Camunda Reviews

We are currently concentrating majorly on our clients in telecommunication. We are also working with new and existing federal clients and proposing Camunda Platform to them.

We are using its latest version. We are currently in the development phase. It is in our local environment, but we are planning to be cloud-based. Going forward, we will create a Jenkins Pipeline and deploy it onto the Azure cloud.

It is open-source. It supports microservice orchestration. This is what we are really interested in. We can customize our products depending on the use cases.

They have a migration plugin that can be used to migrate from one BPM to another BPM. It is in the beta stage since last year. If they can make it available in the market, it would be great. We are going to have a couple of migration projects for migrating from IBM BPM to Camunda, and this plugin would be useful. I have already discussed this with them two weeks ago and asked them to look into this and add it as a feature. We are expecting this plugin to be available in the next version. This is the only requirement we have at present. They keep on coming up with different features, which is helping us a lot. Its latest release that came out last month was awesome.

I have been using this solution for five years.

It is stable. I didn't face any issues in the production or development phase.

I have interacted with their technical support, and they are very helpful. When I have to work on any POC, I also directly work with the product team.

Its initial setup is straightforward.

I would advise others to verify the technology stack that they already have in place. They should check the orchestration part and see if they need to take care of any redesigning.

I would rate Camunda Platform a nine out of ten.

We have multiple B2B services running for our customers. We have approximately 120 workflows and are eventually migrating everything to the Camunda Platform. We have approximately 25 workflows on Camunda currently running.

The headless nature of the Camunda Platform is something that has helped us to build our own logic and platforms on it.

The cockpit features of the Camunda Platform can be improved to make it a bit more user-friendly, in terms of providing a bit more user experience for non-technical users. There could be some additional documentation added.

I have been using the Camunda Platform for approximately one year.

I would rate the stability of the Camunda Platform an eight out of ten.

There are some improvements needed.

The solution is scalable, it can fit any size business.

The technical support is good. However, the agent is not in the position to understand our use case for them to report to us on time. The speed and training of the support agents could improve.

I rate the support of the Camunda Platform a seven out of ten.

I have used K2 and some other workflow solutions previously.

The initial installation was not difficult for us because we had already some experience with the solution.

The price of the solution is reasonable. 

My advice is you have to be a bit optimistic and you need to see if this solution is the right fit. You have to determine if you are looking for a low-code platform or a headless platform. There is a misunderstanding between multiple products and the Camunda Platform being a headless BPMN, it is not a low-code platform.

I rate Camunda Platform an eight out of ten.

The primary use case is for modeling processes.

It allows me to present or to demonstrate the business process flow, visually, without having to resort to PowerPoint, Visio, or other products. 

I can convert it into a real process. Once it is validated visually by the business people, then it can be enhanced into a full-blown process model.

The features that I like the most are the drag and drop.

The simulation feature of this solution needs improvement. As an example, if I wanted to highlight an event then when I press on it, I would like all of the impacted processes to highlight. That way, you can see the impact of an event on different processes.

If there were some industry templates it would have helped significantly, because it is similar to a process map for a domain. That is what we are currently creating, a domain-relevant process map. 

When it comes to insurance, just to give you an example, there is marketing, then underwriting, policies for contracts, policies for prevention, collections, there are claims, and business flows that we had to create from scratch. If we could have started through a template, it would have helped us kick start the initiative.

I have been using Camunda BPM for one year.

This solution is stable. I have not experienced any issues with this solution.

It's a bit early, so I haven't stress-tested it yet for scalability.

We have three users.

I haven't reached out to technical support.

I found everything on the website. The manuals and tips were useful.

Previously, I used BPM online, but I changed to Camunda BPM because I downgraded my current requirements.

I enjoyed BPM online but needed a more lightweight tool for modeling. BPM online is cumbersome on the modeling side.

The initial setup was straightforward.

It was deployed a year ago, so I can't remember exactly, but I think that I only took a few minutes to deploy.

I did not use an integrator, I did it on my own.

It's free, open-source.

I use the open-source free version.

I reviewed Sygnavio and Pega Systems. 

I chose the Camunda BPM, because I am domain-oriented, and I saw that many companies, especially in my domain, the insurance domain, are using Camunda BPM and that gave me the insight as to where I should focus my efforts.

We are currently a startup with Insur Tech and we are sensitive to cost. It's our strategy and it is the best tool for the price at this time.

What I have learned from using Camunda BPM is to keep it simple.

I would rate this solution an eight out of ten.

We're planning and exploring moving to the Enterprise Edition. We find some functionality for the migration to be helpful for us. This is why we might move to the Enterprise Edition.

We are currently using Community Edition and then looking to move to Enterprise Edition possibly soon.

We are using the latest version of Camunda BPM. We keep upgrading to each new release. We keep always moving with less change. There are a lot of features in Camunda BPM.

We are documenting all of the processors and VPN. Then we share it with our business users so they can approve our other process. From the technical part, what we did was exposing Camunda BPM as a web service.

We configured a split between the process and the business. If there are any changes in the business, we are changing it in the process. If there is no impact, we don't need to redeploy our configuration settings again and again. 

This was something that saved us time and improved our data center processes.

We were discussing Alfresco. They were saying that their product is much better than Camunda BPM. We signed the governance policy for "Cloud First". 

When you search for Camunda BPM resources or books on how to utilize Camunda BPM, it is lacking. When it comes to Alfresco, there are thousands of resources that can help you to utilize within AWS and its Group Services. I would like to see the usage of Camunda BPM on Amazon Web Services be improved.

For Camunda BPM, the sense of community is lacking. The company itself is based in Germany. Alfresco is a very small company with an open source community. It is really good and it works perfectly. It was easy for us to adopt it. 

We are proposing that Camunda BPM can be offered as a web service. What could be improved is better support for AWS and training provided with the platform to make it easier to use.

Camunda BPM is very stable.

We didn't experience any issues with the scalability of Camunda BPM. It has good scalability by default. We are in Information Authority and we're looking on behalf of other government agencies, i.e., the civil service correspondence system.

We are creating different systems for the VPN to meet the processes. We are using Camunda BPM for 200 to 300 users. We use it almost every day.

We took responsibility for the setup and it was straightforward with community help

We implemented the setup of Camunda BPM on our own. We did everything in-house. Within a week, it was done. We implemented pretty fast.

We're very strongly recommending Camunda BPM. It is good. It is easy. The community is good. There is a lot of support if you are stuck anywhere. You can Google it and find the answers. Many people are using Camunda BPM worldwide and finding the responses was easy. 

I would rate it an eight out of ten. The reason why I wouldn't rate it a 10/10 or higher is that there are some other features available within other tools that can improve the algorithms they are not aware of yet.

Camunda BPM satisfies our requirements and we have been using it for a year.

Primary use case is for fast prototyping innovatie processes within the social domain of the government.

Camunda has enabled us to do quick prototyping within end-to-end team consisting out  of information architects/process architects/developers and product owner to form a consistent view in business value, achitectural compliancy and technology.

The number of client implementations and cross-language capabilities to support multiple frameworks is very pluggable compared to other BPM engines out there. It's also more portable than most of them. Next to being open source, the modellers are made in HTML and can be embedded in your own website with little effort.

The user interface needs improvement. It should be more tailored to the end-user and offer a better user experience design over the user interface itself.

The solution could also use more and better frameworks in terms of embedding them in the engine. Right now the only embedded framework that's supported is Java. It's not a problem because you can also have remote workers that do part of the process through their remote RESTful API which they have clients for, but you cannot embed .NET. You cannot embed that for execution within the engine through delegates, so I would definitely say that would be a plus if they would expand that. Certainly in terms of performance.

I've been using the solution for two years.

I haven't had any issues with any instability.

There's a free version and an enterprise version, so it depends on which you choose but it's very scalable, but you have to understand it's persistence strategies as it uses a centralized database. That's normal for a BPM, however. In their new product Zeebe, which is a derivative of Camunda, they've made it completely decentralized and scalable via partitions, which might be more generic and easier to understand than the forementioned persistence strategies of Camunda. Because of partitioning, Zeebe is also a step forward into better orchestration in a micro service landscape. On the other hand that comes with the cost of complexity of installation. I would say for small to mid-size companies Camunda is scalable enough.

We're using it in the innovation field labs for the government so there's about potentially 350 municipalities there, and the number of people who are participating in this common ground field lab is about 150 potential developers, product owners, business analists that can be tied together in their disciplines around the Camunda Process and Decision Modelling Engines. A few products in those labs are now being developed using Camunda.

We are able to do everything from community support. Everything is well documented there. There has been no need to get support from them specifically but one of the owners writes a lot of papers and presents webinars which you can join for free. I would say they have very, very good support and are very open-source community-minded. I think they are one of the most supportive companies I've seen.

I don't have any knowledge about the paid support, because we don't do paid plans. I suppose that it would be great because if their free seminars and white papers are good, I suppose a higher level of support would be great, they really know what they are doing.

We used a workflow engine. The reason for switching is compliancy by design. Mainly Object Management Group (OMG) and Triple Crown Standards (BPMN, DMN, CMMN), which are supported by Camunda allowed us to reach this compliancy.

It depends on how you set it up. If you want to set it up for demo purposes or development and start working with the product, the set up is fast. The first one I installed took me five minutes and it was running.

We wanted an open source engine. Therefore we did not evaluate other engines such as Mendix, Pega.

We use the free version, the open-source version, but there is an Enterprise option. And the Enterprise version has heat maps so you can easily optimize complex processes on performance. You can easily see the hot spots that need to be scaled in a different manner in terms of hardware or improving your process flow.

I would definitely recommend the solution to anyone. At least for the short-term. They are currently shifting towards their new product, Zeebe. We are actually currently using it already in smaller labs on smaller projects, such as modelling process flow's and micro service orchestration driving front end ui's such as digital assistants. But there is not much difference between the two so, I would definitely advise anyone starting with a BPM, in general, to start with Camunda. I found Camunda really easy to start with.

I would rate this solution 8 out of 10.

We use it for the public sector. Currently, we are only modeling the processes, but in the future, we would be automating all the processes. We are at the first phase of the process.

It is simple to use. The user experience is very good.

In terms of features, it meets my needs, but I would like Camunda to have an office in Brazil and provide training in Portuguese. They should provide regional support and training courses in Portuguese.

We have been using this solution for a year and a half.

It is very stable.

It is scalable for what we need. We have five people who are using this platform, and we plan to increase its usage. We are implementing it in some of the remote offices, and we would be able to expand it next year.

We are using the community version, so we are not using their support.

It was very simple. We are using the web solution, and it was very easy and quick. We could start using it in one week.

We are using the community version. There is no licensing cost.

We are beginning to use it for modeling some areas in the public sector, and there is no problem. I am yet to use all the features that Camunda has. For me, it is a complete solution at this time.

I would rate it an eight out of 10.

The primary use case of this solution is for migrating IBM BPM to Camunda.

We helped our customer to reduce their licensing and operational costs to a larger extent by proposing Camunda BPM to replace existing BPM solution. They were very much impressed with the capabilities of Camunda BPM and started migrating to Camunda BPM

I like everything about the entire BPM that comes with the BPM suite. It's more intuitive and they are enhancing the product very effectively year after year.

It's a customizable product and it's user-friendly.

I don't see many issues with this product.

The migration strategy needs to be improved. Most of the financial institutions in North America are looking towards open source BPM to replace their existing existing BPM platform.Camunda has already started working on a plugin to mgirate any kind of BPM workflows to Camunda BPM seamlessly. They have just released a beta plugin to migrate Legacy BPM processes to Camunda BPM. If they make it as a full-featured version, that would be a lot of help with migration projects. 

I have been using Camunda BPM for six years.

We are using the latest version of this solution.

It's a stable solution. We have not had any issues.

It's highly scalable and offers high availability. We used eight in a containerless server and also on a shared server.

I have work with different organizations, particularly with Camunda BPM. These organizations that we have recently started with are still in the beginning stages of the practice. Previously, we had heavy usage and had to support two to three clients simultaneously.

Technical support has been very helpful, even during the RFP phase. If we needed to verify anything then we could speak to the sales head directly, as well as to the product team.

Previously, I worked with JBPM, which was an open-sourced BPM.

The initial setup was straightforward. We didn't have any issues.

The only issues we could have would be with our code.

When compared with the proprietary products, the pricing costs are much less, even though it is an enterprise edition. It's very minimal. 

My customers and I are very happy with the pricing cost and the features.

Pricing depends on the number of tasks we use.

Yes. We evaluated JBPM and Activiti BPM before finalizing Camunda

I would definitely recommend this solution, especially if they are spending a large amount of money using proprietary BPM tools, such as Pega BPM.

I would rate this solution an eight out of ten.

We are a bank and use this solution for process modeling, organizing, and process architecture like line of business, and to be able to make process interfaces between each diagram. Activities include client enrollment, or a client account opening with a process for loan granting, which can't be done in Modeler. We are customers of Camunda and I'm a process analyst. 

The most valuable features are the ease of use and the ability to streamline a process model on a BPM diagram.

Process interfaces between diagrams could be improved. I'd like to see process interfaces and structure in order to make process architecture. Not only to lift diagrams, but to make new diagrams and new data. You can make new diagram and new data but if the client wants to open a current account, then it must be a process interface. It would also be helpful if they would publish processes in a format that can be easily viewable and understandable. The main area would be in publishing because we want to have all the processes published on our intranet. 

I've been using this solution for six months. 

The stability is fine although we did have some initial problems with it. 

The solution is quite scalable and functional. We have seven to 10 users doing process modelling. They're focused on archiving processes.  

Technical support is fine, although a little slow. 

The initial setup was very easy, I did it myself. 

As a process analyst, I'm into IT development, so my advice is not to make processes highly detailed. The value added here is the freeware version that can give you the best tool to get the job done as a process analyst. 

I would rate this solution an eight out of 10.