We performed a comparison between OpenText AppWorks and Pega BPM based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Business Process Management (BPM) solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."One of the most useful features is the code is customizable, we can make it our own."
"From a business perspective, the most valuable aspect lies in the optimization of processes."
"We've automated several processes, including purchase requisition to purchase orders, RFQ processes, vendor onboarding, project budgeting, and business case creation. The recent versions of OpenText AppWorks, especially those incorporating low-code functionalities, have had a significant positive impact. In some cases, we've observed a remarkable reduction in development time, ranging from 50 to 75 percent. The MTP model and life cycle have facilitated rapid development cycles."
"AppWorks is a very quick development platform with low-coding capability and strong integration with third-party systems."
"OpenText AppWorks has standard features such as system-to-system and human-to-human integrations, but what I find most valuable in the solution is its monitoring feature that tells you more about your processes, how to restart and how to stop each process, etc."
"In terms of the scalability and the handling of complexity, the customers are satisfied, and we also have confidence in the solution to achieve whatever implementations are required."
"The monitoring aspect is highly valuable, as it offers an exceptional capability to track every minute of action performed by a business user in the global context."
"We really appreciate the process automation and how can you create human tasks as one of your processes."
"The solution has very helpful technical support."
"The solution provides us with a very good dashboard."
"The solution's case management is its most valuable aspect."
"It is a stable solution...It is a scalable solution."
"When our clients automate the KYC and onboarding processes, they can reduce their manual force and then deploy them in much better tasks rather than the mundane activities of selecting forms and gathering information."
"The case management functionality of this solution has been most valuable."
"It is easy to use, easy to understand, easy to implement and easy to enhance and we can do it as a Cloud. Also it is very user friendly."
"The most valuable feature is the situational layer cake."
"OpenText AppWork's low-code capabilities can be enhanced by integrating them with AI offerings like Aviator."
"A room for improvement in OpenText AppWorks is its user interface. It should have mobile compatibility because right now, you still have to make two applications with a user interface for Android and a user interface for iOS, so if OpenText AppWorks can provide one UI that can be used across all devices, that would make the solution better. An additional feature I'd like to see in the next release of OpenText AppWorks is a better UI in terms of the look and feel. Another feature I'd like to see in the next version of the solution is mobile compatibility because, at the moment, you have to make your application mobile-ready or compatible with mobile devices because there's no provision for it in OpenText AppWorks."
"The integration could improve."
"There is room for improvement in the pricing structure."
"The solution needs to continue to enhance the low-coding feature within the product itself."
"There could be some improvements with the low code design part. It could be more customizable and more user friendly."
"The crucial missing element is the archival function."
"AppWorks could be improved by including BPM simulation."
"The local development approach is good in Pega, however, cost-wise, it's getting expensive. That needs to be addressed."
"Pega Cloud early adoption and use for cross enterprise capability was new to many. The early adoption meant version 2.0 of their cloud service may require refactoring and redesign of some services."
"First-time customers will find its licensing tricky. The technical support team for this solution could be faster in resolving tickets."
"The pricing model needs to be improved. Right now, it's too expensive."
"I believe they simplify the application development. It is still complex. The learning is not easy, it takes time compared to other products on the market."
"From a technical point of view, it would be helpful to have some advanced analytics to help with configuration. We have a lot of unwanted features and it would be good to configure it more appropriately so that we are using just exactly what we need."
"It's called a local platform but on the other hand, it needs a lot of experience. It's not all that easy to click and plug and play. If you really want to use all the features out of this platform, you definitely need a lot of experience and a lot of training to get there."
"We need more light retail BPM tools within the Pega system. However, Pega is mostly for big companies."
OpenText AppWorks is ranked 16th in Business Process Management (BPM) with 8 reviews while Pega BPM is ranked 3rd in Business Process Management (BPM) with 57 reviews. OpenText AppWorks is rated 7.8, while Pega BPM is rated 8.2. The top reviewer of OpenText AppWorks writes "Automates processes like purchase requisition to purchase orders, RFQ processes, vendor onboarding, project budgeting, and business case creation". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Pega BPM writes "Provides built-in frameworks that can be reused and reduces time and cost". OpenText AppWorks is most compared with Microsoft Power Apps, ServiceNow Now Platform, Appian, OutSystems and Camunda, whereas Pega BPM is most compared with ServiceNow, Camunda, Appian, IBM BPM and Microsoft Power Apps. See our OpenText AppWorks vs. Pega BPM report.
See our list of best Business Process Management (BPM) vendors.
We monitor all Business Process Management (BPM) reviews to prevent fraudulent reviews and keep review quality high. We do not post reviews by company employees or direct competitors. We validate each review for authenticity via cross-reference with LinkedIn, and personal follow-up with the reviewer when necessary.