Nintex Process Platform Reviews

Process automation, electronic forms, and digital transformation in all versions of SharePoint, on-prem and in Office 365. As a consultant and developer, I have used Nintex everywhere, including the SharePoint-agnostic Nintex Workflow Cloud.

In some instances, workflows I’ve built for customers have transformed the business, saving significant time and costs compared to manual, legacy processes. In several instances the savings have been enough to provide the ROI for SharePoint and Nintex licensing, and project costs, within a business quarter.

A well-placed digital transformation solution can reduce turnaround for key processes, enabling businesses to compete with and beat out competition by streamlining their processes and enabling their workforce to get more done in less time.

As a workflow automation solution, being able to route, approve and manage content is one of the few areas in SharePoint where there is a true ROI. Provides the ability to automate SharePoint processes (building sites, lists, updating content).

You can also automate document and content processes, onboarding and offboarding, and general IT and HR solutions.

With an extensive list of integrations with LOB data, your workflows can extend far beyond SharePoint, driving adoption of SharePoint and saving people, departments, and companies significant time in their daily processes. These are huge value drivers for SharePoint and Nintex.

• Built-in reporting on-prem is limited and clunky at best.
• Integration can be fairly technical, and often business rules inhibit product capabilities or force a developer to consider alternate methods for integration.
• Hawkeye is emerging as a reporting solution, but as a V1 product it’s not very useful yet.

Nintex is as stable as your SharePoint farm (on-prem), and in Office 365 workflows are robust. The application functions as expected and any issues with workflows or forms typically come down to design flaws rather than application issues. Nintex has been out and available since SharePoint 2007, so it’s a mature platform.

Scalability is tough. Workflows in SharePoint have the lowest priority of any task, and, in on-prem, workflows execute against the Web front-end servers. If your WFEs are under spec or at spec, workflow load will impact performance, and you may need to up resources or consider adding WFEs to enable large-scale deployments. 

In Office 365, the licensing model will be your limiting factor (subscription for the number of published workflows) so scalability is a non-issue.

Nintex technical support is not great. On a scale of one to 10 they are a three. They are slow to respond, and you often have to wait for or ask for escalation. It’s important to note that they only support "break/fix" – they will not assist with design or development questions. However, the online community and documentation in most cases more than makes up for support.

SharePoint Designer and Visual Studio are alternatives, as are K2 and a few newer players in the visual workflow and forms design arena. These tools tend to be far more technical to use, harder to support, and also have limitations not inherent to Nintex. While Nintex is an expensive solution, the value can be returned very quickly, with the quick development and go-live cycle, as compared to traditional or competitor tools. This is a key value for Nintex.

Setup is simple and straightforward. There are a few prerequisites for installation, but the Nintex documentation for on-premise installation is solid and, if followed, the installation will run very quickly. It does involve some downtime so planning is required (several IIS resets during installation). However, it’s one of the easier things to install in SharePoint.

In Office 365, installation is as simple as installing it from the store and adding the app to the site collection, so could not be much easier.

Nintex products are expensive, but valuable. Licensing in on-premise was historically based on a perpetual model, where you’d license per Web front-end. However, they are switching exclusively to a consumption (subscription) model, where you purchase the number of workflows you think you’ll use in your environment, and can scale up from there. 

I suggest talking to a Nintex partner for licensing advice and guidance for your specific needs.

We have tested and evaluated numerous competitors, the principal of which is K2. However, K2 is equally expensive when you get down to specifics, and requires a dedicated infrastructure, whereas Nintex resides on existing SharePoint Servers. K2 is also far more technical in nature. It does have some benefits over Nintex (principally high-volume workflows – think point-of-sale or hundreds or thousands of transactions per hour), so careful evaluation of your needs is important in selecting the right tool.

I have also developed workflows using SharePoint Designer and Visual Studio, but again they are far more complex and longer to develop, as compared to Nintex.

Get a trial, talk to a technical sales rep, and just go in and try to build something. It’s pretty amazing how easy it is to use, and trials are good for 30 days. Talk to a premier partner if you can.

The main use case is accounts payable. We also implement it for human resources processes like onboarding and insurance plan changes.

The capacity to integrate with external platforms. It's great to be able to call web services or other external services.

There is room for improvement in the user experience in the forms. When we need to develop the forms, we don't have much customization, and I think we need more flexibility there.

It's technically difficult, but it would be great to be able to develop our own code and integrate it into the platform. We could then run our own code for specific actions and requests or even develop a page or form. So, if I can ask Nintex for something, it would be a way to integrate our own code for specific actions. 

When it comes to integration, it could have more options for custom requests.

We use Nintex Workflow Cloud. I have worked with the Nintex Process Platform for two to three years. 

I would rate the stability an eight out of ten. 

Scalability is a limitation of the product. It's not so easy to scale. I would give it a five out of ten. 

I'm an integrator for Nintex. So, the number of users depends on the customer. But we have thousands of users across all our customers.

So, it's suitable for enterprise-level companies. It's more suited for enterprise level, not for small or medium-sized businesses (SMBs). It's too expensive for the SMB market.

The quality needs improvement.

Neutral

I used Microsoft Power Platform.

Power Platform is better. It has more options and flexibility, even though it requires more technical skills to implement. 

Nintex is easier to implement and more user-friendly, but Power Platform can do a lot more.

The initial setup is simple. We have both hybrid and on-premises. We have all kinds of implementations.

Integration: For a technical person, it's quite simple. It could have more options for custom requests, but in general, it works fine.

The deployment process takes a couple of days.

Saving time is the biggest benefit. It gives the customers the flexibility to solve simple automation problems quickly. 

It saves time for both the employees and the company's administration.

I would rate the pricing for Nintex Process Platform as four out of ten; one is high, and ten is low.

It is pretty expensive.

I would recommend it for specific use cases. If it's something simple, I would recommend Nintex. 

For a large number of users, I recommend LeanIX. 

If it needs to be complex, I wouldn't recommend Nintex. I would recommend Power Platform instead.

Overall, I would rate it a six out of ten. 

We are currently using K2 Five classic. We have several use cases. The main use case is the vendor request. We process all requests that come in from existing or new vendors through K2. Our legal department uses it for checklists and other things. The approval process, onboarding, and all other related things are also done through K2. It is used for onboarding, termination, suspension, access, and many other things. All these things are automated.

It is for process automation, and it saves a lot of time and resources. Some of the things used to take weeks, and now they can be done in days and hours. Previously, we needed a spreadsheet, and now everything is done through a form. Everything is automatic, and eventually, the returns are pretty good.

The workflow engine of K2 is its main strength. Its workflow engine is probably one of the best, and that's the reason why Nintex bought K2. It can clearly handle any complex process or scenario.

K2 is almost low-code. It is a no-code or low-code solution. You don't have to read a whole lot of code. It is pretty much GUI based. Their support is also excellent.

The biggest advantage of K2 is SmartObjects, which allow you to separate the data from the application. It is a standalone application that allows you to build a data source from different places, which a lot of other applications also do. It is called SmartObjects technology, which is pretty powerful. If I have data from different applications, such as JD and ServiceNow, I can just create a SmartObject based on a data source and use it. I have some forms that have six, seven, or eight applications in a single form with data from different places.

K2 is a workflow solution, and there is no RPA solution with K2. This is where K2 lacks a little bit. It is just a heavy workflow solution. It doesn't have a supplemental product like RPA. If you want to use RPA, you have to use Blue Prism, UIPath, or something else. If you use Nintex, it has an RPA solution. 

It is a form-based application, and they are doing everything electronically. The initial investment in K2 is heavy because it is a BPM software. It does not have a low cost because they charge you the same for one workflow or 100 workflows.

I have been using this solution for seven years. I also used to work for K2.

It is used across the board. Almost everyone in the accounting department uses this solution. We also have a bunch of different legal departments, and they also use it. It is being used from the bottom to all the way up. When someone submits a request, it can go to the VP and all the way up. Because it is an approval process, it depends on how high it goes.

Their support is excellent.

The on-premises setup was fairly complex four years ago because we had to build the servers. You have to build test servers, staging and production environments, and all kinds of stuff. When you go for the cloud solution, you don't have to maintain any of those, which is why we are moving to the cloud solution. Our initial investment was quite a bit, and we're trying to move to the cloud solution.

The initial investment in K2 is heavy. Currently, the expenditure is $28,000 for a year. After we go to the cloud, it is going to be per seat and probably cheaper. Currently, there are unlimited users.

I would rate K2 an eight out of ten as a BPM solution. 

It has a lot of features for creating and managing workflows, as well as for integrating with other applications. Nintex offers features, particularly to ensure a user-friendly experience.

At times, issues arise in certain scenarios. In such cases, the versioning can become quite difficult. There may be no other way but to restart the entire process or rectify it at that point.  

So, there is room for improvement in terms of the stability of this solution.

In future releases, Access-related features are important because a lot of data is stored in Excel in most organizations. So whenever we need to upload this data, we need to have workflow features that can validate each row and other data before inserting it into the software system. These features are not available in the standard version. We are not looking for a one-time import of data. Instead, we want to be able to process the data in real-time using DXL. This is one of the things we are looking for. 

The second is the ability to create Word reports. A report that is created in Microsoft Word.

This is a very common type of report, and it is used to present data in a clear and concise way. I would like to be able to create different types of word reports, such as listing reports and formatted reports. But Nintex does not provide any control over MS Word to control and format it. I would like to see MS-related connectivity with Nintex Workflow.

I have been using this solution for more than six years. However, we used the on-premise version, which had certain limitations in comparison with a cloud version. 

I am satisfied with the customer service and support.

Positive

We have worked with Nintex and SharePoint.

The solution is expensive compared to its competitors. 

We are actually in the process of evaluating low-code tools in this space. We are looking for a private cloud under the Azure cloud environment. 

The on-premise version of Nintex Workflow was good for the workload that we were using.

However, the trend has changed, and now all the features are available on the cloud, not on-premise. So we have to move to the cloud.

We are cost-sensitive, so we can't just move the tool to the cloud directly. We need to evaluate and understand our requirements first. And since we are in the pharma industry, we need to make sure that the software is compliant with Part 11 regulations. For Nintex and other products, we need to develop them with those features in mind. So, that's an additional layer of customization that is required for all these platforms. That's why we are looking for a ready-made product that is compliant with Part 11 and FDA regulations.

So it will be easier for us, and it will reduce the need for customization. So in that sense, we are basically evaluating the different options. It was never a key factor for us, but we are not happy with Nintex, so that's why we are not considering it. This is the product we have been using for the past 6-7 years, and it was one of the best ones because it integrated well with SharePoint. We hardly had to do any customizations in SharePoint because everything was created locally.

If I consider the standard version, I would rate it eight out of ten. However, the enterprise version has some additional features that I would like to use, but the cost in not so fair. So if I factor in the cost, I would rate it lower, maybe around seven out of ten.

We have predominantly been using the solution as the front end for automation solutions. I'm a program manager. We don't have a direct link to K2, but we work closely with them and carry out a lot of maintenance and other work through them. So it's quite a deep-rooted relationship.

The biggest selling point for us was that the solution had out of box connectivity with UiPath and we didn't have to write any custom code to be able to invoke UiPath bots and automation solutions. That worked well for us in the past but when you talk about other specific functionalities, like the applications or authentication on native operating systems for mobiles and those kinds of things, K2 is lacking big time. The solution doesn't really have a good set up and I think as more and more businesses want app rather than desktop systems or web systems, K2 is not necessarily the best solution going forward.

The solution is heavy and cumbersome and it has a very stringent way of doing things. It's not difficult but at the same time it's not flexible enough. If you don't do it properly, you can't render it on mobile properly and it just runs into a lot of issues. I think what we need is a more flexible platform that can actually give us that option, a second option or a main option, to move away from K2. We run into issues at times and it's mainly around the way we design applications and mainly around how we want to use applications. It restricts us in a very specific way to be able to fully utilize the capability. I think K2 is a bit far from being a perfect mobile development platform. We'd like to look at Microsoft as an option.

I've been using this solution for three years. 

Scalability is a kind of dependent thing. Essentially, it would require infrastructure and IT development to be able to do anything with the infra scalability or the platform scalability. We haven't tried it. We do know that when we want to sync up different environments, it's not that straightforward. I mean it's not complex, but it has a lot of activities. It's not a straight sync up between the two servers. You have to do a lot of tasks including download packages. It's a bit annoying because it takes up too much time from the ops team to be able to sync the two environments, especially when you're uploading packages that at times are not compatible. Again, it could be dependent on the way we've set it up on-prem. I don't necessarily know if that's a K2 issue or if it's an infra issue on our end, but assume it's likely both.

I haven't dealt with technical support because our ops team does that if they ever have to.

I'm a massive fan of K2 even though it's given me a bit of trouble in the past. Essentially, I think there are good features in there as well. It really comes down to your personal requirements, I believe. It's supposed to be a kind of designer-based application, work flow creation application or platform but I personally think that it takes a lot more technical ability to be able to design applications on K2. It requires more than somebody off the street, you need someone who can actually do a bit of design work and be able to spin up a really good application. It's not marketed properly, it's marketed as a designable application platform. But it's not necessarily, it requires a bit of programming knowledge.

The other thing I guess would be whether you want to pay for the licensing cost. There is a price for the K2 environment, does that suit you and your organization? That's something which you need to consider. Finally, K2 is also really hard to find, to be honest, and it comes at a premium so there's that maintenance cost as well or even development costs, which may be a lot higher than any other application that you may use. 

It's given us applications that are stable once you get it right. We haven't had many issues in terms of applications falling over or not responding, things like that. It can be a bit slow if it's database-intensive applications. Again, that could be a mixture of both infrastructure and also K2 application.

I would rate this solution a six out of 10. 

So we have a process flow for which we wanted to use Nintex Workflow. So in SharePoint currently, we have set up that Nintex Workflow. So users used to submit and raise requests in the solution, and that is used to trigger the automatic workflows on the fact that a ticket is raised. Then, the approvals are taken. So all those things we had coded in Nintex Workflow. So, the solution was for some kind of an approval process within our company because there are multiple stakeholders, so it goes to multiple stakeholders for approval, and they approve it. All that happens when working with Nintex Workflow.

Within Nintex Workflow, I think the automatic triggering of the multiple workflows and the setting up of the auto trigger of those workflows are some of the valuable features of the solution. So that is nice.

I think we could have more interfaces with other applications. So I think it was lacking a little bit in its multiple in-house processes and other processes. So there is a little bit of a gap in collaboration.

I have experience with Nintex Workflow. I have been using the solution for a year. I am a customer of the solution.

I rate the solution's stability a seven out of ten. Sometimes it breaks, and then we need to manually restart Nintex Workflow, so it had that kind of intermittent disturbances.

I rate the solution's scalability an eight out of ten. There weren't any scalability issues, really. I think that we found it to be a little bit of a scalable device, but we were not able to achieve it. So there were limitations. So, maybe on the SharePoint side, there would be a limitation that we can raise only these many requests, and the space is about to get full. So that kind of scalability issue, I can remember.

In my organization, around 1,000 users were using the solution.

I never contacted Nintex Workflow's support team.

I think the initial setup is fine.

To those planning to use it, I think it's a good tool to start with.

I rate the overall solution an eight out of ten.

Some time ago, I implemented a demo in Nintex for various use cases such as getting emails from the team, reading the email, writing the email, opening the email, and getting the attachment.

My team and I created a demo using Nintex, focusing on getting emails, reading, writing, and managing attachments. However, we did not explore Nintex Process Platform's full potential, and our hands-on usage was limited to demonstrations.

The user interface in Nintex needs improvement. It is not very intuitive and requires changes. Additionally, the deployment process should be easier.

My team and I have been familiar with Nintex Process Platform for about one year, mainly for learning.

I rate Nintex's stability as an eight out of ten.

I rate Nintex's scalability as an eight out of ten.

The technical support provided by Nintex is very helpful, which I rate as nine out of ten.

Positive

The Nintex Process Platform serves as an alternative solution, similar to UiPath. However, our company has Nintex, and thus I recommend Nintex to customers.

The installation process for Nintex required about two weeks.

The installation was supported by the distributor, and I am not certain about the exact number of people involved from my side.

Nintex Process Platform is expensive. Prices relate to both features and the professional services necessary due to our lack of an implementation team.

Overall, I would recommend Nintex Process Platform to others.

I'd rate the solution eight out of ten.

Primarily, the solution is used to manage business processes in an organization. It helps with fast app developments and approvals. 

K2 has a very wide collection of smart object technology. It's phenomenal. The concept of the smart objects is core to K2. 

The setup is easy.

The solution is stable.

It can scale well.

Support is helpful. 

I'm not up to date on recent upgrades. I've heard that in the latest technology, the solution is much faster, and the UI has improved. It used to be notoriously slow. 

I'm not sure if they have reusability yet. That's one thing I've always wanted - the reusability of the components. 

We'd like to have integration with SharePoint. 

I've used the solution for more than five years. 

The solution is stable. There are no bugs or glitches. It's reliable. It doesn't crash or freeze. 

It's scalable. It's able to expand easily. 

There aren't too many users using it in the company. We had maybe 1,000 users at one point. I'm not sure if this is still the case. 

We've used technical support. I've contacted them many times. They provide good solutions. We're happy with the support.

While I have used other solutions in the past, I'm not really an expert in others. 

They have a well-managed three-tier implementation. It's very straightforward.

There's an integrated tool used during the deployment, and the process only takes five to ten minutes. The deployment tool makes it very fast and easy. 

You just need a team of five, maximum, for deployment and maintenance. You might not necessarily need a dedicated person to handle the deployment. 

The deployment is basically done in-house. 

The solution used to be server-based. Now that it is on the cloud, the licensing is user-based. 

In terms of the market, K2 is not overly expensive. It's mid-range. 

While K2 is cloud-based now, many older customers use an on-premises version. 

This solution was acquired by Nintex.

I'd advise potential users if they have a legacy K2 system, to upgrade to the latest version of K2. They provide support and handle the migration of legacy K2 to the latest version. You get more features and advancements. 

I'd rate the solution eight out of ten.