Nintex Process Platform Reviews

Our primary use for this solution is for automating workflows in business applications.

The most valuable feature is the workflows. We have started working with the SmartObjects and the SmartForms, as well.

The SmartForms need to be simplified so that the non-expert, business users can make use of them without coding. That will help a lot. 

I would also like to see the BPM features from Pega implemented, that have to do with the implementation of AI and the robotics.

The AI should be able to learn inside the platform so that it adds intelligence to the tool itself. That way, it can handle the things that are being taken care of by external entities. It will first learn how to handle new events, and then handle them by itself in the future.

I would rate the stability four and a half out of five. Overall it is good, but sometimes it fails.

This is a very easy solution to scale out.

We have approximately sixty thousand users for this solution. Perhaps one hundred of them support the applications and integration, but the majority of them are end-users.

Technical support for this solution is good. We have a contract with them and the support is good. They always help.

I have used Pega and I feel that it offers more than the K2 solution, in terms of the latest technology. For example, I like their implementation of the AI and the robotics inside of their system.

We are part of a technical team and we have the expertise, so the initial setup was not complex for us.

We had a consultant from K2 assist us with the setup.

This is a good solution and it is easy to implement. I think that it adds value to any organization, mainly in terms of business applications where you need workflows. It is easy to use, and workflow design can be done by business users. Overall, it is a good product to have in an organization.

I would rate this solution seven out of ten.

In our company, we have different deals, each with a small number of workflow processes. They were primarily using email for approvals that followed. So, we replaced this with Nintex wherever possible. Through Nintex forms, we were able to customize these as well.  

It has helped us a lot, especially during the initial phase of a project where most of the things are done on paper. From our perspective, you can save at least thirty percent in terms of time spent on manual processes, and documenting approvals and process flows.

We are currently facing a lot of issues with Nintex, and we are trying to move away from this solution. In fact, we have already reduced its usage.

The feature that I found most valuable is the ability to impersonate the users so that high-level access to certain resources can be provided. For example, impersonating the super admin allows you to perform actions that cannot be performed by regular users, and they can be badged with this kind of action set. 

Another thing that I like is the deeper loops, and also deeper schedules so that you can schedule a particular workflow to a particular type.

The timer jobs that we have would never run on time.

If you have a complex workflow, Nintex would just error out of it, without giving a "why" and "where". Error reporting is something that definitely needs improvement because most of the time it would just give a correlation ID or something. If there is a workflow issue then we don't know where it failed.

The Nintext Pause operation causes problems and so do the parallel use cases, so these also need improvement.

In the next version of the software, I would like to see a dashboard of all reports, the workflows that are running and their statuses. That would be helpful.

Initially, the product was very stable, but as our usage grew, the issues also increased. This may be a problem with our environment, but in any case, we are now at a point where we are trying to move away from Nintex.

I would rate the scalability a six out of ten.

We have approximately fifty thousand users, right from the VP to the workshop people.

I would rate their technical support a four out of ten. We never get the right solutions. Most of the time we get generic answers that are not to the point.

Nintex was chosen as the first option.

The initial setup was straightforward. During the trial, I had installed it myself. The installation was not a problem at any time.

The deployment and maintenance team is approximately four people. We have three environments, and four people handle the deployments and batch updates.

We have seen ROI.

We did evaluate other options, with one of them being K2. We had seen a few reviews and consulted with Microsoft as well. Based on everyone's answers we chose Nintex.

This is a good solution for mid-scale deployment and mid-scale usage, but as the usage increases, the issues along with it also increase.

I would rate this solution a seven out of ten.

The solution has the capability to handle robust execution.

The solution's flexibility can be improved. K2 needs to be fully code-free, and they should try Endeavor to make it code-free. It will help to hide the complexities of smart objects.

Improvements can be made because we are implementing one solution and need a solution that integrates into itself. It's very tedious to manage, so they should ensure that everything is integrated and taken care of.

We have been using K2 for three years.

The solution is scalable. Approximately 100 people use it in our organization.

The customer service and support team are good. The premium support is good, and their response is fast.

K2 is reasonably priced and you pay for licenses. It costs less than half a million, and you own your licenses yearly. Additionally, you pay 400,000 for support and maintenance, but similar tools charge per user. So you are paying roughly $80 per month for one user, which can be quite costly if you have a large organization.

We are currently evaluating Camunda and Integrify.

I rate the solution a six out of ten. K2 is not mature and still needs a lot of stabilization. My advice to new users considering the product will be to use it without customizing it. After installation, use the vanilla workflows, and you will get fast performance. However, if you customize it, you will run into challenges.

As a Solutions Architect my role is to help my clients implement tools and technology that can build and automate their businesses. While my clients and their environments very widely, Nintex delivers a product that can be used regardless of the industry, division, etc.

In most cases we help clients implement Nintex Workflow to automate business processes that can be tedious when done manually, such as information approvals, notifications, and integrations with other system/data.

The biggest improvement to the organizations that I work with is that it allows the users to reduce, if not eliminate completely, the amount of human interaction, for both complex as well as simple business processes. This allows the users more time to focus on aspects of their work that can have more impact on the longer term strategies of the business.

The Vizio-style designer that runs in the browser is, to me, by far the most valuable feature of the solution. It means that the customer doesn’t have to install any client tools to create powerful workflows.

Another feature that is very close in importance is that it leverages the out-of-the-box SharePoint back-end. This means that you don’t need to install or deploy additional infrastructure to support Nintex Workflow, unlike some of its competitors.

While Nintex Workflow has pretty robust troubleshooting abilities, I think that improving the default logging and notifications would be helpful. Many times we work with clients that have started a workflow, but find that it doesn’t work as they expect, and need assistance in troubleshooting and correcting any errors. That, and offering a licensing model that allows for multiple small workflows, would be a huge improvement to an already great platform.

I have used Nintex Workflow 2010 and Nintex Worflow 2013. I have not worked with a client that has the most recent version deployed.

Overall, I would rank Nintex Workflow at eight out of 10. It is a strong product and is definitely best in its class. It offers strong usability with the in-browser, Vizio-style designer, and can also deliver on some powerful workflow actions. There are times, when dealing with complex workflows, where understanding the application and its nuances is required.

We have implemented an end-to-end workflow solution for a private bank for their loan origination system. We have also implemented a claims reimbursement system, and item-level permissions for SharePoint lists using Nintex workflows.

For end-to-end approval workflows, Nintex workflows are deployed on the SharePoint front-end servers. The claims reimbursement workflows are end-to-end workflows for approvals of claims within the organization. Those for financial services include loan origination, legal and compliance, and core banking system workflows.

Resource management and employee onboarding workflows have also been created to automate the employee onboarding process.

From what was a 20 to 30-day approval cycle, it has now come down to between two and three days for approving loans and claims.

SharePoint does not support item-level/row-level permissions, and we were able to implement the solution using Nintex workflows.

The product and its features have improved the productivity and efficiency of the process flow within the application and systems, providing end-to-end connectivity to all systems.

Tracking of all approvals minutely, audit logs for issues, and helping to find out any non-compliance in the process flows.

State machine and sequential Workflows are excellent features for creating complex state machine and sequential workflows that integrate with major Microsoft products like CRM Dynamics, SAP, and Peoplesoft.

We can create workflows for document management, publishing workflows, and create other custom workflow solutions spanning multiple roles and levels of approvals.

It has integration with BI and Analytics tools, and RPA toolsets as well. 

Custom integration using REST APIs for Line of Business applications is helpful.

It provides good audit and reporting for workflow tasks to detect and resolve issues.

We had issues with long-running workflows for approval processes. While the workflows are waiting for the action to be taken by the approvers, sometimes the approval takes time and workflows do not respond to the actions after a certain number of days.

We would like to design parallel workflows and long-running workflows, along with new features for connecting to cloud-based systems.

When the workflow tasks increase in number, there are issues with performance that need to be addressed.

We have been using the Nintex workflow solution for close to eight years.

The Nintex solution is stable for small to medium workflows and even, to an extent, large workflows.

The Nintex solution can scale from a single server to multiple server deployments to manage workloads.

Good customer support in terms of help desk, and support for fixing product issues.

The initial setup was straightforward, with appropriate demos, documentation, and user manuals.

Implementing the workflows as a development vendor for a major financial services organization, real estate firms, and insurance companies.

Looking at the capabilities and usage for all process flows to be automated within multiple systems and applications throughout the enterprise, the ROI will be met and break-even reached within a year.

Our use case of the solution is to help the sales people in the field, enable them to have all the information from the backend and to more easily put together a proposal for management regarding new tenants of shopping centers. There is a process that flows to the works department, the legal department, the asset manager, and the project manager. They are able to make suggestions, comment, discuss numbers, and make some declarations. It provides good feedback to the management who then need to make a decision. We provide this service for both internal and external clients. We're a customer of K2blackpearl and I'm the company chief information officer. 

The value of this solution is that it's easy to maintain, and to further develop. It's quite low code, so there is not the need of really specialized people and customization is quite simple. 

I think there can be improvements in the product but that may be linked to the decisions that we have taken to put it on-premise, because now we're making big changes and the scope of the project has changed so that we now want external partners to have access to the system. Because we're on-premise, it's more complicated to provide access to their own network. Next time I would go for the cloud. 

I've been using this solution for about three years now. 

Stability is good, no issue there.

Scalability is good. We implemented it in Belgium and then in France and we're now expanding the scope further.  

We haven't needed to contact technical support as we work directly with the integrator. 

I believe the initial deployment took about three months. We used an integrator to help with that and it was successful. They provided some training for us so we'd be able to figure out how to do things ourselves. It was great. 

I would suggest to anyone wanting to deploy this solution to find a good integrator that understands the business first, not only from the technical side. Don't hesitate to take the journey. I would also suggest starting with a small solution and then expand it. Like everything, do a minimum viable product and then extend it a bit more slowly and grow into it.  

I would rate this solution an eight out of 10. 

We use it for SharePoint 2013 and 2010, and SharePoint Online (Office 365).

Able to automate business processes and help reduce a significant amount of development efforts.

• Workflow (escalation, reminder, LazyApproval, actions, etc.)
• Ease of use

Currently, copying workflow actions from one workflow to another is not possible. Also, the Office 365 solution is not as mature as on-premise.

I primarily use the solution as a development platform.

The solution in general is very easy to use. It's very user-friendly, and it has satisfied the requirements I have. 

It's a really good platform. 

The integration capabilities have been very useful. It's very powerful and very advanced.

The stability of the product is quite good.

The Workflow Designer needs improvement. For example, when you design a workflow on K2, it shows the entire area between one action and another action. However, you should be able to see the structure for this action. It's not automatically structured.

It sould be automatically structured from the shared action to the following action. In K2, you should be able to organize it by yourself. Workflows should be very easy to organize exactly as you need them. It shouldn't be inflexible. The mapping processes need to be better.

You can't really change the look and feel. You should be able to customize the solution a bit more.

The document generation, the dynamic document generation, could be a great addition as a feature.

I've only been using the solution for six months. It hasn't been that long just yet, however, I am enjoying the product.

The stability is very good. There are no bugs or glitches. It doesn't crash or freeze. It's reliable.

The product doesn't seem to have many limitations. It can likely scale well. 

There's no need for technical support as we order services done for us. As far as it's from K2 goes, there's a web solution on the platform and there are partners for the company. Up until this point, however, I haven't found the need to reach out. I haven't had problems that required assistance.

I worked with Nintex for a few years. Recently, after I ran a comparison between K2 and Nintex, I've been working for six months on the K2 platform. I've found it very useful, and very easy in comparison. However, I still use both. Nintex acquired K2 recently.

Compared to Nintex, Nintex is easier to set up. Unlike in K2, in Nintex, you can just build on top of SharePoint. If you want SharePoint, the environment is set up and can install directly in Nintex. In K2, you are configuring two environments. 

I am unsure of the exact pricing. Nintex acquired K2 in 2020 and there may be a shift in the cost structure. I can't speak directly to that, however.

We are a K2 customer and a Nintex partner, although, since the 2020 acquisition, they are the same company now.

I would recommend the solution, especially for companies that are working to go paperless.

I suggest that if they want to integrate between systems from a strategy department into another department, to really look at the integration layers that they have, as it's very advanced.

In general, I would rate this solution at a nine out of ten. We've been largely happy with the product.