SAP Signavio Process Manager Reviews

We use this solution to optimize our fund processes and also to use the process charts for our yearly audits. The audits are a very important topic for us.

Our global aim is to transform from a silo thinking organization to a process thinking organization and I think this technology can help everybody to enable this.

With respect to ease of use, I think that Signavio fits very well here. It matches the needs that we have. At first glance, process thinking doesn't seem like it is for everybody. You really have to get into it a little bit. Now, after using Signavio, I think it's very easy.

The interface is very intuitive and includes a drag-and-drop function. I've never seen anybody who needs a big introduction to the software. Using it is a bit like an iPad or an iPhone.

There are a few bugs when you use the Microsoft Surface Hub with the big screen. 

I have been working with Signavio for two and a half years.

This is definitely a stable product. I have never had any big issues with it.

In our German offices, this solution is used in every department, albeit in different ways. In some departments, it is used only for projects. However, in my office, it is used for our daily processes.

The initial setup went well and I have never had any problems.

It takes a few days to set up. We have a central department that manage the licenses.

We have internal training on how to use Signavio.

We have definitely realized ROI by using this Signavio.

Firstly, it enables process thinking across the whole company. It is also very good for knowledge transfer when you have documented your processes and when, for example, a new employee comes and you can show them your processes. It is really good for big-picture thinking.

We have completed a proof of value for the process intelligence functionality, but we have not yet begun to use it. This may happen in the future.

I really like the simplicity, but when it comes to using it with the Microsoft Surface Hub, there is a little bit of room for improvement.

I would rate this solution an eight out of ten.

I'm a management consultant, and I'm working with an IT-managed service business that is trying to trend well. They're trying to change the way they operate so that they can scale their PE-backed business. They want to grow a lot faster than they're growing.

Typically, that sort of business, they started saying, "We need new systems." As soon as you get involved with helping and say, "What's processes are you trying to execute on these systems?" You immediately get into the use case of, "You don't have an operating model." If you don't have an operating model, you're never going to scale.

I'm helping that business on the journey to establishing an operating model and a set of processes This means that the systems that they want to implement will actually support the processes and allow them to deliver value to their clients. In the end, my use case is a pretty basic process mapping.

The most valuable feature for me is usability. I have experience in managing and growing businesses, operating models that were built for me, and have also built them myself on Microsoft Visio and other tools. They have been horrible, static, unused, impossible to maintain, and inaccessible tools. Now, as an independent consultant, usability is important to me.

It is very easy to implement BPMN using this tool.

The Collaboration Hub is a big thing. 

If you're going to use the tool the way I'm using it, which is to work with businesses and capture what they're thinking, it would be helpful to be able to insert other objects onto a diagram. At the moment, there are the different symbols you can use with different features of BPMN, but if I wanted to cut and paste a slide or some images to help us show them, "This is what you gave me. This is how I've changed it into this," you can't do that. You can't superimpose images or other things into their graphic. I understand that it works well as a best practice for capturing a process, but as a communication tool, that would help.

I have been using Signavio for about four months.

My client currently uses Visio, but it's not available to everybody.

My client purchased one editor license and the Collaboration Hub, which covers up to a hundred people.

I just did a classic Google search. "What's out there in the market?" I looked at three or four, maybe five tools in the classic, "Have a quick look, see what it says." If there's a free version, let's download it, play with it. If within half an hour I'm not going anywhere, bin it. Next.

I think that I did that with Nintext Workflow and just compared it to Signavio. Within half an hour I could use it. It's a powerful editor that very simply allows you to capture stuff if you know BPMN, the business process model notation. I knew a bit about it. It's very easy to follow and it's easy to implement in the tool.

When I ran a business with three hundred and fifty people in it, we had a horrible, static, slightly-linked HTML site that was our process model. Nobody used it. With the Collaboration Hub, the ability for people to give feedback and comment is a powerful tool. A process is only as good as how much it's used, and Signavio gives you the ability to do that.

This is a very accessible and very quick-to-learn tool. In this day and age, anything that's quick to learn is far more likely to be of use than things that are difficult to learn.

I would rate this solution an eight out of ten.

We use this solution for capturing our workflows and processes in all areas of the business, whether that's HR or content production or finance. It's about discovering some of those workarounds and unblocking our workflows.

With respect to how easy Signavio is to use, that's an interesting one because different roles may look at processes in different ways and to some, the word-defined process is a complete turnoff. From the business analyst perspective, it is really easy to use. They're used to using Visio and modeling tools anyway. When it comes to the collaboration hub use, that took a bit of explaining to start. But again, it's a case of a picture paints a thousand words. Even a process diagram, as you're leading your collaborators through it, it's easier to understand.

To explain one way that this solution has improved our organization, I will use an onboarding process as an example. We were seeing the onboarding processes coming through a number of pieces of work and there were problems in the workflow because the issues were being addressed in individual functions, with HR or particular departmental areas rather than looking at it holistically. The fact that we can model the process end to end from the moment a new person is required for a role right through to that person being in their seat and working at their desk and engage with all the different subject matter experts in the different functional areas, really helped.

Using Signavio supports and enables our business transformation. From a business analysis perspective, we're always looking at the "as is" and the "to be" models. Having all of those workflows and processes documented to understand what we're doing now really helps with moving forward in a positive way.

I like the collaboration and the real-time aspects of it. The way that we captured processes previously started with the drawing of an image using Microsoft Visio. We might have had to have two, three, or four workshops to get to an end process that was usable. Now with Signavio, it's real-time. We might have one workshop to start off and capture the main tasks around a workflow, but then we can comment and update that real-time online and collaborate online. It's really helpful, especially as a team spread across the UK.

The user interface for the collaboration hub is antiquated and should be improved. It feels sort of 90s and I think there is more that can be done with it.

I would like to see more support for targeting efforts in terms of resources. One of the things we've done for ourselves is added an attribute to indicate where the process is from. This means that we can do a bit of a heat map of where we've got processes modeled and where we haven't. This gives us the ability to target particular areas of the business. There could be something more on the reporting side of it for the processes you have captured or processes that might be work in progress to see where to target your effort because you don't always have lots of resources to spare. So it's more around targeted efforts.

We've had Signavio in the business for about eighteen months. We started with a very small team of business analysts using it and then spread that across the BAs embedded in all of the digital products, as well as our studio's BAs. After this, with the Collaboration Hub, we've got all our people who work in the project and program delivery, as well as product delivery, all working together and collaborating.

Stability-wise, it's been fine. We've had a couple of minutes of downtime and when we've rung the Signavio help team, they've been fine and worked with us and it's been back online. There is nothing where I'd say it had an impact on what we were doing.

We started with twelve to fifteen users to begin with and now we're at seventy-eight. We're not in the hundreds or thousands but given the people that do the actual modeling versus the people we collaborate with, we collaborate with a lot more, so we have seventy-eight process modelers in the organization, but then we have two hundred collaborators.

Signavio support helped us with our initial setup and a couple of times when we had issues with downtime. They have always been helpful.

The initial setup was straightforward. We had a few information security issues to work through, which was due to the BBCs level of security and what we require. We've gone through all of that process. Again Signavio was on board and made sure that if we had any questions they'd answer those for us. We had their engineers on any calls with our InfoSec team as well. All of that worked through fine.

There has been time saved, definitely. Getting the monetary value requires additional effort in your process capture because, without the measures on that, process capture is very hard to get to the monetary value of return on investments.

Time is very easy to prove because I can see that from the number of people that would have been in workshops to capture those processes initially and how many times we would have been around that same scenario to do that. However, to get to specific use cases, you need to have the measures around those processes captured at the same time, so that's another degree of capture that you wouldn't have necessarily done in the original process capture, but it's fine. It's doable and then you can get to the monetary value, but we have not done that.

Right at the very beginning, we looked at five different products with Signavio being one of them. We had a list of requirements of what we wanted from our process repository. We went through all five products, had demonstrations of them, did a compatibility and feature matrix against all of our requirements and three came out of that process. Post further demos we had done, Signavio was the choice in the end because it met our business needs.

We do not yet use the process mining and process intelligence functionality, but it is on the roadmap and we plan to do a proof of value this year.

This is a good solution but there needs to be work done on the Collaboration Hub user interface. Also, there is always room for improvement.

I would rate this solution an eight out of ten.

We use this solution primarily for our single-source business process. 

At this point in time, we've onboarded about 400 people who are actively capturing processes and adding critical attributes. We have a lot of additional people (very hard to put an exact number on that) who have viewed the models.

In terms of deployment and maintenance, there is a team of five people plus a specialist testing these sources. At the moment we are using it across some of our value chains and we will eventually cover the entire organization. I expect that to happen in the next 18 to 24 months.

The Australian banking landscape has just been through a revision (royal commission). It's a government led commission looking into banking practices and there were quite a few findings that came out of that. We are using the process repository to lock down and address process weaknesses. We've actually launched a multi-million dollar transformation program to control our environment. Signavio helps to accomplish this which is imperative to government compliance for us.

What I find most valuable for us is the governance of a workflow by embedding process accountability. It has always been a challenge to define who owns what and under what circumstances you can change processes. 

As we have only used the product for six months, it's too soon to tell what we'd like to see added in the future besides getting the solution fully deployed. At this point, we haven't fully explored the full functionality but it's got things like process manning capability and intelligence capability which we haven't even tapped into yet.

We've had no issues in terms of down times or anything since implementation. I suppose the lack of downtime depends on our AWS server. That's all based in Australia.

As far as scalability, I think it's a bit early for me to tell because we've just started using it. We've had no issues to date but I think as we get more involved with implementing our models, it may become a bit more of an issue. But I really don't know. 

Technical support has been pretty good. The primary support is based in Germany, but they are developing the local capability pretty quickly. A lot of support is currently local. Anything that required assistance from the German office hasn't really made much difference in service time.

We're still in hyper-care mode so support is constantly available. There have been no real issues. Migrating some models from the legacy system — that was seven years out of date —wasn't as simple as I thought it would be. It required a bit of scripting. However, that's a one-time exercise.

After we actually completed the configuration, we never had to go back to the vendor for anything. From the support perspective, everything was done. When we did have to communicate with them, it was related specifically to the old legacy system. The rest of it is pretty straight forward.

We had the ARIS solution before Signavio. The primary difference between the two is that ARIS provided an architectural academic view where Signavio is very user-friendly. Signavio got more people in the business excited about using the tool rather than just focusing on the project and involving the process professionals. We consciously targeted a user group that was organization-wide and we based our decision of tool selection on that.

The initial setup was very simple. It took us less than three weeks from signing the contract to having the first users online. We put people through training and we are onboarding users and our core value change progressively. We're only just getting to the actual the rollout at six months after completing testing.

We are working fairly closely with the vendor for integration. Right now we are only beginning to explore the capabilities for enhancing customer experience, mapping customer journey, and the mapping functionality.

In terms of just implementing it, it's very simple. My team has scaled up very quickly. We are to the point of being able to develop internal user training that I think is quite effective.

We used a vendor for the implementation. They were good and we are more than happy. The vendor spent a few weeks with us training my admin team. It hasn't been complicated at all.

As far as return on investment we've saved cost simply on the licensing. The ability to implement our future plans, which may have been hindered with other solutions, gives us a competitive advantage. In actual dollar amounts, that is impossible to value and much of the realization of the return will come in the future.

Signavio actually worked out a fair bit less expensive for us than some of the competitors. We negotiated an enterprise license for up to 30,000 users for certain components and a per-user license for other components based on our need for those. The company was very flexible in price negotiations in terms of the overall solution. We are paying in the region about eight hundred thousand dollars a year for an enterprise license.

There's nothing in addition to that unless we want additional capacity or features. 

We brought in an analyst to select tools for us to have a look at. We looked at ARIS, IBM Blueworks, and Signavio. We decided to experiment with Signavio and ARIS. Then we got business leaders to come in, have a look at the two and come up with recommendations. By those recommendations, we settled on Signavio. 

I'd give Signavio a nine out of ten at this point. I'm very happy in terms of it performing as we designed. If there are any issues, it's because we don't fully understand the functionality and the capability yet. I think the only reason I'm not giving it a 10 is that I've not had a chance to explore capability and functionality fully.

We can use workflow manager to create forms. 

SAP Signavio Process Manager's UI is not user-friendly. Its pricing is also high. 

I have been working with the product for two years. 

I rate the tool's stability a nine out of ten. 

I rate SAP Signavio Process Manager's scalability a ten out of ten. My company has more than 150 users who use it daily. 

I rate the tool's installation a nine out of ten. It takes eight months to complete. One to two resources is enough to handle its maintenance. 

The tool's consulting team implemented the product. 

I rate the tool's pricing a nine out of ten. 

I rate SAP Signavio Process Manager nine out of ten. 

We use the solution for process documentation.

The solution helps us make the new employee understand some use cases easily with documentation.

The solution demonstrates clear visibility of the business processes to the new employees. Along with this, it explains their work responsibilities as well.

They should include a feature for collaboration. Presently, two people cannot work on one modeling process simultaneously.

We have been using the solution for one and a half years.

It is a stable solution. I rate its stability a ten.

We have 40 licenses for the solution. I rate its scalability a five as it is expensive to scale.

The solution's technical support team replies to the queries within a day or two.

Positive

We used Microsoft Visio before. Later, we switched to SAP for better documentation of processes.

The solution's initial setup is easy. I rate the process a ten. It requires three administrators for deployment and takes a month to complete. It includes setting up the software and installing it in each department.

We implemented the solution with the help of our in-house team.

I rate the solution's ROI a two out of ten.

The solution is quite expensive compared to other vendors.

We evaluated GP Tech, ADONIS, and ARIS. In comparison, Signavio is easier to use.

If your company is looking for a solution for implementing the process, look for other less expensive products. But if you want to implement a new BPM system, I recommend Signavio. I rate it a six out of ten.

Our main use case for this solution is (1) capture current process with Process Manager (2) invite process feedback with Collaboration Hub (3) Process Intelligence/ Process Mining from  SAP Tables for Process Discovery and Process conformance with current process.  The process are modelled to BPMN 2.0 Standard. From there, we are able to analyze the business process and identify improvement opportunities.

This solution has improved our organization in terms of the level of engagement. For example, everybody is more aware of the business process.  

In my experience, the Signavio BPMN view is easier for the business to understand than EPC.

In the old days, we used to run workshops with post-it notes and flip charts, draft the process map and then email the process maps or stick up the draft process maps on the wall for comment. You then collate the comments and modify the process maps which is time-consuming. 

Since Signavio Process Manager is a cloud-based solution, it's way easier. You just invite users to comment on the process map.

The most valuable feature is the collaborative nature of it. If somebody documents a global process then everybody can comment on it, or contribute to the process map, regardless of where their office is.

For myself, I most often use the process manager, which has a friendly user interface.

The Signavio Process Manager is a middle-range solution that is also capable of process simulation and workflow management. Whilst it may not be as strong as other products for certain tasks; For example, simulation-wise, it is probably not as strong as SIMUL8 Process Simulation Software. For complex workflow management, it's probably not as strong as Appian. It represents good value for money with strong performance.

If you wish to build a process-centric business from scratch then I think this product would be ideal.

Signavio has released a newer version of the Customer Journey Map which is way better than the previous version.

4 years.

The stability is absolutely amazing. Up until now, I haven't had anything that I'm not satisfied with. We have not had any downtime since I have been with the company.

In terms of scalability, I have used several of the components and they all seem to be integrated. Everything ties in really well. For example, the decision modeling component is linked to the business process map, which is really good.

We have about two thousand people in our organization, and about three hundred who have been trained to use Signavio.

I'm not aware of any major things for which we had to go back to Signavio. The whole platform just works. The issues are more to do with what happens on our site in terms of, for example, creating the library. How you utilize or re-use the elements is entirely based on the libraries that you have created. If you have five different elements that are all called "Approval process" then it becomes a problem, but that would be an issue of governance.

We were using a fairly old ARIS product and then switched to this solution. The ARIS product was well structured, which is good, but the user-friendliness of Signavio Process Manager beats ARIS hands-down. The ARIS solution is also very expensive.

The switch came about when our ARIS license was about to expire, and we considered upgrading the existing product. Our group of thirty-two people evaluated both the upgraded ARIS product, as well as Signavio Process Manager, and it was put to a vote. The result was a unanimous decision to transition to Signavio.

The initial setup for this solution is very straightforward, especially compared to the ARIS product that we were using. Essentially, when you sign up, they give you the username and your password. You can set up the end users in one day.

The difficulty in setup is not on the Signavio Process Manager side. Rather, it is a question of whether the process architecture has been properly defined for how you want to document the business process. Obviously, that has nothing to do with the product, but you need to have a process architect who is able to set up the process governance framework prior to the process mapping.

There was a period of change management because of our switch from the ARIS solution, so there was training involved, but it was a fairly easy transition.

During deployment, we had one person doing the training, who also helped us translate processes from ARIS to Signavio. We had one person to manage it, and another to help us roll it out.

For the implementation, it was fairly easy and we worked directly with the Signavio consultants.

No comments as I was not involved in the commercial negotiation.

This solution provides good value for the money.

We only evaluated the ARIS and Signavio solutions.

Signavio Process Manager is a very good middle-range product. If you want to have more engagement from your SME, or are just starting out and trying to build a process-centric company, then this solution is ideal. You have all of these components in one product, and it will help you to resolve various issues.

The product itself is brilliant, but you need a strong process architect who can provide governance and the framework as to how the business will need to go about documenting and then maintaining the business processes. You need to have the right expertise within the company. The best software in the world can't make up for this.

While Signavio is quite user-friendly, it can be an issue if multiple people creating the same entity in the dictionary. For example, a subprocess "Approval Process" can be created by different teams and process owners, this is something that has to be managed properly.

If I were given the opportunity to recommend process software for people to use, I would highly recommend this solution based on my experience.

I would rate this solution a nine out of ten.

In our company in healthcare, we right now focus on process documentation in order to build a base for future process improvement and potential automation. We use the Signavio Process Manager to design the processes and publish them on the Collaboration Hub. This adds to the transparency of the business since all employees have access to the Collaboration Hub and see the documented processes as visualized models. This transparency is fostering the collaboration between business units by reducing silo thinking and thus enabling continuous process improvement.

The interface is quite intuitive. I am modeling a lot of processes, so for me, it's quite easy. We don't use the entire BPMN 2.2 notation, but I think it's quite easy to understand. At the same time, we have noticed that it is not that easy for people who are not used to reading processes. I think that you have to have a certain amount of background knowledge before you begin. If you are modeling, for example, it is easy to use if you know how to model processes. They also give you a pre-selection of what you can use, which helps.

My team of four people are the only ones who are modeling processes, so the intuitiveness in terms of being able to model does not help others. However, I think in general, when it comes to understanding our models, this solution empowers people in terms of understanding BPMN. They can use the collaboration hub and see the process, and then they use it in the project themselves. They see what is available and they understand the processes a little bit better.

We have not really used process modeling and automation to this point. We mainly document processes and try to get a better handle on the documentation. This helps us to close the gap between what is documented and how people do their work on a daily basis. At the same time, I think it's a very good framework to dig deeper into data mining, process intelligence, and also workflow accelerator because once you have to have processes, you can build on that. It's the fundamentals.

This solution pretty much enables us to carry out the entire process-improvement lifecycle in a unified hub. However, we also use another model on top of that where we measure how good the process is. We give the users a set of questions for them to rate the processes that we give to them. We use the state model, so based on this agenda, the process falls into one of those six categories. We plan to later do this rating of the processes using a workflow accelerator, but it still needs to be implemented.

An example of how Signavio is improving our business is the Collaboration Hub and the whole idea of collaboration. I see myself when I'm in projects or when I'm modeling processes, it's like a common language that you create. What I see a lot is when people come together, they don't really understand each other. For example, if you have IT people and doctors talking, they live in two different worlds, but somehow if you use this language, you can bridge them and you can bring them together because you have a common understanding. I think that's very helpful. So, if you make it accessible to both of the business units to make it accessible to the doctors and to IT people, they will get interested in putting their own ideas into a process.

With respect to providing our users with all of the tools they need, it depends on which side you're talking about. As editors, it's giving us pretty much everything, although we have to do some workarounds. We have process management and we have document management on top of it. We are using two different systems for this and we have connected them because you cannot do it all with Signavio alone. It is not very user-friendly if the user puts one hundred documents into a single process, so we use a different solution for that, and the users jump onto another system. We are keeping mind, of course, that Signavio is not a document management tool, it's a process management tool. Certainly, I think that our needs are covered right now. We have a big transformation project going on and we do a lot of standardization and process variance, so we have combined them in the architecture. Compared to process mining or process intelligence, our use case is simple, so our requirements are met.

The solution’s collaborative features should in theory help to create a process-centric mindset in our organization, although I think the whole idea of process thinking is a mental level that is above this. Even though people use processes as a common language, they don't always think in terms of processes. I don't know if Signavio can really help with that. The collaboration tools help with collaboration, and that's it. Becoming process-centric is more of a thought management function, where you need to foster the process thinking in general. I don't think that it even needs to necessarily be covered with this tool.

Based on my experience, one of the best features offered by Signavio is its simple Collaboration Hub functions, where users from various departments can constantly refer to in their TO-BE process design. The impact bridging silos with offering transparency is immense, especially in hierarchical organizations like hospitals. Most people feel part of the "process revolution" and some of them are even affected by the "process virus", thus initiating continuous improvement by looking at potentials/low hanging fruits in their own AS-IS processes.

There are two main features I like to see implemented/further developed in the SaaS solution, which would bring a great value to our present business case.

On the first hand, I would like to see the inclusion of some document management functionalities. Even though Signavio focusses on process management, processes are often accompanied by loads of documents. With our current solution, we link the DMS system with Signavio, nevertheless, an embedded solution of DMS with Signavio would certainly bring more benefits and better operability to the overall solution and its end-users.

On the other hand, a more user-friendly solution could be targeted with process standards and process variants compromising the overall process architecture. On the level of the process manager, it would be very convenient if standardized processes / or standardized parts of processes could be treated differently from process variants and be "marked" as such. Especially if standardized process parts are implemented in completely different (end-to-end) processes, a marginal change of the standardized part would be translated in all those other processes, where the standard process part is implemented. In the current status, process modularization needs to be performed, where the standardized parts are linked to from any other (end-to-end) process. On top of this, reports could be drawn to measure the % of standardization across all processes, including also standardized process parts in the analysis instead of just those processes, which are standardized end-to-end.

Overall, the solution offered by Signavio is very stable. We had from time to time some troubles with stability at the beginning, where users couldn't access the Collaboration Hub. However, this was due to the fact that our servers are based in South Africa. Therefore, the source of the problem is the location of the servers, which made communication with the Signavio cloud unnecessarily complicated. In the context of healthcare though, even a short system failure might have a significant impact on our daily business. Since we combine BPM with DMS, our end-users need the Signavio access to retrieve their documents for patient treatment. If the access is denied, we all feel the anxiety level increase (slightly) because our value proposition is addressing people's life and their wellbeing.

The scalability of the product is very impressive. At the end of our transformation project, we gonna have more than 10'000 users accessing the Collaboration Hub. We deploy the product parallel to our Transformation Project (HIT2020) in one clinic after the other and we found that the increasing number of users on the platform is not negatively influencing the software performance. This definitely speaks for the scalability of the software solution and allows us to focus on process management initiatives to support business transformation rather than concentrating on issues concerning software performance.

Since I have a business background and I am not an IT expert, I am mostly not the person speaking directly with the technical support team of Signavio. Nevertheless, most bugs occurring in our daily business are fixed within just a few hours of time. We only experienced two or three issues, where problem-solving took some more time. But in my experience the Signavio support team is always determined to fix our problem as soon as possible, delivering satisfying customer service.

There were different solutions in the pipeline and the final battle was between Signavio and Adonis. One of the decision-makers already knew Signavio and voted for the Signavio solution advertising its usability for both process managers and end-user. In the further decision process, he managed to convince everyone to launch Signavio as the new process management tool.

In general, I think it is very important to understand the/your functionality of process management in a company and its relationship/alignment with business strategy. Based on the visions of where you want to go with process management, the right tool for the missions needs to be chosen.

I personally am very much convinced by the modularized solutions Signavio is offering in one SaaS software package: Process Manager, Process Intelligence and Workflow Accelerator all connected with the Collaboration Hub. If you want to push business transformation forward, want to go into process mining, facilitate process automation and in particular want to strengthen digitization initiatives those requirements are well covered with the Signavio tool.

Although, each company has a different role of process management within their company, a process management's "why", "how" and "what" must be clear from the beginning on. The tool chosen must then fit this strategic direction in order to support the business in their e.g continuous improvement.