We performed a comparison between Appian and OpenText MBPM 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."It is really simple to create a new app, and I like the data-centric aspect of the BPM tool."
"The initial setup is easy."
"The solution has a lot of strong features for the financial industry, it is very easy to use."
"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."
"It has very flexible adaptation and the ability to save and automate processes."
"The application life cycle is very clear. I started learning it and giving some workshops to my team. Creating the users and the building is very structured. Documentation is nice and it's easy to learn."
"Appian has many valuable features, the first being the ease of development—rapid development. Second, the process of learning the product and tool is faster when compared to its peers in the market. It's closer to low-code, and while it's still not very easy, it's more low-code than other products in the industry. Appian has a good user interface, a seamless model user interface, which comes without additional coding. It can also integrate with multiple systems."
"It provides us with real-time data on all connected systems in terms of how they're integrated with each other and how they are performing in a workflow manner."
"Not just the solution's automation capabilities, but we like everything about it since we are more of a system integrator."
"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."
"Sometimes, clients expect us to implement ERP using Appian, which is very complicated. In such cases, I don't believe that Appian is a good tool for that."
"Lacks business rules management as part of the solution."
"They should provide more flexibility so designers can create a more picture perfect device."
"The reporting is not as good as in similar products. They could also improve the dashboards."
"I would like to see more features for enterprises. They would also benefit from adding documentation and training on their site."
"It has it's own built-in UI components and doesn't provide much flexibility to customize or extend those components."
"The ability of the interface to load automatic data is not great."
"The user interface could be better in OpenText MBPM."
"There are shortcomings in the solution's support and documentation part."
Appian is ranked 4th in Business Process Management (BPM) with 58 reviews while OpenText MBPM is ranked 41st in Business Process Management (BPM) with 2 reviews. Appian is rated 8.4, while OpenText MBPM is rated 7.0. The top reviewer of Appian writes "Low resource consumption, easy setup, and stable". On the other hand, the top reviewer of OpenText MBPM writes " A solution offering good automation capabilities while needing to improve its support and documentation". Appian is most compared with Microsoft Power Apps, OutSystems, Camunda, ServiceNow and Pega BPM, whereas OpenText MBPM is most compared with Camunda and webMethods Integration Server. See our Appian vs. OpenText MBPM 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.