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

No Magic MagicDraw vs SAP Signavio Process Manager comparison

Sponsored
 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive SummaryUpdated on Nov 3, 2024
 

Categories and Ranking

IBM Blueworks Live
Sponsored
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
No Magic MagicDraw
Ranking in Business Process Design
10th
Average Rating
8.4
Reviews Sentiment
7.5
Number of Reviews
18
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
SAP Signavio Process Manager
Ranking in Business Process Design
6th
Average Rating
8.2
Reviews Sentiment
6.9
Number of Reviews
59
Ranking in other categories
Business Process Management (BPM) (9th)
 

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 No Magic MagicDraw is 3.3%, down from 4.2% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of SAP Signavio Process Manager is 8.9%, up from 8.5% 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.
DiegoRangel - PeerSpot reviewer
Enhanced team communication and design exploration with integrated simulation tools
I was using No Magic MagicDraw to model operations, such as using different kinds of operations with ships or crafts and other systems No Magic MagicDraw facilitated great communication within the team and allowed for the exploration of different designs and architectures, which was beneficial…
Cirvesh-Daga - PeerSpot reviewer
Good visual representation for modelling and business process mapping but room for improvement in reporting functionalities
There is room for improvement in analytics. People don't realize it, but the world has changed in the last six to eight months. Customers want to see AI like ChatGPT and ML capabilities in all aspects of business processes and reporting. That would be my recommendation for any OEM in this value chain. Reporting could definitely be improved. I would like to see new features in analytics. I like that they analyze the process and give it to me visually, but I'd like the option to use DPMM instead of just DPC. I'd also like the option to have the process map laid out top to bottom instead of horizontally. Especially a choice between DPMN and EPC as a format. Because there are some people who are very comfortable with the EPC notation. The process is very clearly event-driven. There's an event, there's an action. It's very simple to understand. BPMN, which is the most popular business process notation, generally tends to have multiple frames. Actually, in multiple swimlanes rather. And those frames could each represent a particular kind of entity. Maybe it's an action, maybe it's an actor, maybe it's an event. So there are two different ways of notation. I just like Signavio to give us the ability to choose that notation. Because some companies use BPMN and some use the EPC. And then, if the minute you make that change, I'd like them to give us the flexibility of having an already plotted or vertically plotted option. Moreover, I would like to see improvement in the visual part. It's the piece that needs improvement. Currently, you can plot the diagram horizontally or vertically. However, I'd like the option to change the way the diagram is created, like switching between different notations.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"We are you using the product as a process mapping tool and as part of a larger process improvement project. We use it with IBM BPM and IBM ODM. We get an automated workflow solution for our customers, an improved workflow automation."
"It's very easy, very quick to create a process map. It has templates. The look and feel is very nice. What we want to achieve out of the process map, we can achieve it using Blueworks."
"The licenses are transferrable between different users."
"Business users understand it really well, which means we can then help them automate their business processes."
"It is a stable solution since there has not been any downtime. Everything loads fast."
"The stability is pretty good. It is highly available, which is key. You don't lose your work and can autosave."
"The ease of documenting and digitizing the processes was valuable to us."
"The solution is stable. All the refreshes run very well."
"The MBFC capability of MagicDraw is higher than the other competitors."
"I think one of the key things is the plugins for integration with requirements management tools like Doors"
"The beauty of MagicDraw is that it has a simulation part, so you can simulate your model to validate it. The simulation allows you to bring in code off of an external code that you can write to set up the simulation and execute the code."
"The most valuable feature is the ability to quickly build multiple layers within the organizational and business process environments, as well as in the SysML product environments, and converting to files that can be accessed by clients who do not have a system and a teamwork server access."
"Offers good standards compliance and is user-friendly."
"It is very user-friendly, and the customer service is really good."
"There is a lot of documentation available on the Internet to understand its functionality."
"When you look at it, No Magic is an all-encompassing tool. You can use it for business architecture design. You can use it for deploying an ERP system across your enterprise. However, it was initially designed and developed for model-based systems engineering. That's the systems engineering required to either produce an IP system or product. It takes away the mounds of paper and puts it into a model. It enables you to generate significant savings by modeling that new product or that system before you ever start developing a prototype."
"It's way of handling is really an advantage. It's quite easy to use, without too much training . That's the main point for me."
"Version management is helpful because I like to try different versions and then decide which of them should be the main model."
"Process Manager is really helpful in building process maps. Creating them is really easy; the program is user-friendly."
"The fact that the repository is available on the web is the most valuable feature. It's a very simple tool. If you can use something simple and visual, you should be able to use the model as well in Signavio. It has the ability, for example, to track versioning control, so if you make updates to the processes, you have the ability to track the versions as well."
"Process management/Process governance is what we think Signavio is very good at."
"We can use workflow manager to create forms."
"The collaboration hub is good because it allows us to share the models that we've captured and to get comments back, and we don't all have to be in the same room, it can be remote and over time."
"The GUI is very easy to use, where you can sit together with your colleagues, discuss the process, and during these discussions you can build up the model."
 

Cons

"The user interface is quite easy at first but process analysts soon run into roadblocks of limited functionality, which is disappointing."
"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."
"We'd also like to see it be Six Sigma or Lean compatible, a lot of people have asked about that."
"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."
"IBM Blueworks is BPMN 2.0 compliant, but it does not adapt to the overarching BPMN 2.0 concepts."
"Sometimes, the tool is automatic, which can complicate it, but once you're accustomed to manipulating it, you can use it very effectively."
"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."
"We haven't yet been able to dabble in case management with Blueworks Live, as it is not yet offered with the product."
"The technical support is not very good."
"The price of the solution could be reduced."
"They don't really support code engineering, and that's why we have to move to Enterprise Architect. MagicDraw is stuck at C++03 standards, whereas most C++ programs today want to use the latest definition of the C++ standards. We were at C++11, and we wanted to do code engineering with C++11 or 17, but they didn't support it. That pushed us into a different tool, which is Sparx Enterprise Architect."
"For the next releases, I would like to have them import requirements from other sources. They could make it very easy to do that because there are a lot requirements management tools like DOORS, D-O-O-R-S, Dynamic Object Oriented Management. A lot of folks use DOORS to create a requirement. For those requirements you allocate them to a component in the architecture and a verification method for that requirement. It would be good if we could import those into MagicDraw as components so you don't have to manually do these things."
"Some of No Magic MagicDraw's most valuable features were its integration with other simulation tools, such as MATLAB, the seasonal plugin, and the Rangel simulation toolkit."
"The UI UX of the tool is not really user-friendly and needs to be completely reformed."
"There's lots of documentation. They process multiples of guides. They've got all kinds of guides and documentation out there, but it's kind of hard to find. There are a lot of videos. You can go to YouTube and find videos on how it's been used in different ways, but it just kind of scratches the surface."
"The cost of upgrading the product should be lower."
"I find it difficult to figure out how I can better align this solution with my KPIs."
"There could be something more on the reporting side of it for the processes you have captured or processes that might be work in progress to see where to target your effort because you don't always have lots of resources to spare"
"For me, given I've got a lot of experience working with BPMN and other process management tools, in terms of the interface, I think there's a little bit more that can be improved to match what the conventional BPMN offers. I've been constantly trying to give this feedback to Signavio, to let them know that it needs to be more coherent with the original BPMN version of the stencil."
"For us, it would help a lot if this solution had floating licenses."
"There is a need for more varied access packages. The access packages that I have used are not cheap enough. They also provide a complete set of tools that are not always used. Sometimes, you need more segregated things, e.g., Signavio includes functionality for a company that has not yet matured. Since there are no basic packages, the company must pay for a package that is not fully used. Typically, process management is started in a company of a certain maturity."
"It's very user-orientated, which is why I gave it a high rating, even if it is not perfect in every corner."
"From what I have experienced when I worked with a process team, we would like to work with dummy process diagrams. Right now, I don't know if I would set up a process as a dummy, since it very often gets mixed up with diagrams in production. There are many process diagrams linked to the production environment. I would like to have some kind of sandbox to work with. That would be very good. I don't even know if they already have it, but I would certainly like that."
"The product's pricing could be improved."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"Making it less expensive would be good."
"There are editor licenses that are around 50 euros per month, and contributor licenses that are around 30 euros per month."
"We are seeing ROI from this solution. The solution has saved us time."
"The solution is very, very cost-effective."
"The solution is not very expensive."
"Price wise, IBM Blueworks Live is in the middle range, and I would give it a five out of ten."
"They have a free subscription model that gives a lot of power to the users."
"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 licensing is on a yearly basis, and it's expensive."
"I rate the pricing a ten out of ten. It is an expensive product compared to software for model-based system engineering."
"I would say licensing would be anywhere from $3,500 to $6,500 per person or per seat (it's a per seat style license)."
"In addition to the initial cost, you have to pay annually for support in order to get the upgrades."
"The price of No Magic MagicDraw could improve. The price of the solution is too expensive for smaller-sized companies. There should be a better pricing model."
"The solution is quite expensive compared to other vendors."
"The solution is expensive."
"SAP is always more expensive. The per-user cost is hard to calculate and forecast for a big company."
"Comparatively, it is a bit costly when you look at similar tools with similar features."
"I think we're spending about $150,000 a year on licensing costs."
"I found the pricing of the solution to be moderate compared to other choices."
"I rate the tool's pricing a nine out of ten."
"Lower than the competition with highly flexible licensing plans."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Business Process Design solutions are best for your needs.
824,067 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%
Manufacturing Company
19%
Government
13%
Aerospace/Defense Firm
10%
Computer Software Company
8%
Manufacturing Company
14%
Financial Services Firm
13%
Computer Software Company
10%
Energy/Utilities Company
8%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
 

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 an...
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...
What do you like most about No Magic MagicDraw?
There is a lot of documentation available on the Internet to understand its functionality.
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for No Magic MagicDraw?
Maybe the price is a little bit high for a small company to acquire this tool. However, they offer trial versions and...
What needs improvement with No Magic MagicDraw?
I don't think there are areas that need improvement.
Which is better - Signavio Process Manager or Celonis?
SAP Signavio Process Manager is a very robust industrial-grade business process modeling tool. It is easy to use and ...
What do you like most about Signavio Process Manager?
The visual representation is extremely powerful and easy to use in process modeling and analysis. I can show it to ...
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Signavio Process Manager?
Due to its SaaS nature, it is slightly challenging as a BPM tool. The pricing could be reduced further. I don't have ...
 

Also Known As

IBM Lombardi Blueprint
MagicDraw
Signavio Process Editor
 

Learn More

Video not available
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Cloudsoft Corp. Ltd., Bayer, S¾SS, Essex County Council
Northrop Grumman, Labcorp, Deposco, ClearView Training, IT Services Promotion Agency, Intelligent Chaos, Metalithic Systems Inc., Sodifrance
DHL, Coca Cola EP, Prudential, Zalando, T-Systems, Jabil, Endress+Hauser, Rakuten
Find out what your peers are saying about No Magic MagicDraw vs. SAP Signavio Process Manager and other solutions. Updated: December 2024.
824,067 professionals have used our research since 2012.