Aurea Process vs. CA Unicenter Network and Systems Management (Discontinued)

The tool has potential. Its capabilities and visual aspects could be considered rather basic but this might improve, particularly if the business intelligence/analytics aspect is leveraged. Once running well, it could allow (perhaps smaller) companies to successfully improve their customers' experiences through digitalizing customer journey - and we all know that customer loyalty goes a long way. However, whether or not the tool is comprehensive enough to deliver this for larger companies with more complex, multi- and omni-channel interactions is yet to be seen...

Incentivized

It's a decent system if you're a pure IT shop and want to become ITIL-aligned. It forces everyone into an ITIL mentality - service level agreements, change management, and asset tracking. It's very rote, for better and for worse. It's not appropriate at all as a customer-facing or non-IT facing self-service tool. You will never get your end users to really understand how to use the interface.

Incentivized

• Face-lifted platforms: CX Messenger (formerly Sonic), CX Monitor (formerly Actional), CX Process (formerly Savvion)
• User-friendly UI
• Relatively painless implementation

Incentivized

• ITIL ticketing (incidents, problems, etc.).
• Change orders.
• Matching up its asset management system with incidents/change orders.

Incentivized

• Standard edition is significantly lighter touch than the (pricier) Enterprise version
• There are similar solutions on the market that are competitively prices and offer positive user experience
• Data migration can be tricky at times

Incentivized

• The user interface (UX) is antiquated and clunky. Compared to ServiceNow, it feels like it's 15 years behind.
• It's complicated - We do routine internal training just to get people to use it correctly.
• It doesn't have an automated way of discovering assets. Everything has to be force-fed.

Incentivized

We have to hire 2 full-time 3rd-party consultants to run this application. That tells me it's not a very IT-friendly, vendor-supported application. Compare that with, say, SolarWinds, which is much easier for regular IT staff to customize without sacrificing features and capability. Sure, we have to bring in Loop1 to consult for us when we need to do a major SolarWinds config change or need a really unusual custom query built, but we never need more than 10 hours of consulting per month.

Incentivized

I did not select CA. If it were up to me, I would migrate us to ServiceNow. The user interface on ServiceNow is 100% more modern and 200% more user friendly. With ServiceNow, the front page for end users makes it clear: one button that says "Ask for something" and one button that says "Report a problem". That's what our end users need. The biggest problem we have in our organization is that our end users don't report issues to the Help Desk often enough and rarely ask for things through the Help Desk. A clean, simple self-service option like this would open up a world of new information for our customer service team.

Incentivized

• As our customers vary in size and maturity, the ROI ranges accordingly.
• For younger, smaller businesses this is a useful tool. Digitalization of he customer journey has certainly helped save time and efforts in many cases.
• For more mature market players the tool is not always comprehensive enough. Dashboard and report personalization take time and efforts, and sometimes it feels that a dedicated BI tool would be a more suitable solution.

Incentivized

• It helped make us an ITIL shop.
• It was integral during our large IT consolidation 10 years ago in merging 10 different IT departments into one by converging on one ticketing system for all IT issues.
• Its lack of user-friendliness has gated us from being able to deploy a true self-service IT help desk.

Incentivized