Azuqua was a tool that helped users integrate their SaaS applications and build custom automations. It was acquired by Okta in late 2019, and is now part of Okta Workflows. Okta Workflows leverages Azuqua’s workflow orchestration engine and application integrations to automate complex identity-centric processes such as user onboarding and offboarding. The product is available as part of the Okta Lifecycle Management…
N/A
ProcessMaker
Score 8.9 out of 10
N/A
ProcessMaker is a process automation platform that helps organizations optimize and scale their business operations. By combining workflow automation, AI-driven decision-making, and advanced analytics, ProcessMaker empowers businesses to streamline complex processes, improve efficiency, and enhance customer experiences.
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.
The task mining component is well suited for processes where there are a lot of steps performed in a variety of systems, particularly by a single individual on a team. It also requires a robust activity ID to be able to track an activity. It is not well suited when trying to track a process where the content is in an email.
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.
User interface. It is clean and easy to understand. You won't get overwhelmed the second you log in.
The workflow maker. With a drag and drop interface, you can easily visualize and implement what you want on the screen. Out of all the programs we tested, this one had the easiest process maker and designer.
Ease of understanding. My biggest recommendation would be that this program is easy to access for anyone. There are complications (see negatives) but this program can be implemented quickly and efficiently, and nearly anyone can learn to use it. You will not feel like you are in the dark with it.
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.
Complications when you get to the more advanced pieces. When trialing, I found that the more advanced a process got, the more complicated it got for me in coding. When you begin using the more advanced features, you will find that you need to have a basic knowledge of coding - otherwise you won't go any further. This was my sole issue. Unfortunately, it was one that would have brought the school to a grinding halt if they were to ever get more complicated than they were.
The system is working as it should, keeping our programs safe from outside hackers. Helping us keep our passwords safe, convenient and already ready to get us logged into the program securely and quickly. Verification that only authorized users are able to access our company's programs. Okta Workflows (Azuqua) is a very good system that has helped our company greatly.
I gave this overall rating for ProcessMaker due to its overall flexibility, design and ease of use for most. Examples of this from us include it being an excellent and trustworthy tool for automating processes, the abilities and capabilities for real-time process tracking and the web-based accessibility and implementation which allows for easy access and management of the tool.
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.
Before making the decision to get ProcessMaker, we assessed different and best options in the market, which are also quite competitive. KiSSFLOW, Blueworks Live, and Bizagi, being the most relevant and ADONIS, to mention the ones we consider the most relevant and capable of meeting our needs. In the end, we went for ProcessMaker because of mainly three things as described before: 1. Real-time process status tracking. 2. Metrics and dashboards. 3. Ease of use for constructing diagrams.
The capability is robust and quite industry agnostic. It would benefit significantly with some out of the box models - e.g. procure to pay on SAP and similar. They could also develop industry specific examples which could kickstart the implementation for organizations.
I'm using Communication edition to introduce BPMN in my organization. I can build the first process in a short time, make my boss more confident with my job.
But, with ProcessMaker, we need more time to design code to handle the process, and without PHP/Javascript Programmer, it seems hard to work with more and more processes online.
However, IE Browser is not well supported, somewhat let the user confuse.
