We performed a comparison between IBM BPM 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."This solution has streamlined our operation and improved the TAT of sales, operations, and underwriters."
"It continues to keep up with the changing needs of the business. That is the strong value proposition of BPM. It's not a one-time automation."
"The reach with Integration Adapters and support for adding custom Java code are valuable features."
"Compliance with the BPMN 2.0 standard."
"Overall, I'm satisfied with the product. If you compare it with other products, it's probably not as easygoing or as simple to implement as the rest. But after you get used to it, it works. It has a lot of capabilities and potential, but the people, who come from different technologies, have some difficulty getting used to the way of working with IBM products."
"We have automated processes with IBM BPM and DocuSign. Its valuable features include low-code, timer, etc. It makes it simple to implement the products. We generate reports using the solution."
"It is easy to take a requirement, put it in the code, and deploy it."
"The possibility to add Java code as embedded .jar, that increases the flexibility of the solution."
"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 feature that I like the most is the collaboration hub, where every user or every employee can see the process in the overview."
"The collaboration hub is good because it allows us to share the models that we've captured and to get comments back, and we don't all have to be in the same room, it can be remote and over time."
"Process Manager is really helpful in building process maps. Creating them is really easy; the program is user-friendly."
"I would say the collaboration features are very useful to us, because we are a European organization, so we are not in one location. This is an easy way to share with other people and ask them for feedback. That is the use case for us."
"The most valuable feature is that you can customize it completely with all of the attributes that you need."
"It's easy and fast. It's very quick to work with process teams in terms of improving processes. You just have to send them a URL and to have a process in front of them. I don't use all of the possibilities we have in Signavio. This has made it easier for people to adopt, because when we scrambled the process team together and started a process of improvement, it improved their process. They are much more involved than they had been earlier, and they can also use Signavio to make smaller improvements in the process for themselves. There are many more interactions between the process teams and Signavio than in our previous solution, where you had to hire in a professional process modeler. It's been a great improvement."
"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."
"The product is extremely complex to use and administrate."
"The front end is not customised for a good user experience."
"We have been experiencing bad performance and instability."
"It is a really powerful tool, but its entry price is so high, which makes it a very exclusive club for who gets to use it. The thing that seemed to be the most intolerable was that you could put lots and lots of users on it, and it worked fine, but if you put lots and lots of developers on it, it sure seemed to have challenges. The biggest challenge was the development because of the Eclipse tool. It just seemed like irrespective of the development team that you put together, whether it had 10 or 50 people, you would end up having to reboot the development server throughout the day when you concurrently had lots of people hammering on the system. The development server just got sluggish. This was true for every project I was on. Once you got more than about five people working on the system at the same time, it would just get slower and slower during development work, and the only way to fix it was to reboot the server. It became just like a routine. Sometimes, we would reboot at lunch or dinner time, which is silly. After the cloud instances started rolling out, I never saw that again. That was probably the one big advantage of the cloud version. Instead of using an independent Eclipse-based process development tool, we moved to web-based process and design. The web-based tool definitely had greater performance than the Eclipse-based tool. I never got onto another project after that with 50 people, so I don't know how the performance is when you get a large team on it, but it definitely seems that the cloud design tool was a massive improvement."
"IBM BPM lacks openness, that is, the ability to become open for new options in terms of APIs, front-end development, and ecosystem. IBM BPM has been quite closed. One of the main improvements would be to somehow embed the rules engine into IBM BPM. Merging IBM BRMS and the rules engine with IBM BPM would be helpful. If there was some simpler way to define rules without having to put IBM BRMS on top of it, it would be good. It's something that we can get out of Camunda but not out of IBM BPM."
"The analysis reports could be much better."
"The interface is limited and should improve in the future."
"When you have to integrate files for enterprise applications."
"Its reporting feature could have customization options."
"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."
"The solution is complex."
"Customized reporting can be improved to make this a more versatile tool."
"Signavio already offers a wonderful range of functions. If variant management and customer journeys are optimized, Signavio can definitely bask in the glory of BPM tools. We also see optimization potential in the management of licenses, e.g. no named users but rather floating licenses and integration into the company's active directory."
"The price can be made cheaper."
"The product's pricing could be improved."
"I would like to see the inclusion of some document management functionality so that we don't need to integrate with a second solution to accommodate this."
IBM BPM is ranked 5th in Business Process Management (BPM) with 105 reviews while SAP Signavio Process Manager is ranked 8th in Business Process Management (BPM) with 57 reviews. IBM BPM is rated 7.8, while SAP Signavio Process Manager is rated 8.2. The top reviewer of IBM BPM writes "Offers good case management and its integration with process design but there's a learning curve". 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". IBM BPM is most compared with Camunda, Pega BPM, Appian, IBM Business Automation Workflow and IBM WebSphere Application Server, whereas SAP Signavio Process Manager is most compared with Celonis, ARIS BPA, Camunda, Visio and ARIS Cloud. See our IBM BPM 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.
