We performed a comparison between IBM BPM 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."I liked its robustness the most. It was a very robust platform in my experience. It seemed like a very stable and powerful tool for handling lots of concurrent users and hammering at the system."
"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."
"IBM's deployment box is one huge black box. We can create all the services with our own code or without a codebase, however, we have a huge amount of space with practically no limitation."
"It is transparent to business users because it is mostly picture based modelling."
"This is one of the best tools to support the business and the way we work, and the numerous processes we need to implement."
"We use it for automating certain processes which previously took a lot of time for agents to set up different products for customers. They would have to enter a lot of different systems. This has now mostly been automated."
"We like that it does not require a lot of hours to train our people."
"The most valuable features come in the bundle, the design process, creating services, creating BPDs, creating coaches, and UI/UX."
"Not just the solution's automation capabilities, but we like everything about it since we are more of a system integrator."
"If you want to use IBM BPM, you will have to invest a lot of money for licenses and you need to learn that there are limitations in developing applications. You cannot create anything you want."
"Better integration with other products in the automation suite."
"IBM BPM's price could be improved."
"The pricing is a little bit high. It's gone up in cost."
"It can definitely be improved in terms of performance and stability."
"The constant switch between Eclipse and its web versions can be annoying and confusing."
"Where it can be improved is Integration. I think that the direction that IBM is taking now, to have something that is much more integrated, that can be seen as one single solution, is clearly the right way."
"The engine itself tends to accumulate a lot of data that needs to be cleaned up, and that's the kind of thing that keeps it from, in some scenarios, scaling as much as it needs to. And then, when you're building solutions, if you're not careful to keep the screens from being associated with too much data, if you're going to just do things the way that a lot of people would just assume that they can do, without having experience of having made those mistakes before, it will accumulate a lot of data, and that will cause it to perform very badly."
"The user interface could be better in OpenText MBPM."
"There are shortcomings in the solution's support and documentation part."
IBM BPM is ranked 5th in Business Process Management (BPM) with 105 reviews while OpenText MBPM is ranked 41st in Business Process Management (BPM) with 2 reviews. IBM BPM is rated 7.8, while OpenText MBPM is rated 7.0. 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 OpenText MBPM writes " A solution offering good automation capabilities while needing to improve its support and documentation". IBM BPM is most compared with Camunda, Appian, Pega BPM, IBM Business Automation Workflow and Apache Airflow, whereas OpenText MBPM is most compared with Camunda and webMethods Integration Server. See our IBM BPM 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.