We performed a comparison between Hyland OnBase and SAP Signavio Process Manager based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Business Process Management (BPM) solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."The solution is very developed and we are not taking full advantage of its functionalities."
"OnBase is a remarkable tool. It is a well-done product. Hyland has a lot of experience in building it and looking for new things for clients in terms of functionalities. It has amazing stability, and it can grow horizontally and vertically. It is built for growth. Their technical support is also quite good and available throughout the year."
"The most valuable features are that it's very secure and provides audit trails for our documents."
"We found the setup process to be okay since they do offer a troubleshooting guide."
"The retention module is one of the most valuable features. Whatever we scan onto the system can be identified and we are notified when the records are due to be disposed."
"I like the cloud and its integrability."
"Process management/Process governance is what we think Signavio is very good at."
"We can use workflow manager to create forms."
"We could increase the transparency and speed for the new ERP introduction. The status and changes by the new system are now clear to everybody and it is a great tool to train the people."
"It is a stable solution."
"This solution is innovative and simple to use."
"I really like the Collaboration Hub because it's so easy to communicate. And what is really important is that you can use it asynchronously. It doesn't matter if you're working in Italy or in America. You are using the same process and you can speak about the same process."
"The most valuable feature is probably the nature of it."
"The most valuable features of this solution are the portal for spreading it over the organization, the usability, and the workflow generator in the background."
"For user experience, they would have to do more with the interface. It is not easy to work with and is a little messy. It is getting better, but it is not yet good enough. Other products are comparatively doing better in terms of the user interface. I have been hearing about Box, which is very easy to use and learn for the users. OnBase has to work on this aspect. It should have BPM capabilities. We compete with tools that provide the BPM feature and support those standards. They can do better in terms of the pricing model. It is a really expensive tool in Latin America. They should have different prices for different regions."
"The look and feel could be better. The integration with the user could be better. It could also be more user-friendly."
"An area for improvement would be the training - getting our people up to speed on how to use it required more training than we expected due to the complexity of the solution."
"We are struggling with duplicates and would like to have OCR functionality when using this solution."
"We need to troubleshoot why our reports didn't get downloaded in a day. There is a workflow feature which powerful but also complicated."
"The dashboards do have some room for improvement as compared to the other vendors which are there in the market."
"The user administration, the user-group administration, and the license models need improvement."
"Technical support has been somewhat challenging; there hasn't been much visibility on how to create a ticket or integrate with SAP."
"I would like to be able to include images in the documentation."
"There is room for improvement in the reporting function. At the moment, for example, while it is possible to report on how many users you had in the last month, you can't use it to tell you how many users you had from the first week to the second week. This is really a drawback because when you have an activity to promote Signavio or BPI, it would be good to be able to measure how many people you had in the system."
"From what I have experienced when I worked with a process team, we would like to work with dummy process diagrams. Right now, I don't know if I would set up a process as a dummy, since it very often gets mixed up with diagrams in production. There are many process diagrams linked to the production environment. I would like to have some kind of sandbox to work with. That would be very good. I don't even know if they already have it, but I would certainly like that."
"One of the most important points in Signavio that would be a great change would be the management of variants of the process."
"It would be beneficial to have a defined leveling or hierarchy system to facilitate better understanding and analysis. More openness and flexibility would enhance its capabilities."
"I think the interface itself can improve a bit. I think the interface is still stuck about a decade in the past, if I may be so brutal about it. Some of the buttons are really small, so you can't even see them. I think it needs upgrading to the 21st century with apps and the way we use mobile phones."
Hyland OnBase is ranked 24th in Business Process Management (BPM) with 8 reviews while SAP Signavio Process Manager is ranked 8th in Business Process Management (BPM) with 57 reviews. Hyland OnBase is rated 8.0, while SAP Signavio Process Manager is rated 8.2. The top reviewer of Hyland OnBase writes "Stable content and workflow management solution with a valuable retention module". On the other hand, the top reviewer of SAP Signavio Process Manager writes "Has many functionalities and is used to model processes to the former operating model". Hyland OnBase is most compared with Alfresco, SharePoint, OpenText Documentum, IBM FileNet and OpenText Extended ECM, whereas SAP Signavio Process Manager is most compared with Celonis, ARIS BPA, Camunda, Visio and ADONIS. See our Hyland OnBase vs. SAP Signavio Process Manager report.
See our list of best Business Process Management (BPM) vendors.
We monitor all Business Process Management (BPM) 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.
