Appian Reviews

We primarily use the solution for application creation and process automation. 

We have 15 different applications running from CRM applications to case management applications, and we are using some RPA functions. We have a big stack of applications we are using. 

The quick development cycle is great.

The ease of development is great.

It's a stable product.

The solution scales well.

There is no issue with setting it up. It's easy.

Pricing is very competitive.

Technical support has been amazing overall. 

There needs some improvement related to the chatbot features.

The performance could improve. If we could calculate the amount of data that will be realized, it would help us a lot. 

I've used the solution for three years. I've used it for a while. 

We'd had no issues in the past three years. It is stable. 

I'd rate the scalability ten out of ten. It's excellent.

We have the maximum license, and we do not plan to increase usage as we do not have plans to increase our workforce. 

Techncial su[port is excelelnt. It's one of the best companies offering support right now. 

The initial setup is straightforward. It's pretty easy. It's not complex. 

We have witnessed an ROI while using the solution. 

The pricing is very competitive. It is not overly expensive. 

We have the solution implemented in our firm. 

New users need to understand the technical aspects of the product in order to take full advantage.

I'd rate the solution ten out of ten. 

The use cases are for complex business-process oriented applications. This is the main use for large customers.

We're not using it ourselves. We're selling it and we are implementing services and projects for other customers. 

The low-code capabilities and, of course, the business process management features are the most valuable aspects of the solution. 

It has a very easy setup.

The technical support is excellent.

It's scalable.

The stability is good.

I cannot speak to any missing features. 

The UI of Appian is more internal. Recently, there has been an addition of an external user portal for the customer-facing stuff. It's still coming out. There will be more features for external users.

I have been using Appian for about a year and a half.

Appian is very, very stable. Thousands of organizations use it. It's got 99.99% uptime in AWS. It's very robust. I didn't encounter any problems with it.

It's scalable. It can scale horizontally and vertically. Some features like the portals can be implemented on Kubernetes, which means that they are scalable to implement.

Technical support is great. Every service request is answered within the hour. It's very, very exceptional.

Positive

I was an integrator for IBM BAW, Business Automation Workflow. And afterward, Pega, and then Appian. My experience with the other platforms was somehow not very good. With IBM, it's very complex. The product is very, very complex, and you need a lot of higher-skilled people to do a lot of stuff. Also, maintenance and management are very difficult. When you can go into Pega, the low-code stuff of Pega is a bit trickier to acquire. It is more complex to develop solutions with it. Also, the business part of Pega is less advanced and is more limited. You can't do everything you want there.

The initial implementation is very straightforward and simple. It's not overly complex or difficult. It's a five out of five in terms of the ease of setup.

The implementation strategy is the Appian standard implementation strategy, as it is a SaaS.

The time it takes to set up varies. For small features, it can take up to two weeks, and larger ones can take months. Usually, it's a fifth or tenth of that time if a company is doing a standard setup. 

The amount of maintenance depends on what your strategy is for deployment. If you're going into transformation and you're going to migrate a lot of business processes in the organization, you need to do it in parallel so, you'll have to employ enough personnel to do it. For a simple solution, two, three, or four people will suffice.

In one case it has been known to reduce process time by about 85%.

It's a SaaS solution. The solution is moderately priced. I'd rate it a three out of five in terms of affordability.

Appian being a complete automation platform, the initial amount covers everything. You then have to pay for specific capabilities separately.

We are using the latest version of the solution. 

I'm a business partner with Appian. I'm an integrator. 

If a potential new user is going to evaluate it, they should look at the whole picture, not at the specific features. All in all, Appian gives the best coverage of all the features needed for an automation platform. It comes bundled with RPA and VPN and low-code and process-mining discovery and document intelligence and portal for external users and the data capabilities, data visualization capabilities, which no other tool gives, gives them in one package. 

They should look for and interview users of Appian to understand the product as well. There are a lot of different ideas in the market. The reason I chose to go with the Appian is the reason that it best suits businesses that wants to jump to the next era to perform the digital transformation in the smoothest way, in the most complete way. This is the benefit of Appian.

I'd rate the solution ten out of ten.

My organization only has a few use cases for Appian, but one of the use cases I'm working with is for a corporate real estate project.

Appian has benefited my organization because of its low-code feature, so my team only has to do minimal coding, resulting in quick deliverables.

What I found most valuable in Appian is its latest feature, which lets you drill down on multiple things through the structure of the reporting and UI side of the solution.

Appian has a few areas for improvement, which my organization raised with the Appian team. One is the Excel output which is limited to fifty columns when it should be up to two hundred or three hundred columns. Fixing this limitation will make the solution better.

What I want to see in the next release of Appian is on the interface side, where the current square-shaped buttons should be round. Having available buttons for the different functions of Appian will also help enrich the UI.

I'd been using Appian for two years now.

Appian is a stable solution, so I'm giving it a nine out of ten.

I experienced a few issues in Appian scalability, particularly in the data or records area, so it's an eight out of ten.

I don't personally have experience contacting Appian technical support, but my peer used to get in touch with Appian, and from what I heard, the support team had been helpful.

My organization only used Appian.

My experience with the initial setup for Appian is nine out of ten.

Appian was quick to deploy. It took a very short time because my organization has the SaaS version.

An in-house team deployed Appian in my organization.

There's ROI from Appian, but I cannot give data about it.

A different team handles the pricing side of Appian.

I'm using Appian right now.

My organization uses the 22.3 and 22.4 versions of Appian in production and the sandbox environment.

In the organization, Appian is deployed on a SaaS environment.

Deploying the solution requires two people.

Appian is a good solution, so I'm giving it nine out of ten.

My organization is an Appian partner.

Our organization uses Appian for content management for our documentation. We are also using the solution for endpoint authentication in our clinic for clinical trials. In terms of banking, we use Appian for contract and access management.

Over the past 13 years, we have implemented Appian for 53 customers.

Appian is easy to install and set up, and it does not come out with your audit. It has accessible process orchestration and process management. With Appian, the time to market is much faster.

We are anticipating a few improvements from Appian. The product competes well with peer platforms, however, when you compare past that scale, there is room for improvement.

I would like to see more features for enterprises. They would also benefit from adding documentation and training on their site. 

I have been working with Appian for 13 years.

Appian is stable because it is on the cloud and it has options, actions, and latency. 

The solution is scalable when compared with the support of the infrastructure. It has proven to be scalable as far as the authentication time has been procured.

Technical support with Appian is good, however there is room for improvement.

Positive

The initial setup is straightforward. When compared with other solutions, Appian is much faster. It is easy to install. It is simple to transfer from the cloud, allowing you to get started immediately with the solution.

The process took us two days. If someone were implementing on-premises, it may take longer.

The licensing of Appian is less expensive when compared to other BPMs in the market. 

Appian is a good solution if you are going to implement BPM or automation into your organization. It can work on a small scale and scale larger afterward. 

I would rate Appian an eight and a half out of ten overall.

They are different zones because we have customers spread across various industries. It's spread across BFSI, manufacturing, and retail. The use cases are multifold. Appian is a solution more for finding solutions within the businesses, which are industry-specific, and business-specific. If it is retail, then we use Appian for onboarding solutions, customer onboarding, case management, and multiple.

Appian's most valuable features are the quick time it takes to develop for the market. It's easy and faster than other BPM solutions. 

I have been using Appian for more than 10 years.

I have found Appian to be stable.

Appian is a scalable solution.

We have premium support from Appian.

I rate the support of Appian a five out of five.

Positive

The initial setup of Appian is straightforward.

The number of people needed for the implementation depends upon the use case, the business area, type of customer, and type of engagement. It varies from a minimum of three to a ten-member team depending on the complexity of the project.

Appian has different models of licenses, such as enterprise-wide or user base. The price is less expensive when compared to other solutions and the various models are an advantage.

More flexibility in the licensing model is still needed because initially there were customers who are looking at only one or two use cases of business areas, but now the business areas are changing and there is a larger scope. One license model may not fit everyone. They need to be a little more flexible on the licensing model.

I would advise others there are multiple solutions in the market, low code solutions, BPM solutions, and case-finding solutions. There are multiple factors that make a good solution, such as ease to use, configuration, faster time to deploy, development and deploy scalability, and manageability. These are all factors that I would consider when purchasing a solution.

I rate Appian an eight out of ten.

We use Appian for a variety of processes in our large company. We use it for some financial processes, such as approvals.

Appian had definitely improved the productivity, and functionality of our company.

It is really simple to create a new app, and I like the data-centric aspect of the BPM tool.

In terms of what could be improved, there is nothing worth mentioning.

I have been using Appian for one year.

We are using the second most recent version.

We use the Appian managed cloud.

The performance is pretty good, but the distortions need to be optimized in order for it to work well.

I have not yet experienced the requirement for scalability.

We have 100 people in our company who use this solution.

We use this solution widely throughout the company. As I am new to the company, I cannot say whether we will increase or decrease our usage.

Technical support is good. They are responsive and were able to resolve my issues.

I would rate the technical support a five out of five.

Previously, I used IBM BPM, on a limited scale. I am not able to make a comparison.

The initial setup was straightforward. It was easy even for a developer.

The development itself can take a month or two to deploy.

We have 10 to 20 people to maintain this solution in our organization.

We used a third-party reseller and a consultant because we are a large company.

I am not aware of the licensing cost. It is handled by someone else.

It is fully managed, and I don't believe there are any additional expenses.

It's a good, solution, that is easy to use. If you are a large corporation, go for it.

I would rate Appian a nine out of ten.

We use Appian to automate processes that we are currently doing manually. We are working on an agile project. We have 500 people using this solution, most of which are operational.

This particular project started with four cases, or four processes. Next year we plan on doubling this and implementing eight more cases.

Prior to Appian, when we were handling a particular process manually, it took 40 days to resolve. After Appian was implemented, it took only seven days. The improvement in time is amazing.

I find the BPM the most valuable feature. It is easy to develop as it is a local solution. Appian is quick to understand and develop.

Appian could include other applications that we could reuse for other customers, CRM for example. This would make implementation quicker.

I have been using Appian for three years.

We had some concerns with the stability of Appian when we had a lot of cases. During normal operation it is a stable solution.

Scalability depends on how much you want to embrace the capacity of Appian. If you have a lot of cases, 150,000 for example, the stability will not be good because the memory required is so heavy that the RAM that you need is backed in. If you pass a certain number of cases, and the processes are complex, the situation is not suitable for Appian.

I have had no concerns with customer service. 

The initial setup of Appian was straightforward. We have an architect on our team who did the deployment. The deployment depends on the environment. For us, configuration took a day and to deploy no more than an hour.

We use one person, the architect, to maintain the program.

The ROI has been good. Profits increased because of this solution, this is why we are going to implement eight more cases next year.

The cost can be improved, however it is not too high for the customers here in Spain.

My advice before starting to implement this solution you need to consider what you want to do in Appian because everything is not possible. Sometimes when you think BPM process, you think that the interface application is the same, but it's not.

I would rate Appian an 8 out of 10.

I work for the largest distributor of Toyota Lexus in the Middle East. My area is related to car motors. I'm an IT senior general manager and we are customers of Appian. 

The workflow engines are a valuable feature. We use them to bridge the gaps of processes within our core systems that are either too difficult or too costly to develop within the core system. We bridge those gaps using Appian. 

We'd like to see the employee experience improved, something we can integrate with SharePoint. Right now we're looking at the Power BI which belongs to Microsoft. It has a lot of good features for low-code no-code development kinds of things. I'd like to see the ability of the software itself to integrate with the core systems. It's a gap that Appian hasn't fulfilled. 

I'd like to see integration with Microsoft products as an additional feature. Microsoft Team, or something like that. It's not there or if it is, it requires some work to enable easy integration with SharePoint. 

I've been using this solution for eight years. 

The scalability and stability of this solution are good. 

I'd say that the technical support is good. 

We visited the workflows that are provided within SharePoint but they did not fulfill the kind of things that we were looking for, or the problems that we were trying to solve at that point of time. We were planning to work on specific domains, specific areas, but you cannot make it work for complex things. 

The setup is not completely straightforward but not too complex either. The deployment itself wasn't too difficult, but this is something where features evolve and the things within it over time start moving. Adapting to any new feature while continuing to work is not simple. It makes things more complex. There are around 5,000 people using the product and we have five people dealing with maintenance. 

The price should be lower. It's not too expensive but I believe the price could be better. 

The product needs to be supported by top management for it to work. This is one of the things that we faced at the very beginning. Second, from a technical point of view, you need to have a dedicated team taking care of this from a product management point of view, not necessarily from a technical point of view because that can be outsourced. I recommend not doing the development in-house, rather to outsource it with one or two partners and the corporate team. I recommend going for the full cloud-based solution architecture rather than having part of it inside and part of it outside. If there is no issue with data sharing then I would recommend going for a fully cloud-based solution. It gives an advantage and reduces a lot of management headaches. 

I would rate this solution a nine out of 10.