We performed a comparison between ARIS BPA and Interfacing Technologies Enterprise Process Center based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Business Process Design solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."The initial setup is easy."
"It has the ability to scale up, as well as integrate with other systems within the organization to get real-time information from dashboards and reports."
"The whole ARIS BPM solution is a bit special, because from the very beginning it was targeted more to Business users and the Management."
"There is a module designer, that one is very powerful and it creates very good reports."
"Collaboration and governance over enterprise artifacts."
"The initial setup and installation are very straightforward."
"Object oriented modeling allows us to trace what's going on with the specified object."
"It brings transparency and 360-degree views of end-to-end processes."
"The most valuable feature is the integrated manner in which all the capabilities of the Enterprise Process Center platform work together and make it easier to complete the documentation of processes."
"One notable software-related benefit from a user perspective is our improved ability to identify opportunities for automation and process enhancement just by gaining a clearer view of the processes. There are two valuable aspects. First, setting up the process architecture is commendable. Second, not having to maintain different versions of processes is a notable benefit. The solution is stable. The support team is responsive."
More Interfacing Technologies Enterprise Process Center Pros →
"The model graphics can be exported in PDF, but the model is too small to read."
"ARIS BPA’s usability could be improved."
"The reporting and the information query features could do with some improvement."
"With ARIS BPM, the script creation is quite cumbersome. With version ten, we needed our developers to do scripting."
"The tool needs to improve its support since they take long to respond."
"Since ARIS 9.X was released, the product has not been as robust and responsive as the previous versions."
"While the dashboarding solution for integrating all kinds of process-related information from company sources other than ARIS is getting ever better, my personal wish would be to have a module that is more targeted to an Agile implementation of some modeled processes (model–to-execute)."
"Integration with third-party tools should be improved (e.g. based on APIs)."
"However, on the process mining side, there's potential for improvement to gain deeper insights into process functionality. Additionally, there's always room for enhancement in the user interface."
"As with all such platforms, Enterprise Process Center is a complex tool and there are many capabilities and features that take time to learn."
More Interfacing Technologies Enterprise Process Center Cons →
More Interfacing Technologies Enterprise Process Center Pricing and Cost Advice →
ARIS BPA is ranked 3rd in Business Process Design with 64 reviews while Interfacing Technologies Enterprise Process Center is ranked 20th in Business Process Design with 2 reviews. ARIS BPA is rated 8.4, while Interfacing Technologies Enterprise Process Center is rated 9.0. The top reviewer of ARIS BPA writes "I can usually find an answer to my issue on ARIS Community". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Interfacing Technologies Enterprise Process Center writes "Highly integrated, user-friendly, and supports mobile devices". ARIS BPA is most compared with SAP Signavio Process Manager, ADONIS, Camunda, Sparx Systems Enterprise Architect and Bizagi, whereas Interfacing Technologies Enterprise Process Center is most compared with . See our ARIS BPA vs. Interfacing Technologies Enterprise Process Center report.
See our list of best Business Process Design vendors.
We monitor all Business Process Design reviews to prevent fraudulent reviews and keep review quality high. We do not post reviews by company employees or direct competitors. We validate each review for authenticity via cross-reference with LinkedIn, and personal follow-up with the reviewer when necessary.
