SAP Signavio Process Manager Reviews

We use this solution primarily for our single-source business process. 

At this point in time, we've onboarded about 400 people who are actively capturing processes and adding critical attributes. We have a lot of additional people (very hard to put an exact number on that) who have viewed the models.

In terms of deployment and maintenance, there is a team of five people plus a specialist testing these sources. At the moment we are using it across some of our value chains and we will eventually cover the entire organization. I expect that to happen in the next 18 to 24 months.

The Australian banking landscape has just been through a revision (royal commission). It's a government led commission looking into banking practices and there were quite a few findings that came out of that. We are using the process repository to lock down and address process weaknesses. We've actually launched a multi-million dollar transformation program to control our environment. Signavio helps to accomplish this which is imperative to government compliance for us.

What I find most valuable for us is the governance of a workflow by embedding process accountability. It has always been a challenge to define who owns what and under what circumstances you can change processes. 

As we have only used the product for six months, it's too soon to tell what we'd like to see added in the future besides getting the solution fully deployed. At this point, we haven't fully explored the full functionality but it's got things like process manning capability and intelligence capability which we haven't even tapped into yet.

We've had no issues in terms of down times or anything since implementation. I suppose the lack of downtime depends on our AWS server. That's all based in Australia.

As far as scalability, I think it's a bit early for me to tell because we've just started using it. We've had no issues to date but I think as we get more involved with implementing our models, it may become a bit more of an issue. But I really don't know. 

Technical support has been pretty good. The primary support is based in Germany, but they are developing the local capability pretty quickly. A lot of support is currently local. Anything that required assistance from the German office hasn't really made much difference in service time.

We're still in hyper-care mode so support is constantly available. There have been no real issues. Migrating some models from the legacy system — that was seven years out of date —wasn't as simple as I thought it would be. It required a bit of scripting. However, that's a one-time exercise.

After we actually completed the configuration, we never had to go back to the vendor for anything. From the support perspective, everything was done. When we did have to communicate with them, it was related specifically to the old legacy system. The rest of it is pretty straight forward.

We had the ARIS solution before Signavio. The primary difference between the two is that ARIS provided an architectural academic view where Signavio is very user-friendly. Signavio got more people in the business excited about using the tool rather than just focusing on the project and involving the process professionals. We consciously targeted a user group that was organization-wide and we based our decision of tool selection on that.

The initial setup was very simple. It took us less than three weeks from signing the contract to having the first users online. We put people through training and we are onboarding users and our core value change progressively. We're only just getting to the actual the rollout at six months after completing testing.

We are working fairly closely with the vendor for integration. Right now we are only beginning to explore the capabilities for enhancing customer experience, mapping customer journey, and the mapping functionality.

In terms of just implementing it, it's very simple. My team has scaled up very quickly. We are to the point of being able to develop internal user training that I think is quite effective.

We used a vendor for the implementation. They were good and we are more than happy. The vendor spent a few weeks with us training my admin team. It hasn't been complicated at all.

As far as return on investment we've saved cost simply on the licensing. The ability to implement our future plans, which may have been hindered with other solutions, gives us a competitive advantage. In actual dollar amounts, that is impossible to value and much of the realization of the return will come in the future.

Signavio actually worked out a fair bit less expensive for us than some of the competitors. We negotiated an enterprise license for up to 30,000 users for certain components and a per-user license for other components based on our need for those. The company was very flexible in price negotiations in terms of the overall solution. We are paying in the region about eight hundred thousand dollars a year for an enterprise license.

There's nothing in addition to that unless we want additional capacity or features. 

We brought in an analyst to select tools for us to have a look at. We looked at ARIS, IBM Blueworks, and Signavio. We decided to experiment with Signavio and ARIS. Then we got business leaders to come in, have a look at the two and come up with recommendations. By those recommendations, we settled on Signavio. 

I'd give Signavio a nine out of ten at this point. I'm very happy in terms of it performing as we designed. If there are any issues, it's because we don't fully understand the functionality and the capability yet. I think the only reason I'm not giving it a 10 is that I've not had a chance to explore capability and functionality fully.

There are plenty of use cases. One of the key things that we're trying to understand is related to the fact that a lot of our teams are working in different methods. Especially being in a global layer of the company, we're trying to see how similar teams from different geographies are working, in order to find a synergy or find the best way to learn from each other. That's why we've taken on Signavio to do our business process mapping.

We work a lot with offshore delivery models and Signavio has helped us bring their processes and our processes in line so that we know exactly where the hand-offs are and who is responsible for what. In some cases, we have improved the process by shifting this responsibility.

That's one of the real examples that we've done. We've been able to look at the whole picture and understand the responsibilities of each team, whether you're in the US, UK, or India. Then we can understand how to change responsibilities in order to make better use of a process. It's been done on the go, which is really good for us and it's been really valuable.

I think the entire process has improved the life cycle by being in a unified hub. We are still in our infancy of using Signavio. Already, there's been a lot of improvement with people contributing or giving input towards these processes, which means it's working already. The next step for us is to use this as a launchpad to start really managing and improving our processes in real-time. I'm hoping to get there within the next year.

The solution's functionality gives everyone in our organization, from process experts to end users, what they need. There are a lot of times that we talk to the business owner, as we have a lot of client-facing teams. Signavio has enabled us to speak to them directly. In other cases, we wouldn't really talk to them about processes, whereas here, because they can access their process with a click of a link, it makes it easier to comment and say, "Actually, we don't work this way anymore." That sort of feedback helps us to immediately look at it, take in all of its implications, and then change the way we work, so we can still be an enabler rather than an obstruction to their work as well. In the end, their work is what brings revenue to our company too, and we just have to be there to do everything for them.

Signavio improves our employees' work-based functions. It just becomes a little clearer who does what. When you can see it on a piece of paper on the wall somewhere, in a very consistent format, as the process manager allows you too, it gives everybody the sense that they know what they are responsible for. It just clears what you have to do so you can focus.

The collaborative features definitely help create a process-centered mindset in our organization. Every process that we have, there are at least six people talking about it at the same time, which is much better than just one person trying to shove something down somebody else's throat. That's a really good thing. Collaboration works towards that.

The most valuable feature for me is the collaboration point of view, where everybody has a single view, or source of truth, and everybody sees the same thing. Everyone can comment, contribute, and discuss the processes itself, which makes it easier to funnel down the most value-adding comments and make the relevant changes to the processes. This leads to the next best iteration or version of your process.

The interface is really good. It's on your browser, so you don't have to install anything. It just runs off Internet Explorer or Chrome, so the interface is I think a big plus for me.

The solution's ease of use is very friendly so it has been adopted quite well. I thought a lot of people might complain that they need to do tutorials and things like that but they didn't. The people I've spoken to or worked with almost picked it up immediately, without having to do too much coaching. That's a really good thing about the interface and the front end.

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.

So far, I haven't had any really bad experiences, so I couldn't really comment on the stability. So far it's been working okay for me.

I think it's a very scalable product. Obviously, if you work with Signavio hand-in-hand, they are very proactive in trying to help you with what you want. More than me being on their tail, they are after me asking what I want them to do for us. That is a good thing in terms of service, so I definitely think it's scalable. They want to understand our roadmap so that they can help as well.

I have used them occasionally. Because we are using a very small component of Signavio, we haven't really had that many technical queries. When we do speak to them, though, we usually get an immediate response. They get back to us within 24 to 48 hours and then we get something sorted out.

We had Signavio in a different department. A German team was already using it. Through our vendor analysis to see what would be the best fit, we actually chose Signavio, and then we found out we already had an existing relationship. That's how we are changing how we work with them now.

The initial setup was straightforward.

We used good consultants. The initial bits, they've done to help us get up and running. In our second phase, where we're moving into a hybrid of cloud and on-premise, we're working hand-in-hand with them. They've been quite proactive. They always answer questions that we have, especially questions related to security and risk because that's a big factor for us.

We do not yet see an ROI. It is still too early for anything tangible. Intangibly, we are definitely working better across regions, with a lot more collaboration and transparency. There's a lot more understanding of the work we do, plus the work that other teams are doing. We have more empathy now.

Our shortlist included iServer, Bizagi, Trisotech, which is a Canadian company, and Signavio. They were our shortlisted front-runners. We went with Signavio because we had an existing relationship and obviously we were able to elicit a lot of feedback about how they were already working with them. Secondly, it was a good preference compared to the other two as well. Bizagi and Signavio were very close, but we eventually went with Signavio because of the interface and experience.

There's a specific type of product that works for your company, and there could be a lot of factors that finally allow you to settle or choose one. For us, it was Signavio because of the fact that they were a good product and we already had an existing relationship. You must really think about adoption. That's the key thing, because for a product of this scale if the adoption is low, you're not going anywhere with it. The friendlier and easier it is to grasp, the better it is going to work for your wider company. That would be my advice.

I would give it an eight and a half out of ten. If you need a whole number, give it an eight, just to push them a little harder.

We primarily use the solution as a support tool towards becoming more focused on process management. This high-level goal can be further broken down into increasing visibility over existing processes, facilitating the design and collaboration on to-be processes, as well as cutting down on external consultants costs related to process management. 

Furthermore, we are using Signavio for our enterprise architecture as well, in order to increase visibility over how the different IT systems used in the company are supporting different processes. 

SAP Signavio Process Manager has a strong basis for creating a process organizational structure (process owners, process managers). 

Visualizing and collaborating in one place on all cross-functional processes has led to an increased understanding of how everything connects (especially through the use of previous and subsequent processes, but also through the use of the "call activity" function within the BPMN models). 

The centralized dictionary has further helped with standardization of items such as roles at a global level.

One of the most valuable features was the possibility of not only collaborating with the other system Process Managers and also with non-licensed users (whether Collaboration Hub users or other external users). 

This functionality ("invite anyone for feedback") has substantially increased visibility over work-in-progress when it comes to process modelling and overall process management and it decreased the time spent on giving and receiving feedback through emails and through sharing screenshots/.ppt files/Visio files etc.

The user management functionality in Process Manager is not as user friendly as the one in the Collaboration Hub. The design, although good compare to other solutions on the market, is not as great as that of the Collaboration Hub. 

Furthermore, the integration with SharePoint Online doesn't offer the same benefits as the one with SharePoint classic, meaning that when using the search functionality of "search in content" you will not get results of the text within the SharePoint Online documentation.

I've used the solution for seven months.

We have not experienced many issues (if any) so far, however, we have also only started using this solution.

The product offers good scalability options, especially with the SAP acquisition.

Technical support offers prompt answers from our initial contact (sales representatives) to the consultant we worked with during the setup and training.

Positive

We did use 2c8 Apps, which was not user-friendly enough and didn't offer a cloud solution. It also was difficult to collaborate/share content with the rest of the organization.

The initial setup was straightforward, and although we used Signavio's premium rapid deployment, we could've most likely done it by ourselves.

We implemented the product with the help of Signavio (10 days of consultation efforts).

I am unable to give an answer at this point as we are still only starting to work with Signavio.

There is a rather high cost for the Process Manager licenses, however, costs can go down if there are more modules from the Business Transformation Suite added to the contract. 

We looked at up to 80 other process modelling solution providers. The top 4 vendors were Aris, Adonis, GBTEC, and Signavio.

My company's clients mostly want to migrate their current solutions to SAP S4/HANA to check the processes the tool offers.

The most valuable features of the solution are the ease of use and the connection to the document management system.

The workflow automation of the solution is an area of concern where improvements are required.

I have been using SAP Signavio Process Manager for a year and a half to two years. I work as an SAP consultant in my company. I work with the former versions of the solution, like SAP R/2 and R/3.

It is a highly stable solution. Stability-wise, I rate the solution a nine out of ten.

It is a very scalable solution. Scalability-wise, I rate the solution a nine out of ten.

My company mostly deals with enterprise-sized clients who use the product.

The solution's support takes a lot of time to resolve an issue after the user opens the ticket with the technical team.

I rate the technical support a three out of ten.

Negative

I have experience with Celonis.

I rate the product's initial setup phase a seven to eight on a scale of one to ten, where one is difficult and ten is easy.

The time for the product's deployment phase varies, but it is an easy process if you know what to do and if you want to deploy it. On average, the deployment process can be completed in two or three days.

The solution is deployed on a public cloud.

I rate the product price a five on a scale of one to ten, where one is low price and ten is high price.

The use of SAP Signavio Process Manager within our organization's workflow was done in different ways. Some of the tool's users used it for process modeling, while others used it for workflow automation. The overall target for most of the customers is workflow automation.

The specific business processes that were improved in our company from the use of SAP Signavio Process Manager were a lot of manufacturing and tax-related processes.

The collaboration feature of SAP Signavio Process Manager is the most beneficial for process optimization.

I haven't used the simulation feature in the product.

I rate the product's ability to support collaboration among team members a ten out of ten.

It is difficult to motivate people in our organization to start using SAP Signavio Process Manager, though I believe that it should have been quite an easy process. People need to be trained on how to use it, and many people are scared of making mistakes while using the tool. A bigger change is needed in the beginning to motivate all employees to use the tool.

I rate the overall tool a six out of ten.

We use this solution for capturing our workflows and processes in all areas of the business, whether that's HR or content production or finance. It's about discovering some of those workarounds and unblocking our workflows.

With respect to how easy Signavio is to use, that's an interesting one because different roles may look at processes in different ways and to some, the word-defined process is a complete turnoff. From the business analyst perspective, it is really easy to use. They're used to using Visio and modeling tools anyway. When it comes to the collaboration hub use, that took a bit of explaining to start. But again, it's a case of a picture paints a thousand words. Even a process diagram, as you're leading your collaborators through it, it's easier to understand.

To explain one way that this solution has improved our organization, I will use an onboarding process as an example. We were seeing the onboarding processes coming through a number of pieces of work and there were problems in the workflow because the issues were being addressed in individual functions, with HR or particular departmental areas rather than looking at it holistically. The fact that we can model the process end to end from the moment a new person is required for a role right through to that person being in their seat and working at their desk and engage with all the different subject matter experts in the different functional areas, really helped.

Using Signavio supports and enables our business transformation. From a business analysis perspective, we're always looking at the "as is" and the "to be" models. Having all of those workflows and processes documented to understand what we're doing now really helps with moving forward in a positive way.

I like the collaboration and the real-time aspects of it. The way that we captured processes previously started with the drawing of an image using Microsoft Visio. We might have had to have two, three, or four workshops to get to an end process that was usable. Now with Signavio, it's real-time. We might have one workshop to start off and capture the main tasks around a workflow, but then we can comment and update that real-time online and collaborate online. It's really helpful, especially as a team spread across the UK.

The user interface for the collaboration hub is antiquated and should be improved. It feels sort of 90s and I think there is more that can be done with it.

I would like to see more support for targeting efforts in terms of resources. One of the things we've done for ourselves is added an attribute to indicate where the process is from. This means that we can do a bit of a heat map of where we've got processes modeled and where we haven't. This gives us the ability to target particular areas of the business. 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. So it's more around targeted efforts.

We've had Signavio in the business for about eighteen months. We started with a very small team of business analysts using it and then spread that across the BAs embedded in all of the digital products, as well as our studio's BAs. After this, with the Collaboration Hub, we've got all our people who work in the project and program delivery, as well as product delivery, all working together and collaborating.

Stability-wise, it's been fine. We've had a couple of minutes of downtime and when we've rung the Signavio help team, they've been fine and worked with us and it's been back online. There is nothing where I'd say it had an impact on what we were doing.

We started with twelve to fifteen users to begin with and now we're at seventy-eight. We're not in the hundreds or thousands but given the people that do the actual modeling versus the people we collaborate with, we collaborate with a lot more, so we have seventy-eight process modelers in the organization, but then we have two hundred collaborators.

Signavio support helped us with our initial setup and a couple of times when we had issues with downtime. They have always been helpful.

The initial setup was straightforward. We had a few information security issues to work through, which was due to the BBCs level of security and what we require. We've gone through all of that process. Again Signavio was on board and made sure that if we had any questions they'd answer those for us. We had their engineers on any calls with our InfoSec team as well. All of that worked through fine.

There has been time saved, definitely. Getting the monetary value requires additional effort in your process capture because, without the measures on that, process capture is very hard to get to the monetary value of return on investments.

Time is very easy to prove because I can see that from the number of people that would have been in workshops to capture those processes initially and how many times we would have been around that same scenario to do that. However, to get to specific use cases, you need to have the measures around those processes captured at the same time, so that's another degree of capture that you wouldn't have necessarily done in the original process capture, but it's fine. It's doable and then you can get to the monetary value, but we have not done that.

Right at the very beginning, we looked at five different products with Signavio being one of them. We had a list of requirements of what we wanted from our process repository. We went through all five products, had demonstrations of them, did a compatibility and feature matrix against all of our requirements and three came out of that process. Post further demos we had done, Signavio was the choice in the end because it met our business needs.

We do not yet use the process mining and process intelligence functionality, but it is on the roadmap and we plan to do a proof of value this year.

This is a good solution but there needs to be work done on the Collaboration Hub user interface. Also, there is always room for improvement.

I would rate this solution an eight out of ten.

The solution is user-friendly. It is simpler than other products. It has process mapping features. It also has BPMN, DMN, and QuickModel features.

There is no documentation available. It is not easy to learn the product. We face a lot of difficulties in understanding the tool.

I am currently learning the solution.

I did not face any issues with stability.

I contacted support once. The team answered my query. I am satisfied with the response. I rate the support an eight or nine out of ten.

Positive

The tool is cloud-based. The initial configuration takes less than a minute.

We are using the free trial version.

The solution is more advanced than Visio. I have theoretical knowledge of ARIS BPA. However, I have hands-on experience with Signavio through the website.

I am learning to use the solution. I haven’t explored the tool much. People who want to explore the solution can go ahead and use it. Overall, I rate the product a seven out of ten.

The solution is used to run business processes. We're able to automate the data from SAP.

We can use the tool to shorten the process of creating tickets. It depends on the type of ticket, though. It is useful for updates.

The product is very useful for office processes. It is also useful for cost-cutting. The solution provides data mining and AI features. We can compare between two companies or departments. We can see if a salesperson is using the best practices to work. The product gives us the process that the users follow to get things done. We need not write it down.

Huge organizations have responsibility charts to know who is doing what. We can better judge whether we want to automate any processes. It’s a next-level tool. It has a huge future.

It’s the only tool for processes that engage shareholders. We can interact with the management more. The solution is great for banks, pharmaceutical companies, financial institutions, and agriculture. It is suitable for non-manufacturing processes. We can use it well in offices.

The solution is complex. Signavio doesn’t provide the scalability that small businesses need. The solution is hard to use. We need some specialists. I rate the user experience an eight out of ten. If we want to get data, evaluate it, get insights, and make changes, we need someone skilled.

I have been using the solution for some weeks.

The solution is stable because it is connected to SAP.

The product offers scalability. It’s not easy, though. We have about 15 users.

The initial setup is complex. The time taken for deployment depends on how much potential you would like to receive from the tool. If we need to get a lot out of the tool, we need training from a specialist. Sometimes, we need more than one person. We need a whole team. The specialist and the team will cost us more. The solution is cloud-based.

The solution is expensive. It is suitable for huge enterprises.

The product provides more insights than Bizagi.

The solution is worth it if the company is a huge corporation with money. It will cost some money, but it can bring a lot of insights and save 20% of the time wasted on processes. Since the product is not cheap, the management wants to see results. There is huge pressure on the process managers to get and work with data. Some customers want to know whether their processes are straight and there is no waste. We can compare with companies and see which tools are cheaper. Overall, I rate the product a nine out of ten.

My task is to form a package of documents describing the activities of the company as a whole. This is done for one purpose, as I understand it, to raise the market value of the company. This is the ordering of processes, provisioning a certain systematicity of processes and their description as well as polishing the API belonging to these processes.

We recently switched from on-premise to cloud.

At the moment, I am in the process of migrating documents into Signavio.

Today, our company is transforming internal processes. We are rebuilding and optimizing many processes, but it should be a continuous process. Today, we are undergoing changes in the description of codes. We are changing the site and many processes are changing accordingly. As a process manager, I envisage possible gaps where the infrastructure changes between operational units, the customer service unit, and customers. I participate in all these processes, shaping future changes, with one goal in mind: Minimize gaps between operational excellence and customer experience management.

Since my company works for external clients, all our processes are geared towards maximum customer service, improving it and performance. Describing these processes, we strive to improve them, or at least not to drop them. At the same time, there is an already developed matrix of key target indicators. Naturally, I focus all operational divisions on them. We have about 15 operational divisions involved in customer service. For example, my company is engaged in the delivery of pizza. We measure how much time we spend on delivery for one client as well as a pool of customers, the amount of pizza delivered for a certain period, etc. We are overhauling internal processes with the help of Signavio, trying to improve our indicators.

The benefit of this application is that I can describe processes and immediately form normative documents for these processes. For me, this is definitely a plus. Сurrently, I work in a company that is not involved in the structural alignment of business processes. They have huge gaps in this. Nothing is described and there are no norms. Therefore, the formation of regulatory documents, rules, and descriptions of processes, not only in graphic form, but also in documentary form is an absolute plus. I have not found this in other process programs.

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.

I have used it for more than three years.

The stability is good. I do not see where it is possible to improve in this area. Reliability, availability, and stability are at a high level

I would suggest more opportunities for integration with other products, especially in the field of migration from a program to Signavio.

I haven’t worked with Signavio support.

I have used ARIS, Lucidchart, and draw.io. I used a different solution at every company that I have worked at.

It was easy enough. I liked the simplicity and usability of the program. It was not difficult for me, possibly because I am already a trained user.

The deployment did not take long. At most, it took up to half an hour.

I always suggest possible improvements and alternative development options or changes in the transformation process. Very often, I do mathematical calculations for this to show the financial benefits of implementing a process one way or another. For this, I naturally use Signavio tools for graphically displaying processes. 

Although Signavio is a feature-rich solution, it is expensive for companies who haven’t reached a certain maturity level in their process management initiatives.

I have worked and reviewed various applications, such as ARIS, and web applications, such as Сamunda, draw.io and Lucidchart. They have quite large options of use from free to more advanced versions. They integrate quite well with each other, but the functionality is limited. There is no way to form a document that verbally describes a process. These are not the main differences, but this function is critical for me at the moment. My task is to form a package of documents describing the activities of the company as a whole.

Signavio is quite a useful application and easy to use for companies who already have a certain level of maturity or who have decided to implement process management. I highly recommend it. Considering my experience with Signavio, I would rate it as nine out of 10.

Our order-to-ship cycle time process is already built up. We only work on its improvements.