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
Pricing
Okta Workflows (Azuqua)
Editions & Modules
No answers on this topic
Offerings
Pricing Offerings
Okta Workflows (Azuqua)
Free Trial
No
Free/Freemium Version
No
Premium Consulting/Integration Services
No
Entry-level Setup Fee
Optional
Additional Details
—
More Pricing Information
Community Pulse
Okta Workflows (Azuqua)
Considered Both Products
Okta Workflows (Azuqua)
Verified User
Employee
Chose Okta Workflows (Azuqua)
I think Okta is so much more complete and FUB is more only sales oriented instead of Customer Service, with Okta you can call, chat, get in contact internally with other departments, and do different things to solve customer issue.
I evaluated Zapier and Microsoft Flow before coming across Azuqua. Zapier was too simplistic and didn't allow for transfer of enough variables. The price point also didn't work for the value it could provide. Microsoft Flow couldn't make the connection with Smartsheet, and I …
Stampley - on the surface they look similar, but I came across this alternative after integrating with Azuqua so I haven't fully evaluated it against Azuqua.
I have used Mulesoft, Workato, my own code and in past years heavyweight data (e.g. ETL) platforms along with a number of bus technologies. In this case, I was looking for the cloud-based approach that matches our strategy of being totally cloud-focused along with simpler …
Azuqua was the first application we assessed for our purposes, and served our needs so well that we felt no need to search further. It gave us the solutions we needed in a way that was easy to set up and maintain, and the support we received was above and beyond expectations, …
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.
Azuqua offered the most customization of the other platforms we tried. While it was comparably intuitive to use, in terms of entry level, Azuqua maintained this intuitiveness at higher levels of sophistication/integration whereas the other platforms either lacked the same logic …
Smartsheet notifications is the main competitor for what we use Azuqua for. When we got Azuqua, there was no competitor and Smartsheet actually recommended it as the solution. Now, we split up the work between the 2 tools and use Smartsheet for the easier notifications and …
Easy to build out complex if/then scenarios and fire of multiple other workflows within one workflow. Like the UI of seeing how data is being utilizes, ported, and manipulated across the workflows. Also like the workflow history for optimization as well as troubleshooting. Raw …
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 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.
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.
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.