ProcessMaker vs. Qlerify

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.

Incentivized

Extremely well suited for process development and since it closes the gap between ICT and Business, for software development. It is less appropriate in cases where swimlane type of process map doesn't suit well.

• 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.

Incentivized

• Streamlined UI
• Real-time collaboration
• Jira integration

• 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.

Incentivized

• We would have like to known about them a bit earlier.

We are happy with this product

Incentivized

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.

Incentivized

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.

I haven't officially evaluated other process mapping tools. I have however used many tool during the past 30 years. Qlerify is first I am excited about.

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.

Incentivized

• 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.

Incentivized

• It has enabled me to achieve results faster
• Qlerify helps find better solutions
• Qlerify has enabled results we have not achieved with other tools
• Qlerify's collaboration features improve team and management buy-in