MEGA HOPEX Reviews

Personally, I have not worked in the production side for this product. I am on the engineering side and perform maintenance on different solutions in the company, including this one.

I am assisting a local company with its maintenance at two different sites. For the most part, 95%, MEGA HOPEX is being used for change management. It is also being used for incident management.

The most valuable feature is that the software controls everything from a single management window. That is a real plus

I would like to see more regular updates released.

The deployment should be made easier.

I have been using MEGA HOPEX for about a year and a half.

This solution is stable for the end-users; however, it is not stable on the development side. Working from the cloud means working from a non-management platform.

HOPEX is quite scalable. The company that I am working with has approximately 200 people using this solution. Some of the are engineers, whereas others are technicians.

It was harder to follow the documentation than I expected.

I have never set up a production site, although I have set up a development site. I can say that it wasn't easy but it wasn't hard, either. The difficulty and complexity of the initial setup is somewhere in the middle.

Deploying to the 200 sites took approximately two months.

I had some assistance from other engineers in my company when I deployed within the development environment. I also received a little bit of technical help from the vendor.

My advice to anybody who is implementing this solution is to consider using VMware because it has been helpful for us. I would also suggest getting help with the implementation.

I would rate this solution an eight out of ten.

The most valuable features for us are related to business processes.

The features are limited. I'm hoping in the future the solution will be bigger and include more items. Right now, overall, it needs more.

I've been using the solution for three years so far.

At first, the solution wasn't too stable. It's improved. Now it's okay.

The solution is scalable. If a company needs to expand it, it's completely possible to do so. 

We only have one person currently working on the solution.

The initial implementation has a moderate amount of difficulty. It's mostly easy, but there were a few items in the release I implemented that were challenging. 

Deployment took us about three days. It didn't take too long.

The licensing is on a yearly basis. I'm not sure exactly what the yearly costs are, as I don't handle this aspect of the solution. I believe it may be around $2,000-$3,000.

We're only customers. We aren't partners or resellers of the solution.

I'm not sure which version of the solution we're currently using.

I'd rate the solution seven out of ten. The solution is one of the best. We've been very happy with it.

I don't use MEGA HOPEX myself, but I deliver it to my clients. Our clients' primary use case of this solution is for IT portfolio management. Our clients use it to determine things like application redundancy or if they want to get an overview of the full landscape of the application architecture. Also if they want to know the conflict detection between the application life cycle and the technology life cycle that supports the application.

I find the IT portfolio management very valuable and helpful.

The support service form MEGA is quite good, but it could be better regarding the EA system competition is getting tougher. I feel that there isn't enough time spent on conservation or knowledge sharing with the MEGA support team. The extensive knowledge sharing is needed, due to MEGA HOPEX has a comprehensive but also complex practical framework. I feels very often struggle to figure out the capabilities of MEGA HOPEX, especially how to maximize the utility of the system.

I have been working with MEGA HOPEX for two years now.

My experience is that stability depends on the customization. If you use basic customization, it's quite stable, but if you have many customizations, I cannot say it's stable.

But if you have moderate customization, it's quite stable I think. The client must be able to adjust the requirements of the application. 

We haven't tried to scale yet, but I believe it's quite big scalable for all layers of EA.

I work closely with the technical support team of MEGA HOPEX. If we can't get a solution for a client, we ask the technical team to give us some guidelines on how to resolve the problem.

The initial setup wasn't too complex, but it wasn't easy either. Sometimes you will need to get help from an engineer that has technical knowledge.

Deployment doesn't take too long. If the client doesn't have high compliance security, it will take between two or three weeks. It took us almost two months to do the upgrade. But it wasn't caused by the system. It was caused by the security compliance. 

It's  better if it's the price is more flexible.

I think that MEGA HOPEX is a comprehensive EA solution, but the challenge is how to use it properly so that it works for your organization. On a scale from one to 10, I rate it an eight. 

We use this solution for capability assessment and modeling business processes.

This solution provides a shared repository for EA artifacts and enterprise components.

The most valuable feature of this solution is the reuse of common enterprise components and entities.

The tool usability is weak and it also has a high learning curve.

Currently, we are just using the business model's architecture and MEGA's architecture.

The IT portfolio is the most useful feature. The IT portfolio management is becoming more advanced and more easy for the IT management to generate revenue, to see the gaps within management with the portfolio management application. However, in the end, we didn't use it. I could not convince our management to implement the solution, even though I thought it seemed interesting.

The solution is really expensive. I sent this same feedback six months ago. I told them they have a lot of opportunities in the Middle East to fill the small and medium businesses niche, even using the cloud. But, the product is very, very costly. 

They do tend to push people to their professional services, instead of helping the customers with their problems. I understand this is their business. At the same time, however, they need to work on fact sheets or offer some program to help the customers who want to implement it themselves and to make it run properly in their environment. The company seems only interested in selling and not customer satisfaction. I'm not asking for anything for free, I'm just asking them to invest a bit in helping their customers implement their technology correctly.

The documentation needs to be more clearly explained. The documentation gives the customers an indication that everything is available, but when they buy the module, they discover that the pieces that they are looking for are not available in the current module, or that they are available in a different module. Then, the user needs to buy a different module or use professional services even though they thought these items were included. It's confusing.

I can't speak for it on a large-scale since we only used it on a smaller scale, but we didn't face a lot of issues. What problems we did have, the security team dealt with easily, so we didn't have many issues at all. It's good.

Technical support is very good. However, they are limited. They cannot support me further because we actually need their professional services, which I cannot access at this point. You need to pay for it. Sometimes, if I try to make some customization they inform me that it's actually a professional service and they redirect me to that community instead. The community website is not mature. It's okay, but it doesn't offer the help I need. If it is a small customization for a POC, they should still be able to help without charging the company. I understand that some customizations need professional services, but these customizations help you sustain your technology within the environment, and the company should want to help ensure the customer is satisfied with the tech.

Previously, I just used Excel and Visio.

The initial setup was straightforward. With configuration, customizing or prepping the data and deployment, it took about one year to set up. We only needed two people to deploy and maintain the solution: one business architect and someone who specializes in customization and operations.

Since we set up the solution, then stopped working on it, then started again, we had to reconfigure everything. I created a new environment and I installed the new version and I migrated the old version over. The solution's technical support assisted with the migration when we re-started using the solution over the past year.

The solution is very expensive, and the company constantly directs users to their professional services, which also costs money.

We don't use the solution on a large scale. We mainly just use it in the IT department. We're using the on-premises deployment solution.

Originally, about two years ago, we set up the solution, then we froze work on it. Recently we started it up again, but it needed to re-configure the solution because our business requirements had changed.

MEGA typically exceeds most of the needs of a client in terms of what they offer.

As for advice to others considering using this solution, I'd say this: you need to study the modules and to match them to your business requirements before you begin so you don't buy something you don't need or won't use. Make sure you know what you need before entering into an agreement.

I would rate the solution at eight out of ten but they need to enhance their way of filling the modules because as of right now, it's not ideal for the customer.

Our primary use case for this solution is process modeling.

The most valuable feature for this solution is the automatic updating and propagation of changes across the system. For example, when we make a change in one of our organizational charts, the changes are automatically made in all of the other processes. This saves us time as compared to in the past when this had to be done manually.

It is a user-friendly solution.

We use this solution for modeling and we do not have an application side to create forms and deploy applications. It would be helpful if we could use this solution to model an application and then deploy it.

If would be better for us if there was a cloud version of this solution available. 

Continuous integration and DevOps is not yet handled by this solution.

We would like to see integration with other products, such as being able to use our workflow with SharePoint and Microsoft Office.

The stability of this solution is ok.

The scalability of this product is something that we found issues with during migration. I would rate the scalability of this solution at sixty percent.

It is only my team, the Quality Department, who uses this solution and there are four of us. The other people in the company refer to the reports that it produces but do not use the product directly.

I would rate this solution's technical support a six out of ten.

I have also used Kissflow, which is able to handle both the organizational side and the application side. Using that solution we can model, create forms, and deploy it like an app. We can have a workflow to help organize the company. It isn't just for understanding how a process works.

The initial setup for this solution was straightforward and easy.

We did have a problem with migration from an older version to a newer one. There was an issue where our administrator made an error and we lost data. We spoke with our partner and they suggested that we should pay because it was our mistake. In the end, we lost thirty percent of our data.

We bought this solution directly from the vendor in Morocco, and they helped us with the implementation. It was really good.

If you want to use additional features, such as the Risk Management capability, then it is a little too expensive.

This solution can be used for modeling, and the publication for employees to consult on the process and design. It can not be used to automate processes or create an application. Therefore, if you want it for enterprise architecture and modeling then it is a very good solution. On the other hand, if you want it for process automation then it is not.

When we migrated to this solution it was difficult. I don't think that we had enough documentation. We felt it was important to switch to the new version because the older one is no longer supported. The impression we have is that when you want to do something like a migration, they want you to pay extra consulting fees. For mid-sized companies, this is sometimes not in the budget.

It is a little bit frustrating that we do not have process automation. Without this, we cannot scale this solution to the new services of our company.  

I would rate this solution a six out of ten.

• Business processes
• Holistic modeling of an enterprise
  
• Its city planning of an enterprise information system.

Generates friendly websites and presents specific views of the enterprise (business, functional, applicative, technological, and infrastructure).

• Collaborative portal
• You do not need to be a professional of enterprise modeling to contribute to the enrichment and improvement of the enterprise repository.

• Friendlier import/export to other modeling tools.
• Better interaction with project portfolio management tools.

• Operational Risk Management - Risk and Control Self Assessment (RCSA)
• Operational Risk Event Reporting and Operational Loss Database Management
• Control Log for corrective action plans.

MEGA offers a more integrated GRC platform to facilitate enhanced coordination between the functions of Risk, Compliance, and Internal Audit on a single platform solution - HOPEX. The product for us is still in the testing/onboarding phase, hence I cannot give a firm opinion on the product's performance.

So far, the GUI seems more visually appealing than the traditional Nasdaq-BWise application that I am used to. The dashboard on the homepage makes for an enhanced view at a glance of the various work functions applicable to the user. The tabs seem to show a wide array of functions and a promise of higher interactivity.

Standardization is lacking. The Operational Risk Function will be more effective if it at a default level follows established Basel standards for Loss categorization, Risk Assessments, Risk Event categorization, etc.