We changed our name from IT Central Station: Here's why

ProcessMaker OverviewUNIXBusinessApplication

ProcessMaker is #18 ranked solution in BPM Software. PeerSpot users give ProcessMaker an average rating of 8 out of 10. ProcessMaker is most commonly compared to Bonita: ProcessMaker vs Bonita. The top industry researching this solution are professionals from a computer software company, accounting for 35% of all views.
What is ProcessMaker?

ProcessMaker is an American multinational corporation headquartered in Raleigh-Durham, North Carolina. The company specializes primarily in developing and marketing enterprise business process management (BPM) software. The company also provides customer support, training, and professional services to larger enterprise customers that require highly customized solutions. The company’s flagship Low-Code BPM product is known for its ease of use and ability for deep customization.

ProcessMaker was previously known as ProcessMaker Workflow Management & BPM, ProcessMaker BPM.

Buyer's Guide

Download the Business Process Management (BPM) Buyer's Guide including reviews and more. Updated: January 2022

ProcessMaker Customers
Tulsa Community College, Sirius College, Mcredit Vietnam, Oregon City Schools, Lakozy Toyota, HyperCube
ProcessMaker Video

ProcessMaker Reviews

Filter by:
Filter Reviews
Filter Unavailable
Company Size
Filter Unavailable
Job Level
Filter Unavailable
Filter Unavailable
Filter Unavailable
Order by:
  • Date
  • Highest Rating
  • Lowest Rating
  • Review Length
Showingreviews based on the current filters. Reset all filters
Somadina Leo
Operational Risk Analyst at a financial services firm with 5,001-10,000 employees
Real User
Top 5Leaderboard
Easy to learn, automates our manual processes to make things easier, and saves us time and money
Pros and Cons
  • "What I like most is the seamlessness of the workflow capabilities."
  • "This solution only supports basic text, but we would like to be able to insert components such as rich text, graphs, charts, pictures, and other objects."

What is our primary use case?

ProcessMaker is an Omnibus-style software. We use it for many of the services within the bank, such as generating a form or filling out a form that passes through different layers of approval. There are several processes that this solution assists us with.

Personally, I use ProcessMaker for five different reports that each includes a workflow. Each report has to be generated and then goes through different levels of change before it's approved and the document is finalized.

How has it helped my organization?

Using ProcessMaker has eliminated a lot of paper use, saving us costs when it comes to hard copies. The reason is that when we have to do a memo, it was previously done on paper. It was reviewed and then we would print it.

What is most valuable?

What I like most is the seamlessness of the workflow capabilities. It makes the workflow a lot easier and more automated than our previous manual processes.

This solution is easy to learn and you can teach anybody how to use it. We have used other software that is not as user-friendly. It is very easy to adjust it to accommodate a lot of processes.

What needs improvement?

This solution only supports basic text, but we would like to be able to insert components such as rich text, graphs, charts, pictures, and other objects. This will make it more impactful because as it is now, the reports have to be created after the fact in a Microsoft Word document. Then, once it is complete, other people have to download the report and refer to it. If you can do everything in ProcessMaker, without having to resort to Microsoft Word, then it would be a big improvement.

If ProcessMaker had an engine for data analysis then that would be awesome. It would allow us to discard other proprietary software that is used for those purposes.

For how long have I used the solution?

We have been using ProcessMaker since April 2019, so less than one year.

What do I think about the stability of the solution?

We have problems with instability, although I don't think that it's a problem with the product. I think it's a problem with the resources that are allocated to it. A lot of the time, our platform has problems and people have trouble accessing ProcessMaker. This is a resource issue and it may mean that we have to allocate more bandwidth to the platform. This only happens when it is a process that is widespread and affects multiple units in the entire group at the same time.

Overall, I would say that our solution is not stable, but it's not because of ProcessMaker.

What do I think about the scalability of the solution?

ProcessMaker is very scalable because you just do it once. Most of the processes in the department follow the same workflow, so someone generates something and it goes through different levels of approval until it is finalized. This means that it is very scalable in terms of it can be applied to a whole range of processes. 

The only types of processes for which it cannot be applied are those that involve analysis. If there are any processes that involve high-level analysis then this solution may not be very useful. However, if it is a very low-level process that just involves a basic workflow like review, approval, or rejection, then it works well and is very scalable. 

Every single employee in our institution uses process maker and we have approximately 20,000 employees. It is used on a daily basis, and every unit has a process that it's using at least once a day.

How are customer service and technical support?

We have a dedicated support team and if we have any problem then they will help to resolve it. They have admin rights and they can make changes. I would rate them an eight out of ten. They are helpful but when it comes to how fast they respond, it is limited by the resources they have. A lot of requests come in from the staff. It's not about quality because they will definitely solve your problem, but it may not be as quickly as you'd like.

Which solution did I use previously and why did I switch?

Prior to implementing ProcessMaker, each team had their own software. We had BPMS iPoint in my team, but other branches used different solutions. ProcessMaker is much simpler and easier to use than our previous solution, and it is also more scalable.

How was the initial setup?

The deployment was across our entire enterprise, which took several months to complete. In my team, the hard part was developing the processes, pre-deployment.

What about the implementation team?

We had a consultant to assist us with the deployment.

What was our ROI?

I believe that my team has realized ROI with this solution. We have saved a lot of costs when it comes to printing papers, although I cannot say how much it is.

What other advice do I have?

The hardest part of implementing this solution is what happens before it is deployed. We were involved in creating some of the processes that we had already been doing manually. We interacted with the IT business person to translate those processes into their business requirement that is compatible with ProcessMaker. Once we were through that stage, the rest of it was just training people on how to use the platform. At that point, it wasn't difficult for my team to use it. When you train somebody on a particular workflow, you don't have to train them a second time on a different process. It is generic and they can use the platform in their day-to-day work.

Once the system is deployed, it is pretty easy to use.

My advice for anybody who is implementing this solution is to dedicate the proper time to it. Don't rush if they want to implement it correctly. The pre-deployment stage, where each unit has to explain exactly what they need it for, is very important. The IT team has to deploy something that is relevant to the process, and it takes time. Proper planning will reduce errors, and moreover, if it is not properly planned then something will be deployed but it will not be very useful to the end-users. Ultimately, they may not end up using it at all and instead return to their manual, paper-based solution, because it's easier for them. Essentially, the end-users need to precisely and accurately communicate their requirements to the IT team, and in turn, the IT team needs to be able to deliver those requirements. With this done properly, you will be successful in deploying ProcessMaker.

Overall, this is a good product but I would like to see the support for more than just basic text, as well as some functionality for processing data.

I would rate this solution an eight out of ten. 

Which deployment model are you using for this solution?

Disclosure: I am a real user, and this review is based on my own experience and opinions.