Appian Reviews

Appian is really helpful in automating different processes. Our clients use it for process automation and leveraging updated features like Appian Portal and Appian RPA. The main use case revolves around external application building in nature, making it comparable to other mobile app general interfaces, particularly those heavy in user interface and user exchange. Also, Appian Records integrates all systems, providing a consolidated view, dashboard, monitoring, and report.

Appian helps in consolidating systems within the client's network, correlating data points, and offering visual dashboards to get a real-time view of various factors. Clients can check the functional state of their current infrastructure and monitor it in real-time, which also relates to the financial side of operations with business reports and similar functionalities.

The valuable features include process automation, Appian Portal, and Appian RPA. Appian allows easy integration with other systems, offers a visual dashboard, provides real-time analytics, and is flexible to be used by non-technical users for automating simple process flows. Additionally, Appian's data fabric now helps in correlating data across various systems for consolidated monitoring.

From a reseller's point of view, subscription licensing could be improved to be more cost-effective, especially for new prospects and smaller investments. Appian has new subscription models, but they might not always be feasible for smaller customers. Competitive pricing on the external user side is good, but internal user pricing needs to be adjusted for better market reach.

I have been working with Appian for nearly six years.

In terms of stability, Appian is quite reliable. I have not encountered any major downtime in customer environments. Their support team has been effective, making the solution stable overall.

Technical scalability is generally good, maybe an eight out of ten, however, some clients encounter issues due to high costs, affecting their ability to scale effectively.

Customer service in the Philippines is rated around a seven due to response times and the lack of a direct support line.

Neutral

The initial setup is generally simple and well-supported by the platform's flexibility and ease of use. My technical colleagues find Appian easy to learn, though they need to continuously adapt to new features.

Appian is promising yet the cost can be a barrier. The subscription cost is higher compared to competitors, which can hinder potential market expansion, especially for new prospects.

The main competitors for Appian are Pega and OutSystems. Appian is set apart by its RPA capabilities, though it is still catching up with the likes of UiPath.

Appian is a promising platform with significant functionalities, but it would benefit from more cost-effective pricing for smaller clients. The technical support could also be improved, especially in providing direct and faster response options.

I'd rate the solution nine 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.

Using this solution allows us to have faster testing on multiple devices.

The solution is simple to set up.

It's a stable product.

The product is open-source.

The solution needs to have more features. If you compare it to, for example, Katalon, Katalon had more features. 

We'd like improved functionality for testing new devices. For example, the last Apple phone is always a pain. The CEO of the bank has it, however, he wants the application running there. The testing of the latest models needs to be possible.

I've been using the solution for about a year. 

It's my understanding that the solution is stable. We haven't dealt with bugs or glitches and it doesn't crash or freeze.

I've never directly dealt with technical support. I can't speak to how helpful or responsive. 

We find the product simple and straightforward to set up. It's for a mobile application for bank solutions and mobile banking.

We are using the open-source version. We only invested in a couple of tests. However, we are using the open-source version which doesn't cost anything.

We also compared the solution to Katalon, and Katalon had a few better features than Appium. I cannot name each specific feature, however, I know that Katalon had some features that made it even faster.

We are customers and end-users. We don't have a partnership with Appian.

I'm not sure which version of the solution we're using at this time. 

I'd rate the product nine out of ten. We are quite happy with its capabilities. 

There are multiple use cases of Appian. A banking customer uses it more for agent onboarding; we are working on contract management for a manufacturing customer; and we are working on an incident management system for an airport. There are almost seven to eight use cases, as of now. 

We don't use Appian, we are partners and we implement this solution for customers. I'm working on both on-premises and cloud-based deployment. Appian's deployment is hybrid. 

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. 

There are four areas I believe Appian could improve in. The first is a seamless contact center integration. Appian does not have a contact center feature. The second is advanced features in RPA. The third would be chatbot and email bot integration—while Appian comes with chatbot and email bot, it's not as mature as it should be, compared to the competition. The fourth area would be next best action, since there is not much of this sort of feature in Appian. These are all features which competitors' products have, and in a mature manner, whereas Appian lacks on these four areas. I see customers who are moving from Appian to Pega because these features are not in Appian. 

I have been working with Appian for three years. 

The stability and performance are good. Appian is focusing a lot on this because they recently came out with a Kubernetes system acquisition, which is providing them the ability to scale as well as an expansion model that can be as stable as required. The performance is very good, as this solution is available across multiple cloud systems. 

As far as maintenance, it's pretty straightforward because Appian, as a company, comes with very mature hotfixes when required, as well as seamless upgrades. As long as you do not do any customizations—which is not recommended—it is pretty easy and straightforward to maintain, and does not take much effort. 

Appian is definitely easy to scale, especially if you understand the requirements. It's a good architecture. 

Of our customers who use Appian, I would say most of them are medium-sized. Next would be large-sized, and then there are not many small-sized customers. Medium- and large-sized companies mostly go for Appian. 

I would rate the technical support of Appian about a seven out of ten because there is definitely room for improvement when compared to the other product support we are seeing. 

The initial setup is a simple process. If it's on cloud, it does not take much time. If it's on-premise, you have to have all the required hardware. It takes around four hours. 

We implement this solution for customers. 

Appian is very flexible in their pricing. In general, Appian's pricing is much, much lower when compared to competition like Pega or other products. Appian also has a flexible licensing model across geographies. Pega usually goes with a single licensing cost—which is a US-based cost—for all global customers, and it's costly. Whereas Appian has a different regional licensing cost model and it can be cheaper, depending on geography. So Appian's licensing is very flexible, and cheaper when compared to other competition. 

The pricing is pretty straightforward. If you're going for a cloud-based deployment, there are no additional costs because you're just going to be on the cloud. However, if you're going to deploy it on-premise, you would need to install software, so you might have to procure your own database and servers and everything. The current recommendation, and what most customers are going for, is the cloud because it's easy to maintain. There aren't really any costs except for the licensing. 

Pega and Appian are both good BPM platforms. The area where Appian has the advantage is that it's really low-code. It takes much less effort when compared to Pega, both for developing and for setup and implementation. Within about 30 days, maximum, you can build out a product in Appian, whereas it will take you much longer in Pega. However, in regard to the four areas in which I believe Appian is lacking, Pega has all those features in a mature manner: seamless contact center integration, advanced features in RPA, mature chatbot and email bot integration, and next best action.

I would rate Appian an eight out of ten. 

If you are looking for a fast, rapid rollout of applications and you have multiple medium-scale and small-scale processes that you want to roll out at a faster pace, with ease of maintenance, then Appian is a good product to go with. Appian can also be leveraged for large-scale implementation—for example, financial service customers, for loan origination or claims organization—but you would really need to understand your requirements in order to achieve this with Appian. Whereas with Pega, it has framework for loan originations and everything, which Appian doesn't come with. Appian is a plain vanilla product, and if you go for a large-scale core implementation, then you should have enough information and requirements to capture it. Appian is best suited to mid-scale and small-scale processes and a rapid rollout. 

We use Appian for client on-boarding, anything onboard related, really: loading institutional clients, tracking that information in a single reporter, doing the follow-up, creating the plan parables for them, and developing for them.

In my organization, there are about 150 users who are currently using Appian on a daily basis. We use Appian very extensively. Every day, there are more than 100 unique logins to the system.

Appian also has very flexible local integration and we have used that extensively to integrate with our Legacy system.

The user interface is good, but it's not perfect. They should provide more flexibility so designers can create a more picture-perfect device. There should be more features on mobile UX development as well. 

Currently, it's easy to use and It gets the job done, but it's not flexible in regards to creating the mobile application from scratch. You have to play within the framework and the rules of the UX; however, that's something that not many customers like. Customers want a flexible mobile application development platform. I think Appian should make a lot of improvements with respect to their mobile application development by providing more flexibility for designers in order to allow them to create their own UX components and control the display of the data onscreen. 

I would like to see more flexibility in terms of the UI. I know that it's not designed to be a big application that allows you to do multiple things, like creating the second year stream of the pie, for example. I feel like Appian has been so instrumental in making their entire product local, and have really improved the user interface design, but the user interface design is limited to authenticated users only — although there are some limited pieces available on the login page. I would like Appian to extend their local capabilities to the login page as well so that we could create an available application that can be targeted to any customer. For example, if you flipped it, you would see information about various products and other information, something that could be very realistic if only Appian would allow these capabilities to be extended to the login page.

I have been using Appian for more than 10 years.

The stability is good. We have been using Appian for our strategy and tactical solutions and it has held up very well for us. The team was able to adapt to the changes of the new version  very quickly and were able to implement the application without any complexities or jumping hurdles relating to development. There were no issues for us. Appian has been meeting just as many of the requirements in my department as the stakeholders have. The stakeholders are happy with the UI and ease of the application. The overall usability has improved and everyone is happy with Appian. 

We believe that the scalability of Appian depends on the expertise of the Appian designers. It completely depends on the skill of the designers — how they design the applications determines the scalability of processes and data. In other words, the platform is very scalable. It stores the data as memory so the data allows us to retrieve the information rapidly; but again, we had already done the data management so the team was focused on data retention and data management. They set up their architecture in such a way that the system and the application can be scaled very quickly, so we are not seeing any problems with the scaling of Appian. 

My team mainly interacts with Appian cloud support who regularly provides them with solutions and advises them about any existing platform issues.

We previously looked at the Pega system; actually, one of our departments is currently using Pega system, but we wanted to diversify our technology base to provide a better experience for our stakeholders. My CIO recommended we make an investment because these two platforms are leading BPM tools offering similar functionalities, including BPM, EI, and case management. So we were calculating the pricing, trying to figure out what the return on the investment would be if we went with one platform or the other and what it would cost us in terms of losses between Pega and Appian.

The initial setup was straightforward. The team was able to set it up quickly, build up the applications and deploy it within six to ten weeks.

We have an in-house team that is comprised of Appian architects, designers, consultants and professionals who are trained on the Appian platform.

I would definitely recommend Appian. It has come a long way and it's a good product. It's entering into the area of a local application development platform. Appian is continuously making product updates every quarter. 

I would give Appian a rating of nine out of ten.

Our plan on using the solution will be to basically utilize it for business process management, and for case management as well. We want to use their local platform offering and some of their niche markets, to see how they can provide dynamic case management all in one place. 

One of the features that we felt was valuable to us was the business case management and how seemingly easy it was to use.

The combination of business process management, dynamic case management over the local platform has vastly improved.

We appreciate the drag and drop functionality and the easy to access plug and play features. 

They seem to be introducing a lot of automation into their product, which is exciting for us. They're apparently partnering up with different companies to offer robotic process automation in the future.

The initial setup is very easy.

You can easily integrate other applications into the product.

We're still researching the platform. I don't have a strong opinion on what might be missing. They seem to be constantly upgrading their products.

The solution could use some more tutorials to help brand new users figure out how to use the product effectively.

We're not really using the solution so much as testing its capabilities and discovering its resources. We've been doing this now for about two months.

The solution has been pretty stable. I haven't had any downtime whatsoever, or any disruptions or anything of that nature. There hasn't been any lag in service. It's been good.

The solution is very agile. It's very easily expandable too. You're able to integrate different applications or different interfaces with this platform. It's actually quite flexible, I should say.

That said, at this point, we don't plan to increase usage. We're still learning about the product. We hope, in the future, if we take it on, we will be able to expand it.

Due to the fact that we haven't had any issues yet, and we've been using the solution for a short amount of time, we haven't needed to contact technical support. If I need to in the future, I will. However, at this point, I can't speak to their level of service as I've never used them.

We did not find the initial setup complex. Our engineers, who handled the implementation, found it to be quite straightforward.

The deployment process was fast. I can't recall the exact number of hours it took, however, it was not a drawn-out process.

Maintenence seems to be minimal, however it would be helpful if there was someone on staff to maintain it as needed.

Our engineers handled the implementation. We were able to do everything in-house. We didn't need assistance from consultants or resellers.

The solution offers a monthly subscription model. That's what we use. I recall it being about $90 a month. They do have different tiers. 

We're currently doing a case study on this specific solution. We didn't look at other solutions.

We don't have a business relationship with Appian. We're just customers.

We're most likely using the latest version of the solution.

I would definitely recommend the solution and invite other companies to try it out. They even have the trial edition. That way, you can test the solution before having to purchase the application edition. If you decide to go forward, it is $90 per user per month. They have the enterprise edition as well which is a bit more. 

The solution is that it's available on different devices as well, which makes it very flexible and easily adaptable to a lot of different environments, including Windows, Linux, Mac, and Android.

The product also caters to all sizes of companies, whether you are small or large.

I'd rate the solution nine out of ten.

We use the solution internally. It is for internal front ends for capturing transactions and then managing the workflows and sending them to back-end systems. 

The rapid deployment of solutions is excellent. 

It's cloud-based, and it was a smooth transition from the cloud to on-premises. We've really enjoyed the automatic updates. We never have to manually upgrade to the latest platform. It saves us some work. The cloud setup is simple.

The solution is very stable.

It can scale well.

Technical support is quite responsive. 

We have a growing need for more DevOps for deploying branching strategies, and Appian is not great at that. If that had more DevOps capabilities, it would be an excellent product.

On-premises setup can take a while. 

We've used the solution for the last five years. 

We've only had one 15-minute downtime incident that was related to an AWS hardware issue in their 1AZ. That wasn't Appian's fault. That was it. It's been pretty stable and reliable. There are no bugs or glitches. I'd rate the solution's stability nine out of ten. 

The solution can scale. 

They've promised they will bring out Kubernetes, which we currently don't have. Right now, it vertically scales. There is no horizontal scaling yet.

So far, we've scaled from 4XL to 8XL without issue. I'd rate the solution seven out of ten. 

We have 400 users on the solution right now. 

We do plan to increase usage. The solution is mission-critical. 

Pi and P2 issues get responses within a couple of minutes. Support is very responsive. 

Positive

We did try to shoehorn Cibo into doing everything. We unbundled it into different domains. 

If you do the setup, there is a bit of a learning curve you have during the initial setup. On the cloud, the deployment is much easier. They spin it up for you and manage it for you. It's less work. For the on-premises deployment, I'd rate the ease of setup six out of ten. It took a few months to deploy. Cloud deployment, of course, is much easier since there really is nothing to do. We deployed over a weekend.

We deploy every month. It takes a couple of minutes to deploy the latest features. 

We run a lean show and only have about five people dealing with the solution. There's an architect, two engineers, and a few QAs.

We have an integrator helping us from India. 

I don't deal with licensing. However, my understanding is that it's not the most expensive. It is moderate. I'd rate the pricing seven out of ten in terms of how expensive it is. 

We're a financial institution, and we're customers. 

I'd rate the solution eight out of ten.

I'd advise users to choose their implementation partner very carefully. Do the due diligence on the implementation partner for the best results. 

I mainly use Appian for end-to-end process automation.

We use appian for IT services implementations of our esteemed clientele in CX transformation, process automation ,EX transformation and app modernization areas

Appian's most valuable feature is that we can create end-to-end process cloud ntive  workflows with minimum turnaround.

Appian could be be further improved by making it a strict, no-code platform with in-built process packs.

I've been using Appian for six years.

Appian is stable.

Appian is scalable.

Appian's technical support could improve, especially their response turnaround.

Positive

used multiple options. Since i represent  product agnostic  IT services organization, cant comment furthur on this

The initial setup was relatively straightforward, and deployment took around an hour.

NA

first year itself break even happened.

no

Anybody thinking of implementing Appian should have an enterprise-wide roadmap. If you're doing an enterprise-wide digital transformation, Appian is worthwhile, but not for just one or two use cases because the license costs are higher. I would rate Appian as nine out of ten.