Celigo vs. Okta Workflows (Azuqua)

Celigo is great for transaction-based integrations (which is most), but not great for when you want to replicate data from one system to a database. For example, if you are trying to get all of your NetSuite data into a Snowflake database. However, if you are trying to get data out of NetSuite and create transactions in another system, it's perfect.

Azuqua is well suited to connect data based systems or to add an extra level of automation to Smartsheet without requiring the control center. It is also well suited for people who don't have in depth understandings of programming. The UI is mostly visual with click and drag systems instead of requiring manually entered variables.

Incentivized

• Error handling
• Template handling
• Cost

Incentivized

• The concept of reduced code to simplify use by less technical teams lowers the barriers to integration and allows teams to collaborate with ideas and concepts much easier
• The ability to review simply any error cases simplifies the old approaches of debugging and reviewing large and complex logs
• While not strictly part of the platform the support team's efforts to assist, to help clarify issues and then (where necessary) to resolve bugs was a large benefit and a key driver to extend the platform's footprint.

Incentivized

• AI would be amazing.
• Shorter wait for project kick-off.

Incentivized

• The lack of connection/card documentation. Every card does have a section with details, but they are sometimes lacking.
• The help center and community also need some structuring work. Every single connection/app should have a section with detailed documentation regarding its triggers and actions.
• The FLO history section needs to be more refined. It sometimes does not load and choosing the date doesn't actually show execution results from that particular day.

Incentivized

Had some rough patches in the beginning, but they were resolved.

Incentivized

Celigo handles errors much much better. Celigo stores templates all in one place making them much easier to find. Celigo interacts with your database as you are working allowing you to pull picklist values right from your db Celigo does not upsert large datasets as quickly and can take quite some time

Incentivized

I had to use the Automate tool for funneling image assets in bulk (tens of thousands) from FTPs into various destinations on an eCommerce platform. The user interface was quite harsh in comparison to Azuqua. Far more text/code line driven.

Incentivized

• Adding additional sales channels for our eCommerce business which drove additional sales
• Real time inventory updates to website to limit overselling
• Operational efficiencies by no longer having to manually input data

• It is very good to maintain customers updated.
• It is good so we can not delay on our responses, and customers keep confidence in us.
• We are able to work multiple persons on a single case without having dificulties on finishing the tasks.

Incentivized