We performed a comparison between Appian and Genpact Cora SeQuence 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."Since implementing we have had a faster time to solution, with fewer resources needed."
"SAIL (Self-Assembling Interface Layer), a scripting language provided by Appian. It is the equivalent of JS and CSS. It allows creation of complex UIs which are also responsive. With SAIL, we have a single language for both the UI logic and its appearance. UI components can be built as reusable components and used in multiple UI interfaces."
"The most valuable features are the low coding and low code data."
"There is a version coming out every six months with performance improvements."
"The agile manner that we require to create our workflows. This is probably the most critical part of our solution and the time it takes to start processing the solution."
"The process models provide self-documenting systems."
"The solution's most valuable features are the regular periodic and quarterly updates, they are very useful updates. They keep improving the solution more often, and that helps the platform or code always be up to date with the latest features."
"With low-code, we don't need a lot of coding, and then from the plumbing perspective, there is a complete CI/CD pipeline that exists within Appian that can be leveraged for open deployment."
"It is very stable. There is no downtime."
"The new reporting and the new dashboard features are really good."
"We would like to have more granular control for interface styling."
"Native mobile capabilities or hybrid mobile app capabilities are very limited. Things like offline sync, offline storage, access to smartphone device features, etc. are not supported by the Appian platform yet."
"I would like to see more complete university tools. For example, with UiPath, I have had a good experience related to a free course in order to provide some users some different levels of knowledge. This extra training helps users not only use the solution but to develop further within the tool."
"The tool itself is pretty good, but the main area that we struggled with was the backend. The frontend development is really good, but the backend modeling can be streamlined a little bit. There are good integrations, but tying them through the data layer and then up into the frontend could be improved a little bit. It does read/write on the data source, and you can configure it to just write or just read, but there is a little bit of work involved."
"One of the areas that Appian is working on is to improve its UI capabilities and give more flexibility to the UI."
"Something I would like to see improved is an SQL database connection."
"My only request is that they decrease the license costs."
"The biggest areas of improvement would be in facilitating team development, DevOps, and integration with typical tools used in enterprise development (Jenkins, Subversion, etc.)"
"The setup and configuration is complex."
"The design of the interface, in general, could be improved. It could be a bit more user-friendly."
Earn 20 points
Appian is ranked 4th in Business Process Management (BPM) with 58 reviews while Genpact Cora SeQuence is ranked 39th in Business Process Management (BPM). Appian is rated 8.4, while Genpact Cora SeQuence is rated 8.6. The top reviewer of Appian writes "Low resource consumption, easy setup, and stable". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Genpact Cora SeQuence writes "It is a very stable and scalable product without downtime". Appian is most compared with Microsoft Power Apps, Camunda, ServiceNow, OutSystems and Pega BPM, whereas Genpact Cora SeQuence is most compared with Hubble and Tungsten TotalAgility. See our Appian vs. Genpact Cora SeQuence 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.