Camunda Reviews

We use an open-source version of this product. In some cases we install on-premises, in some cases, we install on Dockers. How we install the product depends on the use cases and the needs of the projects that we engage in.  

One client may be in logistics. Another client may be involved with internal communication. Another one is in retail. Some will be in business project management. We have to treat each of these to fit their unique needs.  

I like the product since we are a Java-oriented company. Our solutions can be compact with Java. We found it quite useful because we can merge microservices together. It is a different kind of architecture but it is a flexible product that we can use to go live with solutions quickly.  

From my point of view, there is a lot that has room for improvement. But one option that they should focus on most is improving the basic parts of the BPM tools. One example is that they should offer some additional options in terms of employing connectors. We implemented most of our solutions in Java through delegation. We could have done a better job of that with connectors. So connectors are one of the cases where they might improve.  

Another point that I am thinking of that I can not do by myself is to improve the forms. Right now the forms are fairly simple. It would be nice to implement some kind of wizard, or advanced form, and be able to fill in data dynamically.  

A possible add-on is to have a mobile app. Specifically, it would be a tool used to prepare forms dynamically and to preview business projects. If you know what you need to do, you can actually do a lot with a product like that.  

From a security point of view, I think that some features can be added or enhanced. I see a lot of opportunities for interesting stuff that can be implemented like installation identity or places where token authorization can be used. More security measures can be added in order to offer options to protect the front line.  

One final feature that would be nice is the opportunity to operate an active database. I do not think that will happen soon. It is okay because we have very powerful database options right now.  

We have been using this solution for about one year.  

The stability of the product is quite good. You need to have the knowhow to work with it to optimize for best performance with the database and CPU and stuff. But it is a stable and reliable product.  

It is a scalable product. We do not have much on the cloud right now. It is less than 5 nodes. But we could expand that if we needed to.  

As I understand more of the benefits of using the product, I have more plans to increase usage. With any new customer that has a proper use case, Camunda will be my first choice. Even if it is just for the fact that we know we can deploy fast. We can start with a single instance and after that, we can scale without hesitating too much in the planning stages. It is very comfortable for the customer to see things happen quickly. From our experience, most new customers prefer to start small. Better to start fast and get them going and to build them a little at a time to more automated projects than to wait around with nothing seeming to happen.  

I have been around 10 years or more in this industry as a solution architect. With this product, we have the flexibility and speed to serve customers quickly and that is important.  

As for technical support, let's say we do not need it. We can cover any issues by ourselves with our team. We do not have any issues. If we do have an issue, we will compensate for it using Java.  

I prefer not to mention the other product by name because it seems like I would be saying it was not good enough and had to move on, but we did use a product as a solution before Camunda. Every product has its benefit in terms of what they deliver and we just decided that Camuda BPM fit our needs better than the other solution.  

For example, if we wanted to incorporate a solution in a situation where a client was using the Oracle family of products already, we might use Oracle SOA or Oracle OSB to stay within the family of products. Those choices would be a perfect fit.  

On the other hand, if your stack is Spring Boots and Java and open source, Camunda fits well. If you are stuck in an enterprise using Red Hat, there is Bonita and other Red Hat BPMs that may work best for you.  

What you use depends on a lot of things. It could change because of the recommendations of team members, it might depend on the current environment, it could be influenced by whether the company is new and needs to grow fast or if it is an established company with a predictable trajectory. At the end of the day what you use depends on the choice you make for what best fits your circumstance.  

The setup was straightforward. We need to have Java, and that is it. My team does the work on the deployments so I don't know exactly how long it takes anymore. But it is a simple concept that the more complicated the client's needs and use cases are, the longer it will take.  

We do deployments with just two people: one senior and one junior tech. But it depends on the complexity of the workflow. Sometimes we might bring an extra tech if the workflow is complex.  

Of course, we do not use an integrator, reseller, or consultant for the deployment because we are in that role. We know how to build it and we know how to run this kind of project. In the beginning, we did make a lot of mistakes, but at the end of the day, it works. Now when we have a new customer, we know what to do.  

We are using the open-source version so it is without cost.  

My advice about Camunda is I recommend this product when it fits your needs. It is that simple.  

On a scale from one to ten where one is the worst and ten is the best, I would rate this product as a nine because it fits my demands. Of course, there is always room for improvement in the interface, or performance, and stuff like that.  

I hope that people will work on Camunda and within the next releases we will have more connectors, we will have a much more powerful interface, and maybe we can have a mobile app as well.  

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.

It is used in the same way that Azure and IBM BPM work.

We use the Camunda Platform for Banking services.

Camunda Platform is better than IBM BPM, and Azure. It is more elaborate. 

It is divided across the platform.

The integration is separated as well as the UI, and the internal work.

It also integrates well.

I would like to see better pricing.

I have been using the Camunda Platform for a couple of months.

Camunda Platform can be deployed both on-premises and on the cloud.

We are not using the most recent version, but an internet version while the Cloud version is being developed.

We are currently using the Enterprise Edition.

The Camunda Platform is stable enough.

Camunda is a scalable solution.

We have 10 to 15 users per site.

We have not contacted technical support.

The installation is quite straightforward.

You log into the Camunda website and download the folder to install it directly.

The installation process took 20 to 25 minutes.

We configured the integration and the UI.

Generally, the price could be better, as well as the licensing fees. 

We have not yet explored all that Camunda Platform offers.

We would recommend this solution to others who are considering using it.

I would rate Camunda Platform a nine out of ten.

One valuable feature of the solution is its flexibility. Unlike low-code platforms or those with predefined design patterns, Comunda allows for custom changes, providing the freedom to customize.

I have been working with the solution for the past six months.

The initial setup is straightforward.

I have worked with Pegasystems. Primarily, Pega operates on a case-based licensing model, where each workflow incurs charges. Many customers opt for Camunda for basic workflows and case management to save costs. However, for enterprise-level needs, especially those involving CRM functionalities, Pega is retained. Some organizations have transitioned specific workflows to Camunda while keeping Pega for comprehensive CRM solutions.

Camunda primarily functions as a BPM platform. It requires development work for customization. Users accustomed to a local setup may find it less preferable. At the same time, tech-savvy developers who enjoy extensive customization options may favor the solution due to its flexibility in adapting design models based on their preferences. For such developers, this solution would be a perfect ten.

We have integrated Camunda workflow and decision engine into our solution that enables management and digital sales of products – Digital Product Center. We use mainly Camunda Modeler and Camunda Cockpit. For some implementations, we also used Camunda Tasklist.

Camunda is used to model and orchestrate processes. We have developed a module where for selected process steps, the user can build forms that will be used to present or gather data by the end-user.

Another module is responsible for defining the products, with business parameters, that an end-user will be able to buy on the platform. The link between product definition and process definition is also configured.

This solution did improve our product significantly. We were able to focus on the development of other modules that integrate with Camunda, and together provide a powerful tool for our clients. Using such a solution gives our clients great flexibility and a short time to market for new product implementations. 

Next to our product, we are also using the Camunda workflow and decision engine in other custom implementations. Our partners can benefit from open-source, as we did with our product, and thanks to that, we get more custom development contracts.

It is very important for us to have an engine that understands the model defined in the modeler, according to BPMN 2.0. This way, we can use the model for business and development purposes without extra workload. We noticed that the project team collaboration is more effective when we use a working process model.

Last but not least I can mention robust and flexible Camunda Rest API Integration, the lightweight process engine can be easily distributed as a microservice, multiple database support, pluggable architecture, and bpmn.io.

In the future, I would definitely like to see the process administration (migration, audit, tracking) and process evaluation (optimize) features added to the community edition. Right now, thanks to the pluggable architecture, we have built features that partially substitute the enterprise edition features.

We have been using Camunda Community Edition for six years.

We didn’t have any problems with the Camunda Community Edition on production installations. We do have experience with process instance volumes starting in hundreds a year and up to 10 million a year.

The Camunda BPMN Platform is very flexible and gives several options to deploy and scale it. Process Engine can be deployed as:

• Embedded process engine – in your custom application (ex. Spring boot application)
• Shared – Camunda deployed in Application Server or Servlet Container (can be a Spring boot app)
• Standalone instance - it can be deployed as a microservice

These options give you a wide range of possibilities to scale your application. From horizontal scaling to vertical. Moreover, it can be deployed on-premises, cloud, or private cloud, including autoscaling mechanisms.

We did not use another similar solution but we did have experience with homegrown workflow engines, embedded in business applications.

The initial setup is straightforward, especially with Spring Boot Camunda Starter. The configuration is in application.yml files.

We have an in-house team for deployment and maintenance.

There is an open-source version available, that in its core features (workflow and decision engine, modeler) is exactly the same as in the enterprise version.

My advice is to think about what is most important to your business case and choose the right version. You can always migrate to Enterprise edition.

When we started to build Digital Product Center, we evaluated several options available at that time. We decided to use Camunda due to several reasons, but primarily due to the most valuable features mentioned above.

We are using the community edition so it is hard to ask for extra features ;-) I fully understand that if we still want to benefit from the open-source version, there has to be a paid premium version, so that the product can be further developed.

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 had a client who wanted to use a BPM to track user subscriptions on their website. They had 20 steps from different areas and different people who wanted to join as new users of their services. 

We had to use Camunda BPM to track those services because they used to lose track of some clients in the past. They then had to spend more, add some more steps, and add new user subscriptions for months. 

The key here was always to track a new user and guarantee that they will get subscribed to their service in good time.

There's this graphic that tells you how many lines or how many tickets are in each step. In that way, you know where you stand. I find this feature very valuable.  

These are your bottlenecks, and you can see what the tasks are, the problems, see how much time must be spent on them. Then you can propose to fix it or make some improvements to make things go faster.

Documentation can be improved. Right now, the documentation isn't properly organized. We have a lot of documentation. We follow the instructions. We follow some blogs and videos on YouTube. But it doesn't feel like we have all the information we need to implement Camunda BPM.

I have been using Camunda BPM for two years.

Camunda BPM is a stable solution.

Camunda BPM is a scalable solution. It's a JAVA-based application, and we were able to install it in AWS and do all the things we wanted to do. 

The initial setup was complex. We really needed to study and understand how it worked. It was difficult because we didn't have enough information in the manuals.

We did what was said in the manual and then wanted to do more. We watched several videos, and we started to connect the dots. With our own solutions or conclusions, we were able to implement Camunda BPM.

We implemented Camunda BPM by ourselves, in-house. 

I think Camunda BPM can improve their licensing costs. It isn't easy to find clients with Camunda BPM licenses mainly because it's quite expensive. I think the license for an on-premise system is about $50,000, and that's expensive when you have only 100 users.

I used Bizagi before. It's easier to implement, but the problem is that you have to use their suite. You have to use their screen, their admin screens, or user screens. The UX and UI experience is also not good.

We decided to go with Camunda BPM because it gave us what we needed. That is, we can get inside Camunda and use only the tracker of the application. We don't need to use mandatory things like your pages or your web forms.

We can really code what we want and use it. We can create our own UI while using Camunda BPM at the same time. We really liked that because in my company specifically, we use a lot of UX, so all the UIs were very important for us.

Camunda BPM allows us to have a BPM bot with our own UI, and that's what we liked most about Camunda.

I would advise potential Camunda BPM customers to be patient. Perhaps all the information isn't available in one click, but it's possible to implement Camunda BPM, and it's quite flexible. It's worth a try.

On a scale from one to ten, I would give Camunda BPM an eight. 

Our primary use case for Camunda is as a process orchestration layer to help prioritize tasks for users as they were designing downstream systems. Camunda is a way to push the rules to the downstream systems. We are partly a reseller, but we also implement and we are the systems integrator. I'm the vice president and account CCO of our company. 

One valuable feature of Camunda is that it's an open BPM, so it was easier for users and developers to work together to define the rules and define the process, given their BPM and standard architecture. This also allowed us to expose the rules and the business process itself into a standard model, which wasn't possible with other tools and softwares we've used in the past. Finally, the engine itself is lightweight so it was easier for us to handle deployments and in production it didn't have a great demand of the infrastructure.

I think there is room for improvement along with the process. Camunda doesn't have a strong forms designer. While that is an advantage in one scenario in that we were able to bring a third party UI, it was lacking in forms visualization and it would be good to have some kind of a strong forms designer that allows development along with the process.

More often, we are seeing BPM used in conjunction with other automation technologies like RPA and AI. If Camunda were to be placed as a central BPM, it would need a better integration mechanism.

I've been using this solution for two years. 

I would rate this solution a seven out of 10.