Camunda Reviews

I use the solution in my company for process modeling and collaborations with other users.

The most valuable feature of the solution stems from the area revolving around process modeling. It is possible to take care of the process modeling with BPMN. I think the most beneficial feature of the product is that the tool serves as a process orchestration platform and also helps in the area of process automation.

Camunda should be able to automate the processes in any department, like the ones in HR that are related to procurement or any others, which are repeated in the same manner without any significant changes in the process, as it is one area where the product faces certain shortcomings.

I have been using Camunda for about three years. I am a customer of Camunda.

It is a stable solution. I have not faced any trouble when using the product in my company.

Camunda is a scalable product.

Around 10 to 15 people in my company use the product.

I have never contacted the solution's technical support.

The product's initial setup phase is difficult for beginners.

The solution is deployed on the cloud.

The product's price depends on the number of processes that need to be automated or where the orchestration part needs to be used. The product is affordable for medium and large enterprises.

My company chose Camunda since we wanted a tool for process modeling with BPMN so that we could automate some of our processes.

I recommend the product to those who plan to use it, as it is a simple and practical tool with powerful capabilities.

The product helps achieve operational efficiency in our company since it helps with the process modeling area. The product also helps automate and orchestrate processes effectively.

Camunda's user interface's contribution to process modeling and deployment stems from the fact that it is pretty intuitive and simple.

It is easy for someone to learn to use Camunda.

I rate the overall tool an eight out of ten.

We're using Camunda as an SI integrator. We are currently working on becoming partners with Camunda but for now, we're customers.

Camunda provides an easy way to integrate with the architectural environment and it offers us flexibility.  

I'd like to see a number of preset features and configurations included in the solution to make it more of a plug-and-play kind of product. That would help us in terms of our customers. 

We've been using this solution for six months. 

The solution is stable. 

Camunda is not a huge company and they haven't yet reached a critical mass of users but the customer service is good and efficient. 

In my previous job, we used Appian and I've also used IBM BPM. When I switched jobs I chose Camunda because I found the initial setup to be easier and it's very user-friendly for the projects I'm working on. In some instances, it might not be suitable such as in a bank where there are over 300 processes. In that case, IBM BPM might be a preferable solution, but I don't see much advantage. 

I was responsible for the deployment; we had one person dealing with the structure and another for the implementation. The initial setup was straightforward and fast. Everyone in the company uses it, we have around 200 employees. 

We've seen a return on investment in terms of processes and that was apparent quite quickly.

There's a community version where you only pay for the support or you can choose the enterprise version depending on your needs. 

We evaluated Appian for my current job but it's less beneficial if your aim is to have your customers at the front end. We took the middle road when we went with Camunda and the flexibility it offers is a big advantage for us. Appian and IBM don't provide a community version and for the enterprise version, Camunda is an affordable solution. 

If you're looking for flexibility, this is the solution. There's no super bullet that does everything but the flexibility Camuna provides is a good start. 

I rate this solution eight out of 10. 

We are using it for one of our workflows. We are not using the user interface per se. We are making use of JavaScript Angular for the UI. So, we're just using the engine part of Camunda.

We are using its latest version.

The ease with which I can define workflows is most valuable. The latest updates and flexibility that it provides around a task activity are interesting for me.

Community support is basically what I'm looking for. Other than that, it is okay for now.

I have been using this solution for the past one and a half years.

Its stability is okay. As far as the performance is concerned, we have our internal architectural constraints, and because of them, it is unstable, but it specifically has nothing to do with Camunda.

It is easy to scale. We have about 50 to 60 users, and it is used on a daily basis.

We used to use K2. We changed from K2 to Camunda mainly due to the licensing cost issues.

It was simple. It took us about three or four weeks to deploy the first portion or first draft of BPM.

In terms of maintenance, it is okay. It doesn't require anything specific.

We did it internally.

Its price is decent. Everything is included in the license.

The Community version is also good to start with. We are using the Community version.

It is loosely coupled. Therefore, there is a lot of flexibility in the way we want to restrict the usage of Camunda. 

I would rate it a nine out of 10.

We use Camunda for the automation of the workflow and business process designer. We use the module cockpit and the workflow engine to orchestrate the process. We are a consulting company and we're not doing this for internal purposes. We mostly do this for projects, and these projects are for our clients.

The environment where we work is very dynamic and is changing a lot. So based on the circumstances, we mostly work on the delivery parts, as in project deliveries. At the beginning of the year, we have a clear scope, clear targets, but down the road, we face a lot of challenges where we face many dependencies. We need to constantly go around the dependencies and change things back and forth.

We have a lot of experience in the development, on the ERP, and so forth. We have seen that investing in a tool like Camunda is valuable, especially because it's an open-source product. When you do the customization, you'll be enriching and increasing the automation possibility of the product. So, the value is always increasing.

The best feature is the automation.

Camunda supports microservices and you can do multiple things. The most important thing is that you can reuse components that you have within the product. For example, let's say that I developed a workflow for a quality review; that is a workflow that can be reused in any new process. I can just ship it, plug-and-play, copy it, and reuse all of the features and components that are there. It means that I won't be spending too much time in terms of development to put it in place. To me, that is the most valuable thing about the product.

The only drawback is the time that it takes to have a complete set of workflows implemented on the Camunda platform. This is from drawing the modeling and the workflow up to the production release.

The support definitely has to be improved.

Second, it needs to be more intuitive. As it is now, to develop an automated process in Camunda, you would need to involve a front end developer, backend developer, and sometimes, someone who has experience with modeling. Where in Appian and Pega, you would be able to simply reduce these overheads by creating the process, the flow, and converting it within certain boundaries into the automated process.

The visualization part can definitely be improved. You can see the process moving live, but if you have a complex design where you would like to show the process in a different shape, that takes a lot of customization and a lot of coding effort to put this in place. The visualization needs not a little or a medium amount of work, but rather, it requires a lot of improvement. At the end of the day, we have the process, we have the workflow, we have the event, we have everything. However, what the people see at the end of the day is what they believe. So sometimes we know that we do have a lot of data and a lot of information, but we fail to represent this information in a way that meets or addresses the business requirements. Better visualization capabilities would help in this regard.

I have been working with Camunda BPM for almost two years.

I would say that it is stable, at least up to a certain extent. Whenever there is an update to the product available, we go ahead and update it to the latest.

This is a scalable platform. We have about 600 users and about 20 superusers. The superusers are developers, admins, and process engineers. They are a mix of process, business support, mobile app developers, and so forth.

Support is an area that is in need of improvement.

First, they don't have a strong knowledge center. If there is a challenge or there is an issue and you would like to look around, it's not straightforward. Their knowledge center does not address most of the challenges that a person who goes through the cycle from scratch. In building the process and building the products and building the workflow, a person will go through a painful process if they don't have enough experience.

When I say enough experience, I mean a minimum of 16 to 18 months. If someone doesn't have this experience on Camunda, it will be difficult and they will suffer to get things up to speed. The learning curve is too high, so they can do more if they enrich their knowledge center.

The second problem is that the support services from Camunda are not straightforward. When we communicate with them, they have to evaluate you. Sometimes they charge you per workflow, but there is no standard model. It is difficult for us because we have an agreement with the client that at the beginning of that project, we put in our estimation as to the required resources in terms of the infrastructure resources, and in terms of logistic resources, and support. With Camunda, because of the undefined or non-standard costing, that becomes a challenge.

So sometimes we go to a client and we see that the support costs will be much higher than the benefit of the digitalization. That's an example where we decide to do only the modeling for that client using Camunda and the classic workflow development will take place. This is the case, especially for small and medium businesses. For enterprise clients, definitely, we always go with full-fledged support.

I have limited experience with Appian and Pega BPM, but my most in-depth experience is with Camunda BPM. We did a pilot project with Appian for one or two months and we did one with Pega for about one month.

During our evaluation, we have seen that there are pros and cons to all of them.

We also used K2 as one of the platforms, as well as Microsoft BPM. The Microsoft product was a combination between Dynamics and SharePoint and so forth, it was really rigid. Similarly, K2 has a lot of limitations.

This is important because once we get the business requirements, we adapt to the system. We don't force the business to change, especially in this region. We are in the Middle East, Gulf area, and working with the government sector means that they have their own standards that we need to comply with. They have their own procedures where the tools, the IT, and the process have to be adjusted to meet their requirements. For example, consider a supply chain and the procurement process. This is different from one organization to another.

This is the main thing that holds us back from investing in a system like Pega. Pega, to a certain extent, is good. It has most of the capabilities. It also gives you the room to customize to the extent that you feel fit. However, the cost is too high. When we talk about the licensing costs and the customization costs, it's extremely expensive and out of reach.

The initial setup was not straightforward. The complex part was to load or update the backlogged events. So if I have a process, which is already past the flow to a certain stage, after the implementation, if I did not start from scratch, you would need to make the data or the workflow that you have current with the process. Making it current with the live process monitoring is a nightmare. It takes a lot of development effort, a lot of data validation, and a lot of workarounds to bring this up to speed.

I have not seen that there is too much support in being able to bring in existing services. For example, if someone has an existing process, an existing instance with existing data, which is not linked, there is no explanation of what the best approach is and how to load and how to bring this into the new process and make it current, covering the backlog.

This is especially true if the backlog is something that would be crucial for some of the processes that are down-line. For example, in the case where you have a successor process where it depends on the predecessor too much in terms of the decision, and also in terms of that project. Normally, we deal with delivery on projects, so we look at the delivery and the forecast and the delays. So to see the project delays, sometimes we need to go back in time to see whether the delay was in the first stage or on the second stage or on the third stage. Based on this analysis, we always create our baseline by the end of the year and reiterate on our scopes at the beginning of the year.

We have an in-house team of two resources that maintain the product.

The cost of this solution is better than some competing products.

My advice for anybody who is considering Camunda BPM is that they implementing a PoC first.

I would rate this solution a six out of ten.

We use the Camunda platform for workflow management.

The architecture is good because it's a headless workflow. I can create my own frontend, and it's fully API-based. Our approach is more flexible, so I can use the Camunda API to generate my own workflow blueprint. 

Additionally, it's cloud-ready as we have deployed it on the Kubernetes container platform, which aligns with our cloud-first architecture. These are the aspects we like about Camunda from the IT side.

Camunda lacks sufficient dashboards for operations and reporting. Although I can create dashboards and reports using the provided framework, it's not as enterprise-ready as some of the competitors in the market. They offer ready-made dashboards that are easier to create compared to Camunda. That's an area where Camunda can improve.

So, in future releases, I would like to see better dashboards.

I have been using Camunda Platform for a year. 

I would rate it around seven out of ten. We haven't encountered significant issues or unavailability of services.

In my organization, at least 100 users are using this solution. I would rate it an eight out of ten in terms of scalability.

It requires maintenance such as patching and other regular tasks.

I would definitely recommend it. 

Overall, I would rate the solution a six out of ten because Camunda does not provide a prebuilt interface. I have to develop it myself. To provide a comprehensive product to my business users, I need a frontend. The frontend provided by Camunda vendors is very basic. Most of the vendor's customers develop their own UI or frontend using technologies like React, React Native, or JavaScript frameworks. 

So I rate Camunda Platform a six out of ten due to the incomplete delivery of a frontend. Without a proper frontend, the business cannot effectively use the platform. This is an area where I'm still exploring how well the competition performs. That's why I'm giving a slightly lower rating. However, in terms of orchestration, API capabilities, and cloud compatibility, Camunda is very good.

I have used IBM BPM and Newgen in the past. We are still using IBM BPM alongside Camunda.

We use it as a task manager. Our use case is to help manage human tasks and have a workflow to which we can assign a function and some criteria to agents.

Camunda helped in an important way because we have a standard language in discussions between developers and business analysts. It has been key in closing that gap.

And although we haven't quantified things, generally, this type of platform will reduce the cost of in-house development.

The UI is very user-friendly compared to other products. The native, vanilla UI is very interesting and intuitive to use. It's user-friendly when it comes to modernizing a business process. 

The connectors provided by Camunda work correctly for mapping out and connecting processes. Our strategy is always to use out-of-the-box products.

It exposes a REST API that it can facilitate and make it easy to integrate with other systems.

We are not continuing with Camunda because of performance problems. We have millions of cases and when we did load testing with Camunda we found some limitations.

It is not difficult to change existing processes. The difficulty was in integration, for example, to call an external web API, and in the security capabilities, to use a vault for secrets. That was difficult.

They also need to integrate business role management, because Camunda doesn't have a built-in business-roles engine. The business analytics monitoring, the BAM portion, could also be improved.

We have been using Camunda Platform for about six months.

It's very stable.

In our strategy, we use containers on-premises to manage scalability using Docker or OpenShift.

Camunda's technical support is very good.

Positive

We had a solution before Camunda, but I don't want to identify it because we did not have a good experience with it.

The installation was very simple. With Camunda, it's very easy in comparison with other products.

We set up a dev environment and a laboratory environment, and it took about five days, max. We hoped to expose Camunda to our end-users, not only IT users but also business-type users.

We haven't seen return on investment because we need more time with this type of product. It's a long-term investment. It will take three, four, or five years to see a return.

The price is competitive with products like Bonitasoft and RHPAM (Red Hat Process Automation Manager). We have two versions of Camunda. The first version was open source, without support, but then we got a supported version.

Other products, like Pega or IBM or Oracle, are very expensive.

We have evaluated Bonitasoft and RHPAM.

Camunda and other products—like Bonitasoft and RHPAM —have been chosen, strategically, by our enterprise to reduce the gap between developers and analysts, because we talk the same language: BPMN.

The only negative point was the performance. If a company wants to use it with small or medium-sized systems that do not need a lot of performance, it would be a good choice.

We ran two proofs of concept, but it was on internal processes. Both processes were related to the human resources area. Right now, the IT central area is working on a service to optimize using Camunda.

We use the community version, and we use Cawemo Platform to start modeling and involving the areas. We pass the models to the IT central area, and they go on with the job. I work for the government of my state. I work in a central area, and we work with BPM, so we were trying to find a solution for automatization. That's when we found Camunda.

We are trying to transition the environment and trying to see the use for it in the future, but right now we are running one project specifically.

When we ran our first proof of concept, we had some aid from an external company called Memora, which is a representative here in Brazil. They have high-quality technicians. The first project was really a success.

We don't have specific key users because we are trying to understand how to use the solution in order to provide public services for the citizens of our state. They are solving some technical issues and trying to integrate the solution with our internal IT environment.

The idea is using the community version in order to provide public services, but not all services, because we have a traditional program system development. They are considering buying a local tool, and they are considering Camunda Platform.

We are using the newest version of the solution.

We like the idea of working with Cawemo because it enables us to keep on working, remotely or not. It allows us to collaborate between areas. It's easy to model and easy to use. It's a great tool for communicating at the beginning of a project.

The business model could be easier to understand.

We started using Camunda at the beginning of 2020. We started researching and using the Cawemo solution for modeling, getting the idea, and knowing the environment. That's when we decided to run a proof of concept. It happened in the middle of 2020.

During 2021, we had some issues concerning coronavirus, so things stopped for a while. Right now, the central area responsible for IT restart is considering running another proof of concept on Camunda.

It is stable.

The solution is scalable.

I tried to get some information about buying the license for the solution, but I found it kind of hard to understand the business model. That's why we're currently using the community version.

I would rate this solution 10 out of 10. 

My advice is try to understand and use it because it's really an amazing solution. I only have nice words to say about it. I really hope our central IT area runs this proof of concept, and that it becomes successful in the near future so that we really start offering public services on Camunda Platform. It's easy to use, stable, it integrates areas, and you can use the community version.

I use Camunda Platform for trainings. I teach people how to develop process application. I am helping people understand what Business Process Management Suites are, what they can use it for, and their advantages. I am a trainer and a consultant, but not a reseller.

We use the open-source free version so we do not pay for support.

Because Camunda has various versions, there is the Platform itself, which contains the process server, and there is the Modeler, and it is distributed differently and used for different purposes.

I think that the positives of Camunda Platform are that our customers can start with the free version. I think it is the most important.

I do not recommend anybody use the free version for production without paying for a support subscription. I always recommend to use the free version only for testing and learning purposes. And I think for that purpose, it is perfect.

There are a few things that I'm missing. For instance, the user interface creator, which I know other systems have, like Aurea or Lombardi, which are IBM solutions. The interface creator, including the data model creator or some module which would allow the users who are not programmers or business consultants and who are not technically skilled in database and Java programming, to create data models and user interfaces. I used to use have this with Savvion and Aurea BPMs.

I am using the Camunda Platform for about six years.

Because we use it only for learning purposes and the solution is not used by more than four - six people at once, we haven't faced any issues.

Our purpose is very simple, it is only for trainings for our customers who come to us to learn how to create process application. I do about four trainings a year and they usually have from four to six attendees. So it's about 20 people per year who have access for only two months each.

They receive the access to their personal account for two months. They receive it when they attend the course and they have access two months after the course and then the account is closed and the tenant is deleted.

In terms of how much staff is needed for deployment and maintenance, it is just me and one programmer.

Hard to say if we will increase usage. I am in communication with another company which is developing their own process platform, so maybe I will switch from Camunda to their platform in the future.

We have been using the community very often, but we haven't tried to contact support because we do not pay for the support.

I did use two platforms intensely in the past. I worked with the IBM Business Process Suite. It was later replaced by the Lombardi solution. Then I was working with and implementing Savvion, which was later bought by Banerjee and now is represented by Aurea Business Process Management Suite, which is still my favorite.

I met in-person with Mr. Ketabchi, who is the father of Savvion Business Process Management Platform and I really believe that it is a very well designed solution and very user-friendly for the business consultants and business process analysts. It is my favorite one. After Progress Software divested this solution and created the Aurea company and distributed it from there, Aurea managers decided that our market is too small for their interest, and we had to search for new solutions.

Then we switched to Cordys and we became a partner Cordys for Central Europe, Poland, Czech Republic, Slovakia Republic and Hungary.

We implemented Cordys to at least one important customer which is East European broadcasting, TV broadcasting corporation. But then Cordys was diverted by Mr. Baan, the founder of Cordys to OpenText, and again OpenText changed their sales policy. So again, our market is too small for them.

We were searching again for another solution. So the next in the queue was with Bonita and Bizagi, but finally I decided for the free version of Camunda because at that time I only needed something for training purposes because six years ago I started to concentrate on trainings for business process analysts and consultants and for trainings in the area of process automation.

The initial setup is not too complicated.

We started with the analysis. The implementation depends on what you are asking for. We had a few discussions with the developers about what I expect and they developed and implemented it in about two months with about 10 days of work.

I have to say that the developers I cooperated with had previous experience with Camunda.

The price is for support, because as far as I know, Camunda doesn't sell licenses, it provides service support, not the licenses. It is a difference. Because you don't buy a license, but you do buy the support services. I think that for the support services, the price is very fair. And if I would go for the project, I would surely decide for Camunda because the yearly support price is very fair. I don't remember exactly. But at that time, when we did the calculation, it was about €20,000 per year.

My advice to anyone considering Camunda is that I recommend to use the free version for trainings and for testing and for not very crucial process automation for pilot project purposes, but not for production and not for key processes. For key processes and for production, I always recommend to buy the support.

On a scale of one to ten, I would give Camunda Platform a 10 for sure.

It's very good. But it depends on what you are expecting.

For other purposes, there might be something else which is preferable. It is not easy to say there is one business process management for all purposes, for all companies. I would recommend Camunda for either small or middle-sized companies.

I would not recommend it for corporate uses because to integrate in this scenario requires much more extensive and intensive technical work for integration with the usual applications, et cetera. Therefore, Bonita or IBM Business Management Suite, for example, already have many thousands of connectors to Salesforce, SAP, ERP Systems, Microsoft systems, et cetera, whereas with Camunda, you are almost in the beginning and you have to develop everything by yourself. So for larger companies, the implementation might be too long and too expensive.