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

IBM Blueworks Live vs Interfacing Technologies Enterprise Process Center comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive SummaryUpdated on Nov 3, 2024
 

Categories and Ranking

IBM Blueworks Live
Ranking in Business Process Design
12th
Average Rating
8.2
Reviews Sentiment
7.5
Number of Reviews
20
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
Interfacing Technologies En...
Ranking in Business Process Design
22nd
Average Rating
9.0
Reviews Sentiment
7.3
Number of Reviews
2
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
 

Mindshare comparison

As of December 2024, in the Business Process Design category, the mindshare of IBM Blueworks Live is 3.5%, up from 3.1% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Interfacing Technologies Enterprise Process Center is 0.2%, up from 0.1% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Business Process Design
 

Featured Reviews

AjarMathur - PeerSpot reviewer
An easily scalable and affordable solution that enables users to document and digitize processes with ease
IBM Blueworks is BPMN 2.0 compliant, but it does not adapt to the overarching BPMN 2.0 concepts. There is only one kind of BPMN 2.0 diagram. It is a process diagram. It doesn't have the concept of separate tools, which other products offer. If I had to do a hardcore BPMN 2.0 modeling, the product would have its own reservations. There were features we could not explore from a BPMN 2.0 perspective. Most of the time, people who are shifting from Microsoft Office tools to a digitized way of working still want the reporting capabilities to be strong. Some tools, like ARIS or Signavio, offer customized solutions from the reporting perspective. If I have documented my whole finance process and want to fetch out a complete SOP report in a very customized manner, IBM Blueworks cannot provide it. We have to rely on some other services. So that's one area in which we always struggled, how to really customize the reporting aspects. I understand that we need to keep the tool a little more asset-light. It's very difficult to keep adding many options, but at least a few BPMN 2.0 options were needed. We have been suggesting to IBM that we should have some way of customizing the reporting. At least we should get a custom way of reporting it into different formats like Excel or putting up a logo for one of the clients so that their SAP can be printed that way.
SantoshKulkarni1 - PeerSpot reviewer
A Robust Solution with Enhanced Automation and Process Improvement Identification Capabilities
I recommend that users invest more time in the initial setup of the process architecture within the tool. It is crucial to spend time designing how the process architecture works as it significantly impacts how the tool behaves. This upfront investment can prevent the need for extensive reworking later on.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"Business users understand it really well, which means we can then help them automate their business processes."
"I like the two-tiered approach, that is, discover and then drill down to the main steps. You can right click and attach risk, policies, and much more. It is a user-friendly solution."
"The ease of documenting and digitizing the processes was valuable to us."
"For me, what I find to be the most valuable is its simplicity and the association with Microsoft Office."
"It enables decisions based upon processes that we do model, and ultimately move forward with."
"For me the most valuable feature is that it's one depository for our bank. So it's not like everybody has their critical processes on SharePoint or on their desktops. Everything is centrally located. It's very intuitive, easy to use. The support that I get from IBM is always great."
"You can use if from your mobile device or you can be on the desktop. It doesn't matter. You are always connected. It is cloud-based, so you don't have to install anything."
"The reporting that we can generate from IBM Blueworks Live has been interesting. We found the KPIs, risks, process modeling, format, and colors, to be very good. We use the EY template and it is interesting to generate reporting in this format."
"The most valuable feature is the integrated manner in which all the capabilities of the Enterprise Process Center platform work together and make it easier to complete the documentation of processes."
"One notable software-related benefit from a user perspective is our improved ability to identify opportunities for automation and process enhancement just by gaining a clearer view of the processes. There are two valuable aspects. First, setting up the process architecture is commendable. Second, not having to maintain different versions of processes is a notable benefit. The solution is stable. The support team is responsive."
 

Cons

"I wish Blueworks Live had simulations built in, but it doesn't. It also lacks a feature of reporting; ad hoc, drag and drop reporting. A lot of senior people are always asking for reports, and there's no reporting feature within IBM Blueworks."
"In the solution Signavio, they have a customer journey mapping feature that should be added to IBM Blueworks Live. It's valuable to map or document the customer journey to identify the pains and opportunities in this process."
"The objects that the solution creates are not unique."
"We'd also like to see it be Six Sigma or Lean compatible, a lot of people have asked about that."
"I can't insert any images. For example, within the process map, if I want to put it in the box or rectangle, or circle. If I have to use one image or icon, that's not possible."
"Some of the import functionality was a bit restrictive, in terms of loading data in from other data sources. Something as simple as Excel, loading data tables from Excel, wasn't great. And vice-versa. Some of the export and import functionality with something like Visio - which, I know it's a slightly different tool - but being able to work seamlessly with those other tool sets would've been quite useful. I know it was something that was in the pipeline to be looked at. So that would be useful."
"IBM Blueworks is BPMN 2.0 compliant, but it does not adapt to the overarching BPMN 2.0 concepts."
"The ability to create a very structured rule. With the capability that we have right now, Blueworks Live is more process focused. We should be able to enhance it to include a lot more of decisions as well."
"As with all such platforms, Enterprise Process Center is a complex tool and there are many capabilities and features that take time to learn."
"However, on the process mining side, there's potential for improvement to gain deeper insights into process functionality. Additionally, there's always room for enhancement in the user interface."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"They have a free subscription model that gives a lot of power to the users."
"We are seeing ROI from this solution. The solution has saved us time."
"Making it less expensive would be good."
"Based on the licenses purchased, from a footprint perspective, you can have as many people as you want. You have multiple different categories of licenses to keep the cost low."
"The solution is not very expensive."
"There are editor licenses that are around 50 euros per month, and contributor licenses that are around 30 euros per month."
"Price wise, IBM Blueworks Live is in the middle range, and I would give it a five out of ten."
"The solution is very, very cost-effective."
"My advice for anybody who is implementing this product is to understand what options you believe you are going to want to implement and rollout in the first three to five years, but spend the most time understanding what the set-up costs and pricing will be in the first two or maybe three."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Business Process Design solutions are best for your needs.
823,875 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Financial Services Firm
19%
Manufacturing Company
10%
Computer Software Company
10%
Government
9%
No data available
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
No data available
 

Questions from the Community

What do you like most about IBM Blueworks Live?
The solution is easy to operate. Also, there is an automatic mode to make the business flow. You don't have to put any lines or arrows in a decision point in IBM Blueworks Live; it's very automatic.
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for IBM Blueworks Live?
The solution costs around 600-700 dollars/year, which is quite affordable.
What needs improvement with IBM Blueworks Live?
Sometimes, the tool is automatic, which can complicate it, but once you're accustomed to manipulating it, you can use it very effectively.
What do you like most about Interfacing Technologies Enterprise Process Center?
One notable software-related benefit from a user perspective is our improved ability to identify opportunities for automation and process enhancement just by gaining a clearer view of the processe...
What needs improvement with Interfacing Technologies Enterprise Process Center?
While we have yet to explore the tool's capabilities fully, I can't think of any immediate drawbacks. However, on the process mining side, there's potential for improvement to gain deeper insights ...
What is your primary use case for Interfacing Technologies Enterprise Process Center?
We use the solution for finance processes, specifically for accounts payable and accounts receivable.
 

Comparisons

 

Also Known As

IBM Lombardi Blueprint
Enterprise Process Center
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Cloudsoft Corp. Ltd., Bayer, S¾SS, Essex County Council
Pepsi-Cola Manufacturing International Ltd., EFFORTS, Stuart Wright
Find out what your peers are saying about IBM Blueworks Live vs. Interfacing Technologies Enterprise Process Center and other solutions. Updated: December 2024.
823,875 professionals have used our research since 2012.