Appian vs Pega Platform

• I have observed after version 17.1 we have a lot of good features in Appian that improve usability (UX). This adds real value in this competitive Digital space.
• You can understand business use case and convert it to a logical process automation.
• Process Modeller has improved a lot and providing smart services use adds more value.
• Service integration helps us to seamlessly integrate with third-party systems

Read full review

• Reusability
• Pega’s Situational layer cake architecture is capable of organizing application to suit enterprise needs. An enterprise can have a complex organization structure located around the globe. Because of Situational layer cake architecture reusing common policies and procedures is easy while allowing for differences between products, regions, channels and customer segments.Whereas with some application development platforms, separate copies of the application should be created to suite different business context.
• Faster application delivery
• With Pega developers can reuse common policies and procedures, replicate functions and industry specific frameworks and utilize pega UI elements to develop applications. IT is easy to deploy.Therefore developers are capable of delivering application earlier compared to some application development platforms. Pega reduces time taken to deliver an outcome.
• Pega upgrades
• Pega platform is upddated to adapt and work with latest technologies.
• Proprietary users support and maintain Pega platform continuously. Pega customer support is always willing to enhance product support.

Read full review

• Advanced functionality requires use of the Appian expression language. The more advanced the logic, the harder it is to build with the expression language. This means development expertise is more relevant if you need advanced functionality, which I imagine applies almost all the time. I would much prefer if they allowed some common language such as JavaScript out of the box.
• Debugging has proved difficult. It’s easy for developers to get the app to or feature to a “working” state but it needs robust alpha testing.
• Deployment can be tricky. When a solution gets big and there are many teams and dependencies, it needs a careful process to ensure things don’t break.
• Reasuability of Appian objects is both a pro and con. Reusing objects across apps may be more trouble than its worth because of creating heavy dependencies. Experience is helpful to strike the right balance.

Read full review

• Pega’s Strategic Apps, Cobrowse and OpenSpan offerings appeal to midmarket customers, but Pega is not aggressively promoting Pega 7 and Pega Express as stand-alone iBPMS platforms to the midmarket.
• Pega doesn't support powerful data or process modeling capabilities as compared to the other tools.
• Pega doesn't support full extraction, transformation and loading capabilities as offered by other industry-leading tools. Pega support doesn't solve tickets correctly on-time.

Read full review

• Currently we have no negative impact. We have a better follow-up on our tasks and we believe that tasks are completed faster.
• However we don't finish every project and we can't realy calculate our ROI. It's hard to give you some numbers.

Read full review

• With our framework, we have been able to build new applications in 10% of the time/cost. Example, we built an application that took 8 months and 1.2 million k in a traditional .net environment and was able to build a similar application in 60 days for about 100k
• Collaboration with the designer shaves weeks off the requirements gathering
• Standard reporting is a launchpad that allows the users to accept the system without waiting for MIS reports to follow application build which often would usually delay use for 60 to 90, but not with Pega

Read full review