Try our new research platform with insights from 80,000+ expert users

Appian vs OpenText 360 for SharePoint comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive SummaryUpdated on Jan 5, 2025

Review summaries and opinions

We asked business professionals to review the solutions they use. Here are some excerpts of what they said:
 

Categories and Ranking

Appian
Ranking in Business Process Management (BPM)
5th
Average Rating
8.4
Reviews Sentiment
7.1
Number of Reviews
60
Ranking in other categories
Process Automation (4th), Rapid Application Development Software (5th), Low-Code Development Platforms (4th), Process Mining (6th)
OpenText 360 for SharePoint
Ranking in Business Process Management (BPM)
26th
Average Rating
8.4
Reviews Sentiment
6.8
Number of Reviews
13
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
 

Mindshare comparison

As of February 2025, in the Business Process Management (BPM) category, the mindshare of Appian is 6.2%, down from 6.3% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of OpenText 360 for SharePoint is 0.4%, down from 0.7% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Business Process Management (BPM)
 

Q&A Highlights

it_user128490 - PeerSpot reviewer
Aug 15, 2017
 

Featured Reviews

Srimanta Pandit - PeerSpot reviewer
Flexible, improves operational efficiency, and reduces the time taken to complete processes
The solution’s turnaround time for development is better compared to other tools. The solution enables fast development. The traceability of the processor is good. There is much more governance and regulations on the processers. The tool reduces the time of the processes by 30% to 40%. The solution’s low-code aspect has greatly impacted the development and deployment speed. One of the major reasons we are using the product is that we can reuse the modules. The developers can reuse all the modules. It enables us to make subsequent developments in less time. The prebuilt modules can be deployed within two to three weeks. The tool is very flexible. Compared to other platforms, the Appian product team was agile in quickly customizing things for us.
Ravi Krishnan S - PeerSpot reviewer
Has a strong and easy integration with Teams but the workflows could be more intuitive
OpenText 360 for SharePoint helps us with work and document management. We have all the functions and files of private equity firms stored according to particular investment portfolios. It handles all the document workflows and logging activities The product has a strong and easy integration with…

Quotes from Members

We asked business professionals to review the solutions they use. Here are some excerpts of what they said:
 

Pros

"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."
"It is easy for me to define the process and create configurable workflows."
"The most valuable features are the low coding and low code data."
"The agile manner that we require to create our workflows. This is probably the most critical part of our solution and the time it takes to start processing the solution."
"It is really simple to create a new app, and I like the data-centric aspect of the BPM tool."
"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."
"SAIL (Self-Assembling Interface Layer), a scripting language provided by Appian. It is the equivalent of JS and CSS. It allows creation of complex UIs which are also responsive. With SAIL, we have a single language for both the UI logic and its appearance. UI components can be built as reusable components and used in multiple UI interfaces."
"The most productive aspect of Appian lies in its ability to develop interfaces, particularly user interfaces. Creating user interfaces is highly productive, when these interfaces are integrated with the original database. In such cases, using record types proves to be a very efficient method of handling data. The synergy between interfaces and record types enhances productivity."
"The product has a strong and easy integration with Teams."
"It has a lot of flexibility, and Microsoft does come up with some new additions from time to time."
"It's all now on cloud subscription, so you can use all the features without worrying about making the system updates patches."
"OpenText 360's best features are platform independence and its performance when searching large numbers of documents."
"The fact that it allows for the internal sharing of information is very good."
"This solution has good connection and we do not need to migrate everything in order to protect the repository."
"We concentrate on the legal industry, such as legal libraries. It's the most structured solution we have used and implemented for five years."
"The most valuable features are collaboration, traceability, retention of documents, and search."
 

Cons

"The reporting is not as good as in similar products. They could also improve the dashboards."
"Offline capabilities and responsive capabilities could be better. The mobility features of Appian platform are still evolving."
"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."
"One room for improvement is the ease of UI UX development, like in OutSystems and Mendix."
"There could be a scope of enhancement for capturing the variety of use cases."
"We'd like improved functionality for testing new devices."
"I would like to see more complete university tools. For example, with UiPath, I have had a good experience related to a free course in order to provide some users some different levels of knowledge. This extra training helps users not only use the solution but to develop further within the tool."
"It has it's own built-in UI components and doesn't provide much flexibility to customize or extend those components."
"Integration is an area where the solution lacks."
"We have a very good time to market tool, and the development platform should be made user-friendly. Mostly, it's just support."
"They need to come with more out of the box solutions, rather than depending on customers to develop them."
"The graphical user interface had to be more user-friendly. It's not as intuitive."
"The user interface could definitely be improved."
"They are not going for any add-ons right now. It's the same version we are still using and there is no plan of upgrading and/or creating any add-ons at all."
"The platform's workflows could be more intuitive and easier to use."
"OpenText 360 is generally stable, though there are sometimes issues with document size or format."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"It's an enterprise tool and can be used by enterprise only. So it's a very expensive tool."
"The price is high."
"It's good value for the price."
"The license is not very cheap. It's on the expensive side."
"The licensing will be on a monthly basis. We are estimating that cost to be around $2000 to maybe $3,000 per month. We don't foresee any costs above that."
"The price of the solution is reasonable and is paid annually. The price of the solution depends on how many users use the solution. It can range from $50,000 to $200,000. For example, for 20,000 users the price can be approximately $200,000."
"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 price of this solution is a little high here in Mongolia."
"The solution has a very complex pricing model."
"There is a license needed to use OpenText 360 for SharePoint and we pay annually. The price of the solution could be less expensive."
"Its price is reasonable, but its licensing is very complex. This platform contains a number of pieces, and you have to be an expert in reading all the conditions in the license. They should simplify its licensing."
"Pricing is a part of the enterprise agreement that we have."
"On-premises version is expensive"
"OpenText 360's price varies depending on how long you've been a customer, how many licenses you have, and which products you use."
"It has a reasonable price."
"SharePoint uses a subscription model."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Business Process Management (BPM) solutions are best for your needs.
838,713 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Answers from the Community

it_user128490 - PeerSpot reviewer
Aug 15, 2017
Aug 15, 2017
We have been using ELMA BPM (http://www.elma-bpm.com/), and it also does not require programming to model and execute processes. Yes, for complicated custom features you will need additional scripts but that isn't generally a problem. Plus, there are KPI management options as well as CRM and ECM modules included, all working well with processes. Project Management is available too although I w...
2 out of 9 answers
it_user109617 - PeerSpot reviewer
Jul 29, 2014
Hi, I'm sorry but I don't have any experience with Apian, Open Text and Oracle BPM Solutions. Only with Bizagi! I hope You will get better answers
it_user128490 - PeerSpot reviewer
Jul 29, 2014
Thanks Kurt. I have never heard Bizagi. I would appreciate of you can put your Bizagi experience in your response. Maybe that may turn out to be better proposition for us... Many Thanks Pratyush
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Educational Organization
30%
Financial Services Firm
16%
Computer Software Company
10%
Government
6%
Financial Services Firm
22%
Government
13%
Computer Software Company
9%
Legal Firm
9%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
 

Questions from the Community

Which do you prefer - Appian or Camunda Platform?
Appian is fast when building simple to medium solutions. This solution offers simple drag-and-drop functionality with easy plug-and-play options. The initial setup was seamless and very easy to imp...
Is Appian a suitable solution for beginners who have no additional preparation?
Appian is actually pretty big on educating its users, including with courses that reward you with certifications. There is a whole section on their company’s website where you can check out the edu...
Is it easy to set up Appian or did you have to resort to professional help?
We had some issues when we were setting up Appian. It was quite surprising, since this is a low-code tool which, in its essence, means it is meant for business users and inexperienced beginners. So...
What do you like most about OpenText 360 for SharePoint?
We concentrate on the legal industry, such as legal libraries. It's the most structured solution we have used and implemented for five years.
What needs improvement with OpenText 360 for SharePoint?
The graphical user interface had to be more user-friendly. It's not as intuitive.
 

Comparisons

No data available
 

Also Known As

Appian BPM, Appian AnyWhere, Appian Enterprise BPMS
Process 360, Global 360, OpenText Process 360
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Hansard Global plc, Punch Taverns, Pirelli, Crawford & Company, EDP Renewables, Queensland Government Department of State Development, Infrastructure and Planning (, Bank of Tennessee
iTAC Software, AG Alcatel-Lucent, Pacific Life, Deutsche Verbindungsstelle Krankenversicherung Ausland (DVKA)
Find out what your peers are saying about Appian vs. OpenText 360 for SharePoint and other solutions. Updated: January 2025.
838,713 professionals have used our research since 2012.