Appian Reviews

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.

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.

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.

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.

It is mostly for our API, BPM, workflows, web services, and enterprise integration.

We have been focusing on building all of our digital and mobile applications with a lot of earlier code, as the platforms were legacy. We had to write code from scratch, because it was not possible to use the existing code. For most of our digital applications, like payment systems or digital payments, the use case was for our mobile apps.

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. This is also quite fast. It is important for us to develop the solution in an agile manner.

Newer features, especially in terms scalability. It has to become more scalable than what it is today. It is not a issue today. However, going forward, due to the growth in the number of users and the workloads, it will have to be more scalable.

It needs better integration with our existing application ecosystem.

I would like more connectors for calls and integration features. Typically in enterprise banks, we have 200 to 300 plus applications. Training and documentation on how to integrate this would help.

We would like to see more reduced latency. We would like to make sure that the scale-out factor will be much more as workloads come in. The scale-out should be improved as we grapple with more workloads and users.

We feel the latency could further be reduced, but the access time for the throughput time or the general access time could be further reduced. 

We do not see any issues with overall scalability right now.

The tech support is quite good. Maybe it is not as good as large enterprise vendors, especially when it comes to more technical troubleshooting. Overall, the response is okay, since most problems are solved. Though, if there are major issues, then break times possibly increase. If they could focus on that, it would be helpful.

We have been using tools from IBM, Oracle, CA (formerly known as Computer Associates), so mostly these enterprise tools at the same time are very complex and not very agile. The learning curve is much more than we found with the learning curve for Appian, so it is a trade-off between the agility of using a tool versus the complexity. To a large extent, more functions can be serviced through the tools previously mentioned from a enterprise perspective. However, most of the functions that we have are requirements for our services that we run through Appian, therefore we see this coverage as okay

It was between straightforward and complex. There were a few issues in terms of configurations, but overall, getting the system started was quite fast. There were a few configuration parameters that we had to change, for which, it took us a couple of days more than expected. The way to start this tool is quite quick, so we did not face any issues with it.

Product pricing compared to some of the earlier vendors, like IBM, CA, and Oracle, is quite well-priced. Although, we do feel that as we increase the number of users and the workload increases, we will have to spend more. 

We will have to have a dialogue or negotiate a price for future use. To start with, it is a reasonable price. As we go ahead, we will have to make sure the costs are inline with our expectations as we grow our user base and workloads.

In terms of licensing, instead of user-based, you should go more on a workload basis. It could be helpful, since we feel that we will be growing the workload part of it more than the user part of it. I think they give us a good price on workload characteristics and it would be a better option.

We already had IBM. We evaluated Oracle and CA. We found this product to be good price-wise as well as quick implementation-wise. From IBM, at that time, we evaluated WebSphere, APM Manager, and Workflow Manager. So, it was centered around their WebSphere, Lombardi product. 

How to integrate with their application ecosystem is probably a priority. Once you get a product like this, it is important to have that integration upfront rather than later on to work on. Otherwise, you will grapple with a very complex application ecosystem for large enterprises. These features must be provided for, understood, and the expectations of the enterprise integration bus, service, or whatever you do should be well covered by the solution, so you do not face problems down the road.

Most important criteria when selecting a vendor: We make sure it is a recognized and credible name/vendor. We typically look at the top four or five vendors on independent research ratings, then we form a committee so we do not take personal decisions. We have a committee, we arrive at a consensus, then we put up our selection criteria. This revolves around the technical aspects, the credibility of the vendor, the coverage of the vendor, and the cost as well as where do we see the future roadmap of the vendor.

I've used it for analytics and automation. I use it for processes related to validation. It's for business process automation. It can be used for mail ticketing, validating products, invoicing, processing, order to cash, et cetera.

It helps with working with API projects. It helps me work with clients and helps with automation with UiPath. 

It's a popular solution with clients. 

The price is not that high. It's affordable.

The setup is easy.

It is stable.

The product is quite innovative. 

There is a lot of documentation available.

The solution could offer better features. We'd like to have more options for automation. We have more affordable UiPath automation features, which are lacking in Appian. It really needs to invest in automation more. 

It would be useful if they could create an academy or forum in the future to help active users answer questions they have about the solution.

I've been using it for one year.

The solution is very stable and reliable. It is innovative. The customers I have been working with choose Appian based on its innovation and reliability.

There are a variety of customers using the solution. We're a consultant group and have customers across many sectors. It's hard to quantify how many people are using it. 

Technical support is very helpful. I've also uncovered a lot of documentation that can help me. It would be ideal if they could create an Appian Academy or official forum to help people learn more about the solution and troubleshoot problems. 

I did not have any issues with e Appian installation. 

The deployment of projects depends on the data I work with or the projects I deploy. A simple project will happen fast. A more complex project will take longer. Typically it takes a day or two. A more complex deployment may take a week.

I use orchestrators during the deployment. I simply need to develop a process in the studio first and then I need to activate the robot and connect it with the orchestrator. 

I'm not sure about the licensing. It's not part of my direct scope. However, my understanding is the pricing is reasonable. 

I am using the latest version of the solution. 

We have an on-premises deployment for right now. However, I'm open to trying the cloud deployment in the future. 

I provide the solution for my customers. I am an AI engineer. I provide a solution and find use cases for the customers. 

If people are interested in the solution, they should start by reading more about it and learning more about the offering. 

I'd rate the solution eight out of ten. 

I am working in a software house, and we are using Appian to build a custom-made application while trying to fulfill our client's requirements.

I don't think we currently have any applications for our internal processes, which include a set of Oracle APEX products or applications, especially custom-made applications, which is something we need for ourselves. However, we have many use cases for our clients.

Workflow Engine is a valuable tool. Besides the resource kit, I believe both tools are very, very convenient for our clients.

I don't think I have anything to comment on the areas that need improvement in the solution, but I can refer back to my technical team. As the solution architect, I don't have hands-on experience with both products.

If you ask me about my thoughts on what is missing in Appian or my opinion on what I would want the vendor to add in the future, I would say that the product is in a state of perfection. However, we can't really guess what AI and big data models might sell us in the near future.

I am currently using Appian and Oracle APEX, and I will soon start to use Appian Version 23.1. Also, our company has a partnership with Appian.

I won't be complaining near the client. Stability-wise, everything is okay.

It is definitely a scalable tool. I would rate its scalability not less than eight and a half out of ten.

Even with an on-premise implementation, the scalability is still high, so it is easy to scale up.

I don't have any experience with it personally, but our team that practices on Appian uses the technical support very frequently, maybe on a daily basis or so.

We have been using APEX in our organization for some time now, and I was checking the comparison between Oracle APEX and Appian on peerspot.com for an unbiased opinion. Presently, we are implementing both Oracle APEX and Appian almost equally for small to medium purposes. However, for enterprise needs, I think we will choose Appian.

It depends on the functionality that we are using. For instance, having an LMS solution for our clients is a bit straightforward. 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.

When it comes to pricing, it's definitely not affordable. However, it really depends on the requirements that you're seeking from the solution. If you're looking for an on-premises distribution, it can be a bit expensive. But this is usually the case with on-premises solutions. That's why we have a cloud solution available, which is more cost-effective.

Additionally, the cost is justified by the use cases, and Appian is a good solution overall.

In terms of hidden or extra costs for additional features beyond the standard license, I don't think we've had any exposure to such scenarios, except for the resource kit. From a technical standpoint, I'm not sure if it's paid for separately or included in the license cost. As you may be aware, we've partnered with Appian, so I believe we have an official case here.

I suggest that those planning to use Appian take care of the practice lead because many resources claim to have solid and vertical knowledge of Appian. We are not sure why there is a risk of resources being unavailable during this trip. Additionally, we have a shortage of Appian resources, so finding a good practice lead could be a challenge. Overall, I rate this solution a nine out of ten.

The solution is used for automating software processes for creating internet sites for internal usage. The solution can also be used to make the process easier for external entities. Appian can be deployed on the cloud and on-premises.

The solution helps by providing an automated out-of-the-box process that helps us quickly publish applications within six weeks without requiring any customizations.

The most valuable features are the low coding and low code data.

The solution needs more features. For example, a way to connect to our viewing database, to record, and more interface and component design.

The cost of the solution has room for improvement.

I have been using the solution for 20 years.

The solution is stable.

The solution is scalable.

The technical support for Appian was just expanded to support multiple regions.

I previously used APEX Oracle Application Express and OutSystems. From a local perspective between the two solutions, I prefer to go with OutSystems. Overall I prefer Appian because it has a VPN engine compared to OutSystems which is just a workflow engine.

The initial setup is straightforward. The average deployment takes around two days and requires around 30 percent of our developers.

We complete the implementation for our customers.

In general, our customers are satisfied with the return on investment.

The price is high.

I give the solution a nine out of ten.

We have multiple environments. We can move our application from one environment to another environment through a governance process and approval through the application manager.

The solution is easy to maintain and very configurable.