Appian Reviews

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.

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 business process management.

I like how quickly you can build applications. The low code aspect of it is really useful to get things out to market quickly. Compared to other code tools that I've seen, Appian has a more robust rules engine.

I've been an Appian consultant for three years now.

Appian virtually has a 99.99% uptime rating. It's very stable. 

Appian is very scalable. There's a lot of options for bigger enterprises, like high availability. It's enterprise-grade for smaller to mid-sized businesses.

I have used their tech support, honestly, I'd probably give their support a rating of eight out of 10. They work pretty hard to try to figure out what's going on if there's an issue.

I wouldn't say their response time is long, but it could be quicker. 

There's a one-time setup fee. I think they usually set it up for you. For the typical business user, it's straightforward as they don't have to do anything.

The pricing can be a little confusing to customers. Clients sometimes have to lay out their whole set of use cases and get them approved for specific types of licensing— it's on a case-to-case basis. I think that they're very actively working on improving this, but it can be quite difficult to work out the licensing.

Other than the pricing concerns, it's a really great platform. 

If you're considering using Appian, my advice is to work with people that have experience building solutions with it, because that's going to lead to fewer problems down the line.

Overall, on a scale from one to ten, I would give Appian a rating of nine. It's a great business management platform.

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.

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.

Process Automation and Forms Digitisation, implementation of organisational wide processes rather than use of COTS.

Appian was not selected by any of the organisations I've worked with to date for production use.

Form building capabilities and well thought out process modelling are key points to this product.

Support for complex models really needs significant improvement

Flexibility in the architecture is not there

Management or reusable assets is extremely limited and poorly designed

Business rules are not aligned to industry best practices

Authoring tool slow to use resulted in limitations on how quickly solutions can be built

Integration to project SDLC (such as testing methods, build systems etc needs work)

Trial/evaluations only.

This product is targeted to mid size companies and not highly scalable complex processes.

Customer Service:

Average, although a small responsive team Appian has been fast growing stretching their ability to service customer needs.

Technical Support:

Reasonable, stronger than say IBM or Oracle technical support but it is still critical to engage in a full POC activity with this product to ensure it fits your needs before proceeding with an implementation. The closed nature of the platform means there is limited to no help outside of that technical support team which is already stretched based on the ever increasing customer base.

Compare this product closely to open source options, IBM and Pega. For simple solutions using simple models Appian may be sufficient and would provide better ROI than investing in building a team to support a more complex tool but for complex models I'd look for a stronger tool-set.

We use this solution to provide us with real-time data on all connected systems — for a continuous process workflow.

Within our company, there are roughly 45 people using this solution — mostly developers. We have two admins that handle all maintenance-related issues.

Appian has enabled us tо аutоmаtе busіnеss рrосеssеs much faster sо thаt оur usеrs саn rерlісаtе thеm аnd use them on a daily basis to improve their productivity. 

The most important and the most notable feature is that it provides us with real-time data on all connected systems in terms of how they're integrated with each other and how they are performing in a workflow manner.

The graphical user interface could be easier to use. It should be simplified. When we're dealing with a large number of complex applications, the user interface is not the best. There could be a simpler design especially when it comes to providing a view on handling large users/user groups. 

I have been using Appian for two years.

This solution is very stable and robust. The updates definitely work. I've never had to roll back an update.

It works very well actually across systems. It can work across multiple complex systems, as well. There's no problem when it comes to scaling up and scaling out. Still, the interconnections, in terms of provisions of real-time data, can be a little clunky as the current graphical user interface has some issues.

The initial setup was fairly simple and straightforward. It's pretty much plug-and-play.

Deployment time depends on the environment and the use case. It can take anywhere from two weeks to six weeks.

When it comes to connecting multiple systems, Appian fares much better compared to Pega.

First, you have to understand the business logic behind all of your systems before you start developing and interconnecting the systems, and the process flows across the systems. That's the best advice I have.

Overall, on a scale from one to ten, I would give this solution a rating of eight.

In terms of the traffic, the user interface should be improved so that it provides real-time data for complex connections between systems. If that is improved, I would give this solution a higher rating. Otherwise, it's a very stable and very robust product.