Appian Reviews

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.

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.

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. 

Appian can be used to helps organizations build applications and workflows.

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.

The solution could improve by being more responsive when dealing with large quantities of data. Additionally, they can make the decision or rules engine better. It cannot handle too many rules or too many decisions at once.

I have been using Appian for approximately six years.

The solution is stable.

The technical support is amazing. They have high availability when attending to tickets. The extent to which they go to support you is amazing. They go down deep into the issue you are facing and get you to the right expertise. You can access support through forums and the telephone which they respond quickly with details on a solution.

The standalone and distributed environment installations are straightforward. There are clear instructions, documentation, and support available. However, the installation into a distributed environment can be more challenging.

I have had assistance from Appian support for the implementations.

The license is a bit expensive and the pricing model is sometimes confusing for new users or business users. It is difficult for them to know what volume of usage they will have to be able to purchase the best-suited license at the beginning.

I rate Appian an eight out of ten.

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.

Appian is primarily used for building workflows and low code applications.

Appian helps you do a lot of things. It's easy to configure and build an application platform, and it offers a lot of features. It's flexible so you can reuse it for a variety of use cases.

While Appian is generally flexible, it's rigid in some ways, doesn't allow you lot of options to cutomize. It takes longer to do something that isn't available out of the box. 

I've been using Appian for a couple of years.

Appian is stable.

Appian is scalable. We have a few more ongoing deployments, so the number of users will definitely go up.

There can be some improvement in support, start giving customer more importance than process

Neutral

The cloud version is managed by Appian, so it doesn't take a lot of time. 

The cost of Appian varies depending on the kind of license, and there are no additional costs that I'm aware of. 

I rate Appian eight out of 10.

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.