No more typing reviews! Try our Samantha, our new voice AI agent.

OpenText ProVision vs SAP Signavio Process Manager comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive SummaryUpdated on Dec 18, 2024

Review summaries and opinions

We asked business professionals to review the solutions they use. Here are some excerpts of what they said:
 

Categories and Ranking

OpenText ProVision
Ranking in Business Process Management (BPM)
44th
Average Rating
6.4
Reviews Sentiment
7.2
Number of Reviews
3
Ranking in other categories
Enterprise Architecture Management (27th)
SAP Signavio Process Manager
Ranking in Business Process Management (BPM)
10th
Average Rating
8.2
Reviews Sentiment
6.8
Number of Reviews
63
Ranking in other categories
Business Process Design (4th)
 

Mindshare comparison

As of June 2026, in the Business Process Management (BPM) category, the mindshare of OpenText ProVision is 0.8%, up from 0.3% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of SAP Signavio Process Manager is 2.8%, down from 7.9% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Business Process Management (BPM) Mindshare Distribution
ProductMindshare (%)
SAP Signavio Process Manager2.8%
OpenText ProVision0.8%
Other96.4%
Business Process Management (BPM)
 

Featured Reviews

reviewer1944672 - PeerSpot reviewer
Senior Director, Head of Process & Functional Architecture, Intelligent Automation at a real estate/law firm with 10,001+ employees
Good attribute attachment but problems with collaboration
I primarily use OpenText ProVision to create our end-to-end process repository and library for different parts of the organization, capturing the collaboration process to get the right inputs OpenText ProVision's best feature is the capability to attach a variety of attributes and extract and…
Sravani Bodanapu - PeerSpot reviewer
Intelligent Ops Journey Expert at ANZ Banking Group
Process modeling has standardized complex banking workflows and drives data‑driven automation decisions
I would assess the impact of process modeling features on operational transparency as a four. I give it a four because of how well the platform could be utilized if one has a license or would be able to access it via collaborative features, and as well be able to communicate, making it less people dependent and more process dependent. A small gap of one is only because if the map has to be shared or if somebody has to work together on a map, similar to how we have Google Forms where more than two people can make changes simultaneously, the map does not allow that. One has to close it, and the next partner can only access the map after I close it. The existing changes are lost if they click on ignore or if they close the diagram. This is one feature which is sometimes bothersome. The gap of one is something that is personal feedback from my end. If someone is a newbie and they are building a map for the first time, they definitely go through a training module. But if somebody is jumping right in to build a map for the first time, which I did more than a couple of years ago, I felt that given the extent to which we have artificial intelligence capabilities right now, it would be nice if whenever you are saving a diagram and if I build it incorrectly in terms of adhering to BPMN 2.0, errors are shown, which is really nice. There are errors and warnings that need to be corrected to adhere to the standards. It is great that it allows me to save, but in order to correct the errors, if I do not understand what the error is trying to tell me. For example, sometimes it says that the element is named wrong. I understand that; it is a verb and noun that is a requirement. But sometimes it says the edge folding is not clear, and despite trying several times, I still do not get it. SAP could consider having AI capabilities to suggest how it can be done immediately on the screen itself, perhaps in the form of a virtual assistant or something. Today, for larger errors, I go to Google to check it and try to understand. If an assistant tells me that I think the arrow may be placed wrong, I think that would help me. It would save time and help me from looking up multiple dictionaries to understand what it is trying to say. At the moment, we are not integrating SAP Signavio Process Manager with existing ERP systems because internally I think we are using multiple enterprise resource planning tools. Because of that, there is a restraint to connect it with SAP Signavio Process Manager, and there is a lot of concern in terms of how data could be used because we work in a banking environment. We are not leveraging, and we have SAP S/4HANA. It would be great if there is a data lake that connects to the process, but at the moment, we do not do that. Every time we build a process, it is picked up by a different team, and they try to connect it with the data lake. It is a great feature which I think can be leveraged, but with the range of legacy systems that the company is using today, there is not much I can comment about how the ERP can be leveraged internally.

Quotes from Members

We asked business professionals to review the solutions they use. Here are some excerpts of what they said:
 

Pros

"The stability of the product is very good."
"I like that all the features come as part of a standard license and that one license covers everything."
"OpenText ProVision's best feature is the capability to attach a variety of attributes and extract and analyze that information."
"It's easy and fast. It's very quick to work with process teams in terms of improving processes. You just have to send them a URL and to have a process in front of them. I don't use all of the possibilities we have in Signavio. This has made it easier for people to adopt, because when we scrambled the process team together and started a process of improvement, it improved their process. They are much more involved than they had been earlier, and they can also use Signavio to make smaller improvements in the process for themselves. There are many more interactions between the process teams and Signavio than in our previous solution, where you had to hire in a professional process modeler. It's been a great improvement."
"The ability to leave comments in the Collaboration Hub is a good and easy way for the employees to give feedback on the processes."
"This is a leading-edge product, and it is my first choice of BPM."
"When comparing my experience with Celonis and Signavio, I can discern the distinctions between these two platforms. However, I'm unable to differentiate between ARAs and add-ons, as that falls outside my scope of familiarity. Regarding Celonis, it comes with its set of advantages and disadvantages. Notably, it boasts robust features like action flows, task mining, and seamless integration with AML programming. Conversely, Signavio lacks action flows and instead relies on action segments and tasks for interaction. This discrepancy is a significant factor setting Selenium and SecureView apart. In the context of Signavio, it offers a combination of BPMN and process discovery, a feature absent in Celonis. This tandem of BPMN and process insight contributes to Signavio’S potency. Meanwhile, Celonis primarily features the process miner tool, setting it apart from Signavio. These variations collectively outline the numerous differences existing between Celonis and Signavio."
"The solution is user-friendly."
"Version management is helpful because I like to try different versions and then decide which of them should be the main model."
"The most valuable feature is the glossary. It is really nice because all of the information is centralized, and that is a big help to the company."
"We have been using this solution for less than a year and all of the bad things that we had with the other solutions are gone."
 

Cons

"My main complaint is that the solution is not open source in the sense that you can't have your own in-house developments."
"Integrating with or interfacing with other tools like data management tools would be very helpful."
"There are a number of drawbacks. Mainly, the collaboration is lacking to some extent - at least when it comes to how we are using it."
"Lacks the ability to have your own in-house developments."
"OpenText ProVision's collaboration management is quite complicated and difficult to use."
"The user interface for the collaboration hub is antiquated and should be improved."
"SAP Signavio Process Manager's UI is not user-friendly. Its pricing is also high."
"I think the intuitive handling is an issue which they should be more focused on, especially as we have issues with the glossary."
"The reporting is too slow and there is a limit of 250 processes."
"SAP Signavio Process Manager needs better automatic rendering of data."
"The workflow automation of the solution is an area of concern where improvements are required."
"I would like to be able to include images in the documentation."
"I would like to see more predictive analytics. The tool already has all the process maps, but it could offer a more proactive improvement offering. For example, they could put a little bit more machine learning behind it."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

Information not available
"Comparatively, it is a bit costly when you look at similar tools with similar features."
"The solution is expensive."
"The solution is quite expensive compared to other vendors."
"We are using the free trial version."
"I think that the price of the licenses is between $2,000 USD and $3,000 USD per license per year, plus the hub usage. I cannot remember the exact cost, but it is affordable."
"I think we're spending about $150,000 a year on licensing costs."
"I rate the product price a five on a scale of one to ten, where one is low price and ten is high price."
"It is expensive. The license is monthly."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Business Process Management (BPM) solutions are best for your needs.
900,747 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Manufacturing Company
15%
Construction Company
15%
Energy/Utilities Company
10%
Comms Service Provider
8%
Manufacturing Company
13%
Financial Services Firm
9%
Computer Software Company
8%
Healthcare Company
7%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
No data available
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business17
Midsize Enterprise6
Large Enterprise45
 

Questions from the Community

Ask a question
Earn 20 points
Which is better - Signavio Process Manager or Celonis?
SAP Signavio Process Manager is a very robust industrial-grade business process modeling tool. It is easy to use and does not require too much technological involvement. This solution has a collabo...
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Signavio Process Manager?
I am not aware of the pricing and licensing of SAP Signavio Process Manager in the current firm I am working for. However, in my last company, Fidelity International, I was introduced to SAP Signav...
What advice do you have for others considering Signavio Process Manager?
I do use the collaborative workspace feature of SAP Signavio Process Manager. Our stakeholders who are outside of SAP Signavio Process Manager environment do use the collaborative feature because t...
 

Also Known As

Metastorm ProVision
Signavio Process Editor
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Delta Technology, Export Development Canada, Rompetrol, Salt River Project, AMEC, U.S. Air Force, HP Consulting & Integration
DHL, Coca Cola EP, Prudential, Zalando, T-Systems, Jabil, Endress+Hauser, Rakuten
Find out what your peers are saying about OpenText ProVision vs. SAP Signavio Process Manager and other solutions. Updated: June 2026.
900,747 professionals have used our research since 2012.