and the senior managers would like.

The initial setup was pretty straightforward.

When we went to deploy we went with a consultant BPM-D (Business Process Management -Discipline). We wanted them to help us with our selection because we are a public service organization. We have to go through a particular process to procure anything to make sure that we are following and conforming to standards. So we went through a procurement process, scoped the products accordingly and awarded the contract to Signavio.

Our return on investment is intangible at the moment. Again, it's because of our operating model. We have been trying to find savings, but again, it's difficult to achieve unless you are actually looking to relate it to headcount. It's a challenge and we are not really set up like that in our organization. More recently, we started looking at cost avoidance and so we're looking at that as an angle in terms of return on investment. We are looking at how long it would take us to do it the traditional way.

I can't remember exactly which solutions we were evaluating before we chose Signavio. There were five on the shortlist. We purposely went with a consultant to use their consultancy experience to help us select the right tool because we didn't have that kind of experience. So we used their experience and their guidance to tell us what the top BPM solutions were on the market. Then we pulled together the requirements of what we actually wanted to get out of the tool we selected and got the consultants to do demonstrations to compare and contrast. 

They all had the same criteria to follow and they demonstrated the options to a group of people. It wasn't just myself and my manager, it was a group of people who would be using the tool.  We scored the options based on the criteria and basically Signovio came out top in terms of about five or six different areas that we were evaluating like costs, ease of use, performance — all those sorts of things were taken into account. We just crossed products off the list initially. One was ARIS and another was Bizagi. 

One of the important things for us when we were looking at solutions, was the ease of use. A lot of other solutions out there were just like Visio. The interface for Signavio is good. It is easy to use. It is self-explanatory. I can't really say much more about it in that way. The ease of use affected the adoption in our organization massively. If it had not been easy to use and people were struggling with it, then they just would not have used it. So I'd say it's quite a high factor in making a choice.

Because we are still not using it to its full capacity, it is difficult to really assess the solution's integration, process modeling, mining, and automation thoroughly. A lot of that is because of our own business decisions and being able to get the data that we need to do these simulations in mining. But we can see that people who work with it benefit from these things and we know there is more potential. It is just that we have got to sell that idea on to the rest of our management.

The solution does enable us to carry out the process improvement life cycle. We do not have a completed example yet. We've been working on an HR onboarding process where we've been able to put that into the hub. But again, because of our business model and the way we set up, we have had to hand that project over in terms of work packages for delivery to the business department and we've not got sight of that since it has been handed over. 

The solution's functionality doesn't quite give everyone in the organization what they need. But again, that is only because we are still in the early days of working with people to get them up to speed. The majority of people are used to process and understand process planning. So we are trying to get more of the end-user community involved in using the collaboration hub. So I'd say we're still on that journey.

I would say for business analysts the solution has actually improved that group's workday by reducing the time it takes for them to model a process. We have not been able to do that yet on the same terms with our senior management team. We are still building the process-centric mindset in the organization.

The advice I would give to people looking for a BPM solution would be to look closely at your requirements. Don't be pushed into anything by consultants. Listen to what they've got to say. You will have a gut feel of what you want to do and when you actually look at the tools that are out there it is easier to make your decision.

On a scale of one to ten where one is terrible and ten is great, I would rate the product as an eight only because I think there's always some room for improvement.

We are using the process manager. We have used the collaboration component quite heavily with some of our projects to communicate with some of our other partners. Currently, we are doing some work with some external companies and putting their processes into ours. We have actually been able to communicate directly with them. It has really cut down the time projects take and reduced some of the complexity of following communications with emails going forwards and backward all the time. We are currently going through the business operating model so we can drill down start at our operating model for the business and then drill down to get to the process level.

Because we are still in the early days, it is difficult to say exactly how the product has improved our organization. It is certainly a tool that encourages communications and allows access for departments to see what they do in a much easier way than before. It is good to have that live process that is always going to be updated and accessible instead of on a static rolled up piece of paper in the cupboard.

Probably similar to a lot of other businesses, you are going from having your flows and models in very different formats which can get very complicated sometimes. So it has really given us that opportunity to create that simple view but keep it very detailed as well. People don't need to get bogged down in navigation or figuring out other people's methodology or tools.

This solution improved employees' workdays and functions in some ways. Our automation team is using it quite heavily. It has enabled them to develop their automation quicker and it has enabled projects to be dealt with slightly quicker because of the collaboration commenting, and views are in one place. It has given people that chance to react quickly to any changes and the build of the automation has become quicker and easier.

I think we are getting around to more globally adopting a process-centered mindset. We are not there yet, but I'm hopeful that is will be in the future.

One of the most valuable features is ease of use which has really been a good thing to put into the business. People like tools that they can just pick up and use straight-away. For example, people love the Spacemaker tool, which is funny out of everything they could pick, but they think that is really good. The ease of use, the way the interface looks is very clear and having the ability to add an extra layer to process plans is helpful. I think that extra layer is something that I've really been able to use with the business, and it is nice how valuable that can be.

With the various ways that we can get out into the business through modelers and also through the quick model, we have been able to get things into the solution from different formats and that has been adopted very well. We are getting a lot of the content into the quick modeler. Essentially, in the department I work in, we do not have a full view of everything that goes on in the business. The solution enables the subject matter experts to get their information in and then we can go along and help them construct it and tidy it up properly.

The only thing I would really like to change is notifications. The collaboration and commenting features are great. However, I think it would be more useful for people to get notifications of comments straight away so we can react even quicker to them than we already can.

It has been very, very stable for us. So far so good. I think we had one small outage but it was dealt with really quickly.

We are still in the early days of using the product so the usage is quite small at the moment. I would imagine over the next six months we would be able to really scale it up once we get enough content in there. It is quite gradual at the moment.

The tech support has been very good so far. I have not actually had the need to use them much, which is good. The UK-based team delivers excellent customer service. The people we deal with are very knowledgeable, but also technically going through the system has been really good and quick.

We knew we needed a better solution after we carried out a review end-to-end in the business. It highlighted a lot of the things that better process management could solve for us. From silo approaches to just not having a lot of things joined up in the business, this was seen as a way that we can actually do that and keep it live, and keep it up to date.

We did not previously have a dedicated solution at all. We used older more traditional methods with Visio, PowerPoint and piecemealed it together.

Going back to the process of the tools we considered, it is hard trying to remember all those. I can certainly answer why we chose Signavio. It was the fact that their ethos and how they approached us just seemed to fit with how we like to work. That put them steps above others along with collaboration and customer journey mapping. We were embarking on a customer excellence project at the time, so it was really a way for us to tie a lot of that together. With collaboration being at the heart, it really did help us.

The initial setup was straightforward for the people who did the deployment. We had an idea of what we wanted to do, but they really helped us put it together.

We used an external training company to help get everything set up. They trained us and then it gave us the starting platform to then take it on ourselves to build out.

Our return on investment at the moment is time-savings on project communications. To be honest, because we are in the early stages it is hard to put a value on it. We are still at the stage of just getting stuff in.

The solution's integration of process modeling, mining, and automation in one place really helps. That Collaboration Hub is a nice feature, but also the separation of the modelers and having them in their own space. But it is that Collaboration Hub that really helps bring everything together. We have not fully looked at how the process intelligence will incorporate with that yet. That is something we are still to look into, but I can certainly see that it will be able to just pull those different elements together and layer them.

The product certainly helps us identify process improvements and then we can use that documentation and those models to change our projects and processes. The parts are working side-by-side at the moment. The functionality gives everyone in our organization — from process experts to end-users — what they need. It is presenting a different view and it is allowing people to more easily view what they need to view. But it is also giving that viewer access to understand other areas of the business that they probably would not normally have access to.

On a scale of one to ten where one is the worst and ten is the best. I would rate Process Manager as a high nine. Just the ease of use, the layering of information and how quickly it can all be done is enough to rate it high. The team that we were interacting with in the UK, through from presale to now have really supported us. It is not just a case where we have purchased a product and got left alone with it. They are always engaging with us and working with us to help us with our transformation, which has been really good.

My advice to someone considering this type of BPM (Business Process Management) solution is to just go for it. We have already engaged with some of our partners to help them along. They will want to use some of the methodologies behind the change to use it optimally. But it really works to improve process and productivity.

There are plenty of use cases. One of the key things that we're trying to understand is related to the fact that a lot of our teams are working in different methods. Especially being in a global layer of the company, we're trying to see how similar teams from different geographies are working, in order to find a synergy or find the best way to learn from each other. That's why we've taken on Signavio to do our business process mapping.

We work a lot with offshore delivery models and Signavio has helped us bring their processes and our processes in line so that we know exactly where the hand-offs are and who is responsible for what. In some cases, we have improved the process by shifting this responsibility.

That's one of the real examples that we've done. We've been able to look at the whole picture and understand the responsibilities of each team, whether you're in the US, UK, or India. Then we can understand how to change responsibilities in order to make better use of a process. It's been done on the go, which is really good for us and it's been really valuable.

I think the entire process has improved the life cycle by being in a unified hub. We are still in our infancy of using Signavio. Already, there's been a lot of improvement with people contributing or giving input towards these processes, which means it's working already. The next step for us is to use this as a launchpad to start really managing and improving our processes in real-time. I'm hoping to get there within the next year.

The solution's functionality gives everyone in our organization, from process experts to end users, what they need. There are a lot of times that we talk to the business owner, as we have a lot of client-facing teams. Signavio has enabled us to speak to them directly. In other cases, we wouldn't really talk to them about processes, whereas here, because they can access their process with a click of a link, it makes it easier to comment and say, "Actually, we don't work this way anymore." That sort of feedback helps us to immediately look at it, take in all of its implications, and then change the way we work, so we can still be an enabler rather than an obstruction to their work as well. In the end, their work is what brings revenue to our company too, and we just have to be there to do everything for them.

Signavio improves our employees' work-based functions. It just becomes a little clearer who does what. When you can see it on a piece of paper on the wall somewhere, in a very consistent format, as the process manager allows you too, it gives everybody the sense that they know what they are responsible for. It just clears what you have to do so you can focus.

The collaborative features definitely help create a process-centered mindset in our organization. Every process that we have, there are at least six people talking about it at the same time, which is much better than just one person trying to shove something down somebody else's throat. That's a really good thing. Collaboration works towards that.

The most valuable feature for me is the collaboration point of view, where everybody has a single view, or source of truth, and everybody sees the same thing. Everyone can comment, contribute, and discuss the processes itself, which makes it easier to funnel down the most value-adding comments and make the relevant changes to the processes. This leads to the next best iteration or version of your process.

The interface is really good. It's on your browser, so you don't have to install anything. It just runs off Internet Explorer or Chrome, so the interface is I think a big plus for me.

The solution's ease of use is very friendly so it has been adopted quite well. I thought a lot of people might complain that they need to do tutorials and things like that but they didn't. The people I've spoken to or worked with almost picked it up immediately, without having to do too much coaching. That's a really good thing about the interface and the front end.

For me, given I've got a lot of experience working with BPMN and other process management tools, in terms of the interface, I think there's a little bit more that can be improved to match what the conventional BPMN offers. I've been constantly trying to give this feedback to Signavio, to let them know that it needs to be more coherent with the original BPMN version of the stencil.

So far, I haven't had any really bad experiences, so I couldn't really comment on the stability. So far it's been working okay for me.

I think it's a very scalable product. Obviously, if you work with Signavio hand-in-hand, they are very proactive in trying to help you with what you want. More than me being on their tail, they are after me asking what I want them to do for us. That is a good thing in terms of service, so I definitely think it's scalable. They want to understand our roadmap so that they can help as well.

I have used them occasionally. Because we are using a very small component of Signavio, we haven't really had that many technical queries. When we do speak to them, though, we usually get an immediate response. They get back to us within 24 to 48 hours and then we get something sorted out.

We had Signavio in a different department. A German team was already using it. Through our vendor analysis to see what would be the best fit, we actually chose Signavio, and then we found out we already had an existing relationship. That's how we are changing how we work with them now.

The initial setup was straightforward.

We used good consultants. The initial bits, they've done to help us get up and running. In our second phase, where we're moving into a hybrid of cloud and on-premise, we're working hand-in-hand with them. They've been quite proactive. They always answer questions that we have, especially questions related to security and risk because that's a big factor for us.

We do not yet see an ROI. It is still too early for anything tangible. Intangibly, we are definitely working better across regions, with a lot more collaboration and transparency. There's a lot more understanding of the work we do, plus the work that other teams are doing. We have more empathy now.

Our shortlist included iServer, Bizagi, Trisotech, which is a Canadian company, and Signavio. They were our shortlisted front-runners. We went with Signavio because we had an existing relationship and obviously we were able to elicit a lot of feedback about how they were already working with them. Secondly, it was a good preference compared to the other two as well. Bizagi and Signavio were very close, but we eventually went with Signavio because of the interface and experience.

There's a specific type of product that works for your company, and there could be a lot of factors that finally allow you to settle or choose one. For us, it was Signavio because of the fact that they were a good product and we already had an existing relationship. You must really think about adoption. That's the key thing, because for a product of this scale if the adoption is low, you're not going anywhere with it. The friendlier and easier it is to grasp, the better it is going to work for your wider company. That would be my advice.

I would give it an eight and a half out of ten. If you need a whole number, give it an eight, just to push them a little harder.

In my case, representing the procurement department, we use it now for process mapping of all procurement processes, such as source to contract, procure to pay, and supplier management. First, we map and analyze the current process, then we determinate situations that can be optimized or improved based on our process mapping.

We knew we needed to invest in Signavio because we are a large company with around 15,000 employees and multiple departments. It was impossible to have an overview of all the processes that we have, including processes that are linked to each other and that we might have in Excel, Word, or PowerPoint. How do you bring all of these together to identify possible redundant or contradictory processes? Putting everything into one solution gives us the efficiency of mapping everything and knowing where we might need to focus to make it easier, faster, and leaner for everyone.

In terms of how Signavio has improved our organization, take our supplier onboarding process, to name one concrete example. In the past it took around 18 steps, so we mapped them in scenarios to identify double work, reworks, and things that took much more time than they should. Today, if I look at the new process thanks to Signavio, we were able to reduce it from 18 steps to six, so you can imagine the amount of effort reduced, in terms of people touching the process and time touching the process. This is an example of how we use Signavio to reduce process cycle times.

The solution enables us to carry out the entire process improvement life cycle in a unified hub, because we have all the processes mapped so we can check at the lowest level of detail. We do not only see the process overview but even the activity or task level.

I think the solution's functionality provides everyone in our organization what they need. I am not a superuser, but more of a standard user. For the requirements we have today, at least in my team, we are covered.

I do not use the process intelligence function personally, but my team uses it. Of course, it has affected the way we approach business transformation. We use Signavio to map our processes and identify bottlenecks, double work, and reworks. We eliminate those and make the transformation from a bureaucratic process to a user and customer-friendly process. We don't use it on a daily basis, but we do use it on a regular basis to identify these issues.

The process intelligence has also provided insights into how our organization is actually operating. One example could be that by identifying our processes, we can identify how we organize our team. If you optimize certain processes, you might need fewer resources and you can allocate those resources in areas of the process where you might need more support.

Signavio enabled us to identify a few processes that could be improved. We removed a bottleneck by mapping the process and using the intelligence module, in order to identify where it was redundant. We then removed parts of the process to make it leaner. Another example is on the compliance side, where Signavio helped us identify that we did not check all checkpoints in the process so we could be leaner and even more compliant.

The solution has improved employees' workday functions. By reducing bottlenecks, reworks, mistakes, and unnecessary activities, employees can focus on adding more value activities and eliminating or at least reducing non-value-added activities.

The collaborative features helped our team create a process-centric mindset because there's no process in any company that is not cross-functional. Every process touches another function. Taking the same example of supplier onboarding, it enforced the collaboration between accounting and procurement, minimized the effort, and therefore made the collaboration even smoother because you don't fight about bottlenecks on the reworks. You have one lean process from both sides.

There are many valuable features, of course. I would say the main value of Signavio is to have your current process map in a way that is easy to read and derive optimization actions to make it leaner, faster, more user-friendly, etc.

Another great feature is the visualization, which is easy to see and read. How they map the process is also very user-friendly, with drag-and-drop functionality. Also, it's a very self-explanatory, user-friendly solution.

I would rate Signavio's ease of use as eight to nine out of ten. I am not a process management expert, but more of a business expert, yet I don't need much training to use it.

In terms of process modeling and automation, I can only speak on the process mapping feature, because that is the area I'm responsible for. I would rate it at a very, very high level. Besides ease of use, it is actually very professional in terms of its visualization. We even use it for external compliance audits and the like.

I would like to see more predictive analytics. The tool already has all the process maps, but it could offer a more proactive improvement offering. For example, they could put a little bit more machine learning behind it.

I am not a technical person, but so far I have not seen any performance problems.

As we mapped all of our process, we started with the simple ones and we've scaled up to the complex ones. As of today we have all of our process in.

For me it sounded simple, but I don't know if the people behind it found it to be complex.

It is difficult to specify how much money we have saved in Euros, but I can name you as a percentage. I think Euros depends on the volume, but a percentage is determined more by the specific use case. In the case of supplier onboarding, we reduced the time from around six days of onboarding a supplier to a 24-hour service level.

I think that this solution makes a lot of sense if you want to integrate many processes. If you do it for a single process, you might get some advantage, but you will not get the most out of this solution, which is made for bringing in different topics and processes and mapping them together. It also helps you decide where to split or eliminate roadblocks in order to make it leaner. The more processes you put in, the more Signavio makes sense.

I would rate it between eight and nine points out of ten. I think it's a super-advanced, easy to use solution that brings added value that we need. As a non-key user, but someone who uses the system from time to time for needs that we have, I find it to be a great solution.

We've had a restructuring in our company last year, so a lot of functions that have come are quite new and a lot of new staff are being hired as well. It's particularly useful to have this repository of processes so that new staff can get on board easily and use the knowledge that's available to start working immediately.

There was a lack of clarity at our company, in terms of how certain transactions were supposed to be done. I think with this step-by-step approach in terms of process definition, as well as the ability for people to access the repository easily, we can remove any doubts of how they should be doing their work.

The solution will enable us to carry out the entire process environment life cycle in a unified manner, although we have not gone to that full cycle yet. We are just able to document our new processes as per the new business model that we have. We hope to complete the circle to go into improvement analysis next year, followed by a new version of their processes.

The solution functionality gives everyone in our organization what they need. One way or another, people are sort of developing their business processes on their own, but it differs from department to department. Now, we have a consistent way to model the processes and communicate them. It is now in one unified language.

We have not needed to make changes to our processes yet, but I think as people model their processes, they already see at the outset that there are possible improvements that can be made.

Employees are more productive because they can do a transaction without any ambiguity or issues down the line.

Signavio is approaching the point where its collaborative features will help to create a process-centric mindset. The good thing is the fact that you can raise comments on processors, which gives a lot of power to the end-users. They can say which areas need to be improved or get back at the process modelers to improve their processes in the future.

The fact that the repository is available on the web is the most valuable feature. It's a very simple tool. If you can use something simple and visual, you should be able to use the model as well in Signavio. It has the ability, for example, to track versioning control, so if you make updates to the processes, you have the ability to track the versions as well.

We had a solution before that was not as easy to use. A recent internal survey showed that people have found that Signavio is much more user-friendly. One of our goals was to make sure that our own staff is able to learn a model as opposed to relying on external resources. Our staff was able to be trained on how to use this tool and the model they own for themselves. In terms of ease use, it's very good.

I think the biggest selling point that Signavio talks about is its collaborative aspect. However, there's still a lot more improvement in terms of what they can do, how they receive comments, address comments, whether they actually provide feedback, etc. There is still a little bit more improvement to be made on those areas.

I think it's been very stable so far. There have been no crashes or other issues. We're happy with their regular updates.

Currently, we don't have that many users, so we can't yet test it in terms of scaling up. So far we have gone from ten users initially up to 50 modelers. We are also increasing the number of people accessing the collaboration hub. So far, so good.

Their technical support is very good. They have a very good way of accessing the users and are able to easily put our tickets forward to resolve them. On top of that, I feel that we still have customer success managers as well who check in periodically to see whether we are happy with the solution overall and see how they can help out with that.

We had an older solution that was not as easy to use and our staff was not able to learn how to use the previous tool. With Signavio, one of the selling points is that everybody comes out of a one to two-day training able to model their processes. You get that ability to do it yourself and start modeling very fast.

Our experience was that we used Signavio's own consulting team to do something called a rapid deployment. This was a quick and easy way to introduce Signavio into the organization. In just a few days, they came on site and talked to us to understand our context and situation. Then they could configure the entire solution. It's a very easily convertible solution anyway. Nonetheless, they walked us through it and it gave us the confidence to use the solution.

I think we're spending about $150,000 a year on licensing costs.

I think we were looking at a few state-of-the-art vendors that are out there. They were famous ones like Bizagi, KiSSFLOW, etc. Signavio ticked all of our boxes because you have the ability to model in open formats, such as BPMN, they have a web-based portal, and it was simpler. The other solutions can get a little bit more complicated. This one was a simple, easy to use software that was good for us.

If you are thinking of a solution where you don't have to be dependent on external resources through the modeling part and you want to be more self-sufficient, Signavio is the way to go. It enables you to get your own staff to do the process documentation easily. The most important thing is that we're able to update the processes periodically, which is what we wanted. We didn't want an obsolete processing repository after a few years. We want to give the incentive to staff to update them. That's one of the major reasons I would say you should adopt it.

I would rate this solution an eight out of ten. It's still a developing product and I have confidence that there is still a lot of room to improve. Of course, I'm not using the Velocity Edition yet, so I do see a lot of things that are improving in terms of integration aspects. They look and feel the same. They've integrated all the different modules. I hope that I would be able to give the Velocity Edition a nine out of ten. I think one of the issues was the fact that the solutions looked different because they brought different modules. Now, however, the new one addresses them in a more integrated fashion. The user interface is a bit lacking, which is why I only gave it a score of eight of ten.

We are a transmission system operator that handles the high voltage electricity network in all of Switzerland. There are a lot of core processes and managing support processes, and they need to be very accurate because what we're doing is quite critical.

It's critical infrastructure, so doing things wrong at the core can cause a lot of damage and cost a lot of money, but it can also cause injury or death. It is dangerous, therefore our processes need to be very well understood and need to be run very strictly.

Our employees rely on the Collaboration Hub to understand the processes. They know exactly what to do and how to do it, what the procedure is, and if necessary, what forms to use. We have a few modelers around the company who are based in the business units. They keep up with what the processes are, keep them alive, and keep them updated.

One of the things that are quite easy to achieve with a tool like this is that you start getting together and talking about what you're doing. Being able to show that, graphically, raises the understanding of what all of the team members think we are doing. It is a good way to discuss our understanding, which could be different than it was in the beginning. Just condensing and focusing on this graphical representation unifies our views, which I think is already a big, big step in improving what we're doing.

I think that this solution would help us to carry out the entire process improvement lifecycle. However, I fear that our maturity of processes is not too high. I'm glad that most of the critical processes are there, documented, can be read, and are kept alive. We're not really doing an improvement lifecycle, not really doing metrics measuring, doing improvement, or things like that. We're still one or more stages away from that.

For the time being, I think that everyone in our organization has the functionality that they need.

In terms of improved employees’ workdays, I have seen stability brought to them. I noticed it first about three years ago. This solution has also improved from the modeling side over that time, whereas it has always been easy for the end-user.

I have done a lot of modeling over quite a number of years, and I think that the modeling capabilities in Signavio are state of the art.

The most valuable thing for me is the collaboration hub that can be used by everybody. They can really get their information quickly. It shows them the logic workflows, and also allows them to get the needed documentation, forms, templates, and whatever they need. It's easy to use, you know where you go to get your information, and it's very valuable for everybody.

For us, it would help a lot if this solution had floating licenses. I would consider this to be my number one improvement because we try to involve as many people as possible in modeling, rather than having them just consume work that other people have done. We feel that it is important for people to identify with the processes, and with what we model, so it requires that we have a lot of licenses. If we had a floating license or a concurrent license, then it would help a lot.

Stability has been fine for quite some time, although I had some trouble with the introduction of a new release a few weeks ago. This shook the stability slightly, and unfortunately, it was exactly at the time I was giving a course on using Signavio.

It took perhaps one or two days where it was very slow, and sometimes not responding at all, but it is now back to normal and working well.

We have four hundred and fifty to five hundred people in our company who have access to our processes through the Collaboration Hub. 

We started with perhaps three hundred users in the beginning, which is not a big difference from where we are now, but scaling it was fine. 

In most of the cases, technical support has been quite quick. Not always, but what I liked is that when I had a problem and there was an answer, I used the tracking tool and it was easy to get back to the same person.

This is important to me because I've had experience in other areas where if you need to have three contacts for one topic, you always start at point zero with a new person. This is very boring and I didn't see that. In this way, I think that technical support is good and organized.

Before I joined the company, they were using ARIS BPM. It was perceived as being complex and not easy to use.

The setup seemed straightforward. When I saw it, the solution was up and running.

We used a company called EnerBit in Switzerland. They are a partner of Signavio and they performed the setup for us.

Measuring ROI is quite a complex thing, which is probably the main reason why we don't currently do it. My gut feeling is that we have realized ROI because the license is not too expensive.

I think that the price of the licenses is between $2,000 USD and $3,000 USD per license per year, plus the hub usage. I cannot remember the exact cost, but it is affordable.

The biggest investment is in training the people, and building up the processes and discussing how it should be. That's where a lot of time goes. That's where the money goes. For me, this equilibrium is very good. The money should not go into licenses, but rather the big value is in the content in the end.

We did a GATT / WTO and there were a lot of companies applying. One of our central points was ease of use, especially for the end-users, but secondly for the modelers. I think that Signavio was selected because of this. It was very easy to use.

I was in the software business for a long time, developing SaaS solutions, so I am quite critical when it comes to rating products. I think Signavio BPM does its job, it is easy to use, but it runs a little slow sometimes and it could be faster.

I would rate this solution a seven out of ten.