Nintex Process Platform Reviews

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.

We use Nintex for processing workflows and forms for SharePoint 2010.  Moslty for approval workflows and tracking requests.

One of the processes that we developed was to allow requests for new login accounts. These require managerial as well as HR approval, then it sends workflows after the approval to a lot of different individuals as tasks for them to handle their part of the new user request.

Being able to simply create workflows to handle business processes. It allows us to route approvals to users without human intervention.

Nintex seems to be very server intensive. It is one of the reasons that we are moving to a different product on the SharePoint 2016 platform.

Nintex Process Platform’s most valuable feature is workflow. It is flexible and shares an update quickly. It is easy to maintain as well.

The product’s support for the mobile platform and its ability to handle artificial loads could be better. Its capabilities from the customer’s perspective need improvement. They should add repair and remediation features. 

We have been using Nintex Process Platform for more than five years.

It is a stable product.

It is a scalable product.

The initial process was easy for me to execute. However, it is complicated for those who don’t have any experience working on it. We deploy the product on the Windows servers. The deployment includes planning user access management.

The product’s price is competitive compared to other vendors.

Nintex Process Platform has a good workflow and efficient local support services. I recommend it to others and rate it a nine out of ten.

K2's best feature is that it can solve complex tasks, issues, and projects with little coding.

K2's support for DevOp team corporations is weak.

I've been using K2 for two and a half years.

K2 is very stable - there have been almost no problems in the time I've been using it.

The initial setup is straightforward because it can be deployed on a DB server, application server, and web server.

For the initial hundred users, the cost is $21,000 per year, which I find too high. There are soft thresholds for this initial license, like the number of forms and environments. 

I would give K2 a rating of seven out of ten.

1. SmartObject makes the center of data management, where developer and/or someone can call to it with only one place. SmartObject will return data from other system (such as MS-SQL, Oracle, SharePoint, SAP, etc.) to solve requirements.

2. K2 connect for SAP, easy to make interface between SAP with K2 connect for SAP service designer. Developer can design interface without coding and transform it into SmartObjects.

3. Workflow, to support more complex business processes, logic and data flow without coding.

4. SmartForm, fast and easy to develop web form to connect to SmartObject and workflow. Where you can create web application and ready to release to users within an hour.

• Supports conditional approval by business logic very easily
• Multiple approvals
• Notice of approval by email

Performance. Some customers ask why K2 is slow? Upgrade to current version will get the better performance.

More than 7 years.

Easy to makes deployment package.

Found less in the current version.

No.

Eight out of 10.

Eight out of 10.

K2 is my first and only one solution that I recommend.

Setup is easy in standalone. Distributed setup is complex and requires more network knowledge.

I’m working in the development field and do not know much about this.

No, my team was trying to map requirements to the K2 solution.

K2 makes your work simple.

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.

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.

To automate a manual process through Nintex Workflow in a SharePoint environment.

It provides data accuracy with fewer failures. It saves time as tasks are automated.

This tool is really helpful in reducing a lot of manual work. Its drag and drop components help to create a workflow faster than SharePoint Workflow Designer.

• Scheduling a site workflow is much easier and more convenient. 
• I like the feature of getting an email for a workflow error, then I do not have to go through every instance. 
• Conditional start of the workflow is the highlight of Nintex Workflow. 
• Only Nintex has the feature which allows attachments to an email.

Converting a document from PDF to MS Word, or vice versa, needs to be improved.

Our maintenance costs are reduced.

For the past three years, I have been using Nintex with SharePoint 2010 as well as the 2013 environment.