Worksoft Certify Reviews

We bought the product in 2014, but did not have the right structure in place to use it properly. It wasn't until 2017 that we started to receive good value out of the product. Automation is now part of our strategy.

We use this solution for end-to-end testing of our packaged and SaaS applications. It is very much a part of our key strategy. We have it running end-to-end updates all the time.

We do web UI testing of SAP and ServiceNow. This was difficult in the beginning, as we had a homegrown product, and we had to do the proper object naming. With SAP, Worksoft does the object naming for us. This improved our website from 2014 until now. This is part of their process improvement.

Our business users are doing regression testing as their day job. This is an add-on to their daily work. With everything so pressured in the industry, automation takes the pressure of these users. This is essential for us.

It is not IT dependent. You can go to a business user, and say, "Just record what you're doing." They don't have to be very technical and can just do their job, then you can do the technical side or evaluation. This product helps us so much in capturing real business processes. This makes the overall process much easier.

A technical person thinks differently to a business person, and having to actually see what they do is the part that's so good for us. We can see the processes exactly as they are, not how we think they are. This makes a difference.

I would love to see more data mining modules. 

I want to see more stability in the Execution Manager.

There have been major improvements in stability since we started until now. So, it is becoming more stable. 

Also, we are being taught how to make it more stable, since stability is not just about the product. It is how you use the product. There are base principles that you have to keep on your data in the system. It is how you write the script and if you write the script to be sustainable. This will make it stable.

I love its scalability. I like records set that you can just add onto it. We are going into a new country every year and the ability to increase from test scripts makes the product so much simpler.

Their technical support works with us, which is good. Working with them has been a collaborative process.

Worksoft Certify was originally purchased for a product. We thought that it was not be used to its full extent, so we ran it through a PoC. Then, we decided that the product could work for us.

Ownership wasn't taken for the product during the initial setup, so it was a difficult process at first. Once ownership was taken, it wasn't that difficult.

We have seen ROI.

We have not looked at other vendors.

If you're looking at automation, it has to be part of your strategy. It's not something you can push bottom up. It's not something you can just do for a project. Automation is how we work. It is the thing of the future.

I haven't personally used the Capture 2.0 feature, but we've reviewed it. Worksoft has definitely made it simpler again by putting in comments and adding in some extra things. This has really helped, and our business users have been using it.

The primary use case is to automate their SAP and Web applications. We use Worksoft Certify for end-to-end regression and integration testing across our systems.

It helps us to implement automation testing as part of most projects, so the need for manual testing can be reduced. This really accelerates the testing process as a whole. Before, where it could take ten days to test a project, now it takes only one or two days to do the complete testing. So, it helps us to reduce our testing timelines.

We no longer need ten people sitting and manually testing something. We can just have one person running the entire regression automation testing suite, and this has saved us dollars.

I have found Capture 2.0 helpful compared to Capture 1.0. It allows you to have access to all the screenshots when you use it so you see what steps you are capturing, and if you are capturing it right or not. It is very user-friendly.

It is easy to use and learn the application. For example, I have an intern who joined me three months ago. Today, she delivers the same number of scripts as my experienced developers with great quality.

One feature that could be added to Capture 2.0 is generating a PDF file from your capture, so you can see your screenshots and steps. This will really help teams leverage the documents generated as part of requirement/training.

Right now, when we do regression testing, we manually have to generate all the reports and populate all the results in HP ALM. We really are looking for a solution to have send all the results to HP ALM once Execution Manager completes the execution, then automatically logs them.

Our offshore teams experience a lag/delay when using the Worksoft interface. As of now we use VPN and Remote Desktop to help us with this issues, it was be great to see how much Certify 11 has improved in terms to offshore accessibility.

Every time there is a new release of Worksoft, they present it in a conference. However, there is no training document nor one point of solution where I one see what new changes/feature have been implemented, like a portal. If I don't know how to use a feature, there is no training nor documentation available. When you reach out for support, it takes time for them to research it and get back to us.

I would like more use cases or at least a weekly email update to all the customers saying, "These are new features which have been included in the last week." That would really help.

Worksoft with SAP is pretty stable. 

When it comes to the web, you need a lot of extra effort in making sure that the tests are maintained, but that is the nature of the web application. You have stuff that is changing all the time, so you have to ensure that you maintain your tests regularly.

We have learned the scalability part over time. We were very successful with SAP, but not very successful with the web. Over the period of about two years, we were able to prove to our company that we can use Worksoft for different type of applications. While there is a learning curve, it is all about trying things out and failing few times before you get a success.

I would rate the technical support as a seven out of ten. There is a delay in time zones when we reach out to them. The response is not as quick as we expect it to be with the other solutions that we have. There is definitely a delay in timing, as the speed is lacking.

The initial setup was easy. We had all the information and the requirements that we needed to do the prep work before doing the implementation.

We have Worksoft help us each time that we do an upgrade or implementation. Our  upgrades have gone smoothly.

An example of saving time and dollars: We had project going on that used to require manual testing. The first time that they did manual regression testing, we had a group of about 15 testers who sat in our office for a period of two weeks to do the testing. Now, when we have to regression testing with automation scripts ready in our Worksoft Certify, we do it in a day or two. 

We looked at quite a few vendors and automation tools in the market. We chose Worksoft because of the ease of use and mentorship support they provide in making sure we were successful.

For a new customer who is to implement Worksoft Certify, I would suggest 'Start the right way'. Have a Worksoft mentor come in and help you with your automation journey specific to your organization so you can have expert support until you become successful with it. Once you are successful, you'll know what to do. E.g., we had a team of interns who got trained and they tried to work with it, but it did not work. Then, we had Worksoft help us (after two years), and it worked. 

My team and I do the regression testing. We are a team of three to four people. We are not working on just one project, we are working on five or six different projects.

What's next, well I hope we are able to present that next success story in next conference ;)

Our organization is building a platform which supports a client across SAP end-to-end. As part of it, we have reconfigured go-to market solutions across industries and functions. Now,  specifically for SAP, we use Worksoft to test these reconfigured solutions, as these are very critical. As there are newer versions of SAP and we are building our solutions, we need to ensure our solutions can do regression testing.

The second important aspect is these are real visible assest which we take to the client. So, not only having preconfigured systems, but being able to test it where clients have Worksoft, it gives us an edge. 

Worksoft has helped us position our company better because the product lets us show our value in terms of the benefits that we bring.

Reusability: Once we develop an asset, we can easily move it to a client. There is something called a "reusable script". We adapt it for the client because it can be used in different ways. This saves the client 40 to 50 percent in time. The cost reduction has been anywhere from five to 30 percent for reuse.

We find the import/export utility to be critical.

For business users, the product needs to be more intuitive and user-friendly.

The updates for SAP Fiori have been great, where previously we saw a lot of issues. A year ago, it used to fail miserably. Worksoft teams worked with our product teams to resolve this issue.

I would like to see more integration features. It needs to provide the automation across the right set of plugins and integrations, along with cloud solutions, with the ability to quickly adapt.

Going forward, I am looking for end-to-end testing in DevOps.

The Worksoft team has worked with us to help us improve the stability.

The license cost is quite high. This might not be a consideration for a large company, but it will be for a small company. E.g., Tricentis (their competitor) offers certain exclusive use cases where a company can use it in a certain way, so this is another option that companies consider.

We do an evaluation of the tools which are best for automation with SAP, and Worksoft covers more SAP use cases.

Worksoft is our preferrred partner, but we do work with other testing tools.

Competitors include Tricentis and Micro Focus Quality Center.

There is training required with the tool, but it is easy for business user to understand.

The primary use case would be for automating SAP. We did attempt to automate some non-SAP processes, but had mixed results. We do have some areas which are already using it for RPA-like use cases.

We use this solution mostly for end-to-end testing of SAP.

These are some cases where automation helped:

1. Mostly in the area of project testing, the most immediate benefit is when you historically have manual testers do a certain job, and a full regression testing was previously done 100 percent manually. We have had cases where the release testing for an entire region would take around 12 weeks. With Worksoft, we are now down to two to three weeks.
2. The second benefit would be production execution runs. This would be where we run test cases to do certain transactions, like mergers and acquisitions. Or with asset migrations, there are hundreds and hundreds of lines of assets, that we just need to set up, which can be done by Worksoft.

Codeless automation helps speed things up, versus previous automation tools. It is easier for people to automate.

First, product stability needs major improvements. Our projects get delayed and our executions fail because the product is not stable enough.  We hear consistent reports of performance issues, Execution Manager crashes, and so on.  What is not helping is Worksoft's ability to respond to issues. They do not have clear SLA's on when issues get closed.  We have had High criticality issues that were open for months.

Second, there are mixed results for non-SAP Automation.  We tried to do web UI testing on SAP Fiori and some internal applications, but the results were mixed. In some cases, we are able to automate, but it takes a very long time to do it. There are other cases where we totally couldn't do it or our customers back out somehow, because of the length of time or limitations of the technology. Also, Worksoft testability assessments take quite awhile.

The stability is very bad. We have a lot of projects, which are run by our service integrators offshore in India. There have been performance issues, system crashes, etc.

While we recovered from these, it does not give me confidence, because it is happening every week or two.

Scalability is still to be seen. We have seen a lot of performance issues, so I cannot say for now. From a technical standpoint, it seems relatively easy to scale and we have attempted to do so. However our developers report frequent performance issues and system crashes.  We have not made Automator's mode work after one year in Worksoft. So in theory, it works, but if these issues persist, it does not give me the confidence to scale out another 100 projects.

Our experience has not been good. There are no SLA's for issue resolution which is an issue for a large enterprise customer like us. For us, there needs to be a certain level of reliability and predictability when things go wrong. We are not getting this today because of lack of SLA's.

We used to do UFT, which was a pain to maintain. 

The initial setup was pretty straightforward. However, we noticed that there were a lot of issues with the configurations and we needed to work back with Worksoft support.

We mostly deployed it ourselves. We had some consulting services from Worksoft. They helped in the initial set up, especially with setting up the Best Practices.

Automating our manual processes has saved us 70 to 80 percent of manual effort.

We evaluated Worksoft vs Tricentis. Our criteria for evaluation:

• Cost
• Internal experience and experience of other customers
• The company as a strategic fit with us for the long-term. 

We applied percentages across these criteria, with cost having the highest percentage. Because of our company's profile which was majority SAP, we chose Worksoft. This is with full knowledge of Worksoft's technical limitations versus tools like Tosca.

Today, our team recently launched Selenium. This is because of technical limitations with Worksoft. 

Test automation is a must for any company. It is not just about the tool. It is about the processes, how you maintain it, run it, and how you respond if you have any issues. The toolset that you choose must support the entire ecosystem for the automation process. You need to have an engagement model, robust lifecycle, and sustainable executions.

We used Worksoft Certify with SAP ECC and Fiori applications in the beginning. We extended that to the ServiceNow application. We have up to 15 modules in ServiceNow with 750 test cases. Our regression testing suite is around a 1000 processes.

Previously, the business was spending a lot of time on processes. So, we started automating and executing these processes on a weekly basis. Last year, we had planned and resourced only one major upgrade, but due to this automation work, we were able to add one extra upgrade.

It provides a lot of time savings. We are always ready to execute a task whenever the business asks us. We saved approximately 7000 hours in 2018.

The solution is easy to use.

The stability has been good, so far.

The scalability has been good. At first, we targeted complete automation only for ECC systems. Then, we extended it to CRM and ServiceNow, not only for the North American region, but for the European and Asian regions, as well. Our company is global, and our next regional rollout will be Latin America.

The level of technical support depends on the engineer who comes to the call. I'm not really happy with it. I want to have quick response for my issues. I'm not the technical person. I'm paying for them to support me. 

They come on, and say, "Oh, so-and-so link is here, go through that link, and make the modifications." I'm not comfortable in making those changes. I want to schedule a call, share my screen, and have them fix it for me. That would be a beneficial time savings for both of us.

We were using UFT before Worksoft and were not happy. UFT was too technical. We wanted to switch over to an easier tool, which was how we switched to Worksoft.

The initial setup went well. It was straightforward. We wrote all down instructions and procedures that we need to have before the installation. Once we had everything in hand, the configuration was easy.

Worksoft did the deployment. They were awesome. 

We worked with Charlene Smith. She did the installation for us.

We saved $1.3 million using Worksoft Certify in 2017. 

Our 2018 numbers aren't available yet.

We are not using Capture 2.0 at this point, because we don't have a Worksoft Analyze license.

This solution came to us as part of IBM ELA Worldwide. The company had ELA at that time and told us that this was part of our ELA, "Why don't you go try it out?" We did a PoC, and we liked it. Without a second thought, we signed up for it.

I definitely recommend Worksoft Certify. We went with a vendor and have seen a lot of problems with it, so go with the best partner for automation. I also want to advise to go with the best practices, as there is a difference technically when you follow the best practices. 

We have integrated Worksoft Certify with Micro Focus ALM. From ALM, we execute some tasks from Micro Focus Quality Center.

Our test maintenance time is really low at this point. In the beginning, we were having around a 30 percent of failure test cases and spending a lot of time on those test maintenance cases. Now, there is less than ten percent failed. We use Execution Manager, and once the execution is done, we spend time on the less than ten percent of failed test cases failed. For the last six months, we have not crossed more than ten percent.

The primary use case is for SAP applications. We do some end-to-end testing of applications. We created a checking and boarding process for a flying scenario, which was innovative. For the back-end systems, we use it to do financial valuations.

We also have a SAP HCM module and SAP FI module where we are actively using Worksoft for our current automation.

We have Worksoft Certify on everyone's desktop. So, when we want to trigger automation, it is a advantage.

We use Worksoft Certify for smoke testing and regulation testing purposes.

There is no porting and it is easily adaptable. If you give it to a functional tester or business analyst, anyone can go, run the test, and analyze the results. It is easy to introduce automation tools to the team members. We have installed Worksoft for all of our team members. We have functional testers, business analysts, and manual test leads. We have an offshore automation team, as well as a functional team.

It is easily adoptable. I don't need to hire a highly skilled/trained person to learn it. For other tools, personnel need to be very professional and need to know how to use that tool beforehand, but very little education or help is required here. They can easily adopt and trigger the automation. 

We are not using Certify in the development area, only in the functional or end-to-end areas, and there is a lot of activity going on in the development area recently. Right now, the development teams are using open source tools, like Jenkins. This would be a game changer if Worksoft could start in the development area.

Going forward, Worksoft will be integrating with Jenkins, which will be great for us.

A part of our CI/CD pipeline, we have to deploy through Cloud AWS. So, it is good to hear that they are moving to AWS too.

The stability is pretty good. I haven't seen any stability issues.

One year ago, our SQL Server database was running slowly with it. Then, we upgraded our SQL Server database to the 2016 version. Before that, we had only upgraded Worksoft without upgrading our database, so we were noticing some latency issues. Once we upgraded our database, I have not received any complaints from our team members.

It is highly scalable and reusable. It is easy for team members to maintain and use with confidence. There is great versatility.

We have 16 applications that we do end-to-end testing using Worksoft.

Worksoft technical support is pretty good. A few times where we upgraded, our team members communicated everything to Worksoft well, and issues were resolved pretty quickly. They are pretty supportive. 

With one of our applications where we do check-in, Worksoft is not able to identify the Java-based application. We raised the ticket, but we were unable to resolve this using Worksoft.

Worksoft already existed when I joined. I am part of the team that maintains it.

If someone in the company wants Worksoft, they call the technology desk. Then, they get the proper license and credentials. The initial setup for these cases is straightforward.

Worksoft did the implementation. Our experience with them was great.

Later on, Cognizant took over from Worksoft.

The product has save us time by not needing highly skilled people, since it is hard to retain experienced development resources. Once we train our functional testers who are running the automation, they can the tool well and stable.

Cost-wise, compared with other tools, it is a great product.

Worksoft Certify is a great tool, which is easy to use and maintain, as no porting needed, development, nor high technical skills are needed. 

Worksoft Certify is a great automation tool for SAP applications.

We do test UI. The UI is very dynamic, as it keeps changing, now and then. It's a very critical, where we are using Worksoft to create innovation. However, our goal is to validate financial valuations. 

The company mainly uses Selenium for CI/CD processes for check-in. Therefore, each time a developers does a check-in, it automatically gives a bill with some pass/fail information, which includes Jenkins.

While we are not using the Capture 2.0 feature, it seems like it will be useful going forward with our end-to-end automation.

It is not for the entire automation process. It is mainly for anything which needs to be automated. Instead of just replacing human work, which it is doing now. It also includes robotic process automation for when we are replacing centralize manual work.

Our clients use Worksoft Certify for end-to-end testing of packaged applications and web UI testing of modern applications.

I have been using BPP and Execution Manager for more than seven years. I sell the product to different clients.

It is a great improvement, especially from my client side, where I have implemented it. One of my clients wanted to replace weekend production and support. They were using mini applications that did not need to work on the weekends. So, it was purely replaced with Certify's automation, so they did not need to come into the office on the weekends. This saves a lot of time and frees employees up on weekends.

The tool itself is a great tool. There are some other tool out there which support only web applications as opposed to only Windows-based applications, etc. It is a huge improvement, as it recognizes complex general applications, where most tools won't recognize the objects within them.

It is very easy to use, but there are some places where they need to improve their security. E.g., the BPP tool is just a URL, which does not ask you for a username and password. Anyone can login and can see it. This is a challenge.

Regarding the Execution Manager, which is good, since it comes with a username, password, etc. However, once you are logged inside, anyone can execute anything. It shouldn't allow this. Worksoft should create restrictions at the folder level structures, or somewhere they know they can align only few people to do the job, instead of allowing anyone do anything that they like.

The stability is good.

The scalability is working well for our needs.

The technical support is good. I would like them to get straight to the problem and provide solutions instead of asking a thousand questions.

Worksoft Certify has a very simple language. Our clients want to save on cost and ensure everyone who is manual testing knows it takes more effort.

The solution has cut our clients' test maintenance time for changes, like patches or system upgrades. They used to take a lot of time until the production validation completed. Now, it is just seconds until it is ready, so they can do executions within couple of minutes. 

This solution has enabled our clients to automate and save time (approximately 40 to 50 percent).

The product has saved our clients' money

The product works well with SAP and non-SAP products.

Use this tool. It is really good.

We're using it to move manual tests over to automated tests to use on major programs and projects going on within the company. We are also moving to Dell EMC Embedded Boxes for an agile approach from a waterfall approach, and part of our new addition for 2019 after merging with a new company. Our role now is to automate as much as we can for usability.

We're doing mostly end-to-end testing scenarios. We use it on SAP and ServiceNow web services, along with SRM, CRM, and various applications.

We have an internal web portal, as well as an external. We did automation for it to do regression testing and build a test space.

The most valuable feature is its time saving. Once development is complete, the short time that it takes to execute a test is invaluable. It saves a number of dollars and man-hours. 

The Capture 2.0 feature is very intuitive, useful, and user-friendly. You can do so much with it now, versus the older version.

We had a lot of issues with the optics changing because they're dynamic. We just recently learned they are already worked on fixing it.

Another feature that they are also working on is being able to export processes from one project and upload it to another project. Therefore, we can change our both structures within Worksoft. We prefer to run and set it up based on business use for separate projects. It's exciting to know that this is coming. We want to be able to move assets from project to another project without having to be in the same project or the same folder structure.

I would like the GUI to be more user-friendly and intuitive. E.g., previously, the buttons were gray. Now, they have color to them and are fun for the user. It also makes them easier to identify.

It is very stable. For example, we used it with ServiceNow. We did automation all last year for an upgrade. Once they did the upgrade, we ran a test after the upgrade and everything was successful.

It is very scalable.

The technical support has been good, but sometimes there are little delays. A lot of times when we need support, it's an emergency situation. However, we are able to reach out to our contacts, and they're able to expedite it, which has been very helpful.

Our upper management wanted to be able to do testing much quicker than what we're actually doing with the manual process. We had to research and find a tool which could provide value for the company.

We had QTP, which wasn't very user-friendly from a coding perspective. There was only a small group of people who could actually use the tool. With Worksoft, we were able to push it out to the business.

I set it up. I just followed the instructions. It was easily done.

We've saved over 80 percent in time savings.

Worksoft Certify was the only tool that we found in which you did not have to know coding or know how to script to create a test. It's more user-friendly, more intuitive, and we also have business users who are actually developing as we speak on major projects and programs.

Worksoft was able to come in on a PoC and actually do automation development on the fly. The previous vendors that I worked with for months, they never could do one test within our environment. Our environment is very complex. It has a lot of policies turned on and off, which is a challenge for a lot of vendors.

Give them a chance, because you won't regret it.