Nintex Process Platform Reviews

It has a lot of features for creating and managing workflows, as well as for integrating with other applications. Nintex offers features, particularly to ensure a user-friendly experience.

At times, issues arise in certain scenarios. In such cases, the versioning can become quite difficult. There may be no other way but to restart the entire process or rectify it at that point.  

So, there is room for improvement in terms of the stability of this solution.

In future releases, Access-related features are important because a lot of data is stored in Excel in most organizations. So whenever we need to upload this data, we need to have workflow features that can validate each row and other data before inserting it into the software system. These features are not available in the standard version. We are not looking for a one-time import of data. Instead, we want to be able to process the data in real-time using DXL. This is one of the things we are looking for. 

The second is the ability to create Word reports. A report that is created in Microsoft Word.

This is a very common type of report, and it is used to present data in a clear and concise way. I would like to be able to create different types of word reports, such as listing reports and formatted reports. But Nintex does not provide any control over MS Word to control and format it. I would like to see MS-related connectivity with Nintex Workflow.

I have been using this solution for more than six years. However, we used the on-premise version, which had certain limitations in comparison with a cloud version. 

I am satisfied with the customer service and support.

Positive

We have worked with Nintex and SharePoint.

The solution is expensive compared to its competitors. 

We are actually in the process of evaluating low-code tools in this space. We are looking for a private cloud under the Azure cloud environment. 

The on-premise version of Nintex Workflow was good for the workload that we were using.

However, the trend has changed, and now all the features are available on the cloud, not on-premise. So we have to move to the cloud.

We are cost-sensitive, so we can't just move the tool to the cloud directly. We need to evaluate and understand our requirements first. And since we are in the pharma industry, we need to make sure that the software is compliant with Part 11 regulations. For Nintex and other products, we need to develop them with those features in mind. So, that's an additional layer of customization that is required for all these platforms. That's why we are looking for a ready-made product that is compliant with Part 11 and FDA regulations.

So it will be easier for us, and it will reduce the need for customization. So in that sense, we are basically evaluating the different options. It was never a key factor for us, but we are not happy with Nintex, so that's why we are not considering it. This is the product we have been using for the past 6-7 years, and it was one of the best ones because it integrated well with SharePoint. We hardly had to do any customizations in SharePoint because everything was created locally.

If I consider the standard version, I would rate it eight out of ten. However, the enterprise version has some additional features that I would like to use, but the cost in not so fair. So if I factor in the cost, I would rate it lower, maybe around seven out of ten.

We use K2 as a business process management tool in our company that is connected with our applications. Also, we are using an American-based workflow engine besides K2. We also use ELSA, an open-source platform.

Mainly, we use the tool for automation and workflow. So, we are using ASP.NET for development. Also, we are connected with K2 tool.

Our company needs K2 as an engine. We don't prefer to use the forms because the overall cost is high. Because of this, we have to go to workflowengine.io since it gives us the same results at very low prices. It's not restricted to processes or something like this.

AI is the most required functionality in tools nowadays in the market. The tool lacks to offer support for the Arabic language, and it needs consideration.

My company has been using K2 for two years.

It is not a stable solution.

It is not a scalable solution because of its high prices. We also need K2 engine for small businesses for 50k USD since small businesses are already using other tools for form building. We need something similar to a workflow engine. We use a Russian product offering good protection since it is a .NET-based workflow engine, and its server also can use any programming language. We turned to this tool owing to K2's high prices since, in the end, we ended up paying 300k USD. 100 to 5,000 users work on the solution.

The technical support is very good.

We had previously evaluated other workflow engines, a Russian product. We also used SharePoint Nintex. We switched to K2 since we use Visual Studio for the automation process and to develop our own portal using ASP.NET. So, we don't want more than the required license for forms and other components that we don't need or don't use.

The setup process was not too hard or difficult to understand. It was acceptable since there were no technical issues.

I have seen a return on investment using the solution. So, it is worth the money for its workflow engine and not the forms since I don't need them. Also, I developed the forms using a third-party application which was cheaper.

Prices for licenses of K2 are high. We bought a distributed license for 35k USD. Also, we pay an annual subscription of around 20k. Sometimes we try to lift K2 to higher prices. I need a license for SMBs and distributors, for which I pay around 50k USD. Also, I need a distributed license for our project.

I don't recommend others to start with K2 because of its high prices. There are other components that fit the needs of K2 that will not consider reducing their prices. I rate the overall product an eight out of ten.

We have predominantly been using the solution as the front end for automation solutions. I'm a program manager. We don't have a direct link to K2, but we work closely with them and carry out a lot of maintenance and other work through them. So it's quite a deep-rooted relationship.

The biggest selling point for us was that the solution had out of box connectivity with UiPath and we didn't have to write any custom code to be able to invoke UiPath bots and automation solutions. That worked well for us in the past but when you talk about other specific functionalities, like the applications or authentication on native operating systems for mobiles and those kinds of things, K2 is lacking big time. The solution doesn't really have a good set up and I think as more and more businesses want app rather than desktop systems or web systems, K2 is not necessarily the best solution going forward.

The solution is heavy and cumbersome and it has a very stringent way of doing things. It's not difficult but at the same time it's not flexible enough. If you don't do it properly, you can't render it on mobile properly and it just runs into a lot of issues. I think what we need is a more flexible platform that can actually give us that option, a second option or a main option, to move away from K2. We run into issues at times and it's mainly around the way we design applications and mainly around how we want to use applications. It restricts us in a very specific way to be able to fully utilize the capability. I think K2 is a bit far from being a perfect mobile development platform. We'd like to look at Microsoft as an option.

I've been using this solution for three years. 

Scalability is a kind of dependent thing. Essentially, it would require infrastructure and IT development to be able to do anything with the infra scalability or the platform scalability. We haven't tried it. We do know that when we want to sync up different environments, it's not that straightforward. I mean it's not complex, but it has a lot of activities. It's not a straight sync up between the two servers. You have to do a lot of tasks including download packages. It's a bit annoying because it takes up too much time from the ops team to be able to sync the two environments, especially when you're uploading packages that at times are not compatible. Again, it could be dependent on the way we've set it up on-prem. I don't necessarily know if that's a K2 issue or if it's an infra issue on our end, but assume it's likely both.

I haven't dealt with technical support because our ops team does that if they ever have to.

I'm a massive fan of K2 even though it's given me a bit of trouble in the past. Essentially, I think there are good features in there as well. It really comes down to your personal requirements, I believe. It's supposed to be a kind of designer-based application, work flow creation application or platform but I personally think that it takes a lot more technical ability to be able to design applications on K2. It requires more than somebody off the street, you need someone who can actually do a bit of design work and be able to spin up a really good application. It's not marketed properly, it's marketed as a designable application platform. But it's not necessarily, it requires a bit of programming knowledge.

The other thing I guess would be whether you want to pay for the licensing cost. There is a price for the K2 environment, does that suit you and your organization? That's something which you need to consider. Finally, K2 is also really hard to find, to be honest, and it comes at a premium so there's that maintenance cost as well or even development costs, which may be a lot higher than any other application that you may use. 

It's given us applications that are stable once you get it right. We haven't had many issues in terms of applications falling over or not responding, things like that. It can be a bit slow if it's database-intensive applications. Again, that could be a mixture of both infrastructure and also K2 application.

I would rate this solution a six out of 10. 

We use the Nintex Process Platform to connect internal users across different departments, streamlining workflows and collaboration. As an international organization adhering to evolving standards, Nintex provides a flexible and scalable platform that integrates seamlessly with the Microsoft ecosystem to build a comprehensive collaborating environment. It serves as a fundamental layer, enabling efficient communication and data exchange among our teams.

The latest version of Nintex has many features. We have a clear roadmap and the necessary application to integrate it into our platform.

The solution does not integrate with many platforms.

I have been using Nintex Process Platform for several years.

I rate the solution’s stability a nine out of ten.

I rate the solution’s scalability an eight out of ten.

We have the consultant doing the deployment.

The initial setup is straightforward. It depends on the situation and the context of workflow. I take one or two days to complete the setup.

The solution doesn’t have an extra fee. We are compatible with the package.

Nintex is running much smoother after installing the new version of Nintex Connect on our platform.

While we initially tried using consultants, we found it more effective to collaborate directly with our users. This user-centric approach has helped us identify key technical aspects of Nintex.

Overall, I rate the solution an eight out of ten.

Some time ago, I implemented a demo in Nintex for various use cases such as getting emails from the team, reading the email, writing the email, opening the email, and getting the attachment.

My team and I created a demo using Nintex, focusing on getting emails, reading, writing, and managing attachments. However, we did not explore Nintex Process Platform's full potential, and our hands-on usage was limited to demonstrations.

The user interface in Nintex needs improvement. It is not very intuitive and requires changes. Additionally, the deployment process should be easier.

My team and I have been familiar with Nintex Process Platform for about one year, mainly for learning.

I rate Nintex's stability as an eight out of ten.

I rate Nintex's scalability as an eight out of ten.

The technical support provided by Nintex is very helpful, which I rate as nine out of ten.

Positive

The Nintex Process Platform serves as an alternative solution, similar to UiPath. However, our company has Nintex, and thus I recommend Nintex to customers.

The installation process for Nintex required about two weeks.

The installation was supported by the distributor, and I am not certain about the exact number of people involved from my side.

Nintex Process Platform is expensive. Prices relate to both features and the professional services necessary due to our lack of an implementation team.

Overall, I would recommend Nintex Process Platform to others.

I'd rate the solution eight out of ten.

Nintex creates forms and digital workflows to automate processes. There is a decision-making engine built using business rules. We specifically use this solution for remittance processes for a bank.

Before using Nintex, we had a manual process which started with sending an email. This process is now 50% automated. We upload a form to start the workflow and the process follows certain business rules. For example, if an amount of money is more than or less than a specific amount, the automation sends it to a specific department. 

This solution is very easy to use and customize, using almost zero coding. It's built on SharePoint which many companies in our country have experience with. This made it easy to adapt the application in our environment.

We would like to have access to an on-premises solution. In our country, we have a relationship with Central Bank of Egypt, which do noes not allow cloud solutions to be used. They should offer an on-premises solution with a flexible price license.

The knowledge base for this solution could be improved and expanded upon. Currently, it takes time to find the specific answers we are looking for. 

I have used this solution for one year. 

This is a stable solution with good performance. However, stability and performance is dependant on capacity planning before the implementation. 

This is a scalable solution, however, some features are not available on the on-premises solution. An external vendor's assistance is needed to overcome this. 

The customer support team could offer faster assistance. It would help if they had a local team in Egypt to assist.

Neutral

The initial setup was straightforward but the customization of the system was time consuming. We started with a POC, worked in a test environment to complete customization and integrate with our full system and then pushed this to production. This whole process took two years. 

We have been able to free up time for our team members to focus on other projects. 

This solution is affordable and is cheaper than most alternatives on the market. We have a standard cloud license that costs about 20k per year.

We evaluated Bizagi, Appian and Pega.

I would rate this solution a seven out of ten. 

Our searches are automated for the approval process, and we have automated our dual management process with K2.

We have 41 processes automated within K2.

It was only a process automation tool for workflows and approval, but now since being bought out by Nintex, we will have many other products available to use. For example, the RPA part of Nintex can plug into K2 and be used together.

The most valuable features of this solution are that it's no code, it's very flexible, and it's easy to design.

Currently, it's taking quite some time to deploy a package, it needs improvement. If they can simplify the deployment then it would be helpful. 

I would like to see a versioning tool included within K2 similar to Visual Studio to do your versioning of programs. It would be very useful and assist us a lot.

If they could also include an RPA as a tool, or integrate it with RPA products. It would be beneficial, as we wouldn't have to purchase anything else.

I have been using K2 for eight years.

We are using the latest version.

It's a stable solution. It is one of the features I like most.

It's a scalable product. We have approximately 4,000 AD users for this solution in our organization.

We have had no problems with the technical support at all.

Previously, we used Lotus Notes for workflows and approvals. 

The initial setup is very straightforward.

I have a development team of four people on safety.

There is an initial fee when purchasing and a fee for maintenance afterward.

It is not an expensive solution.

We have plans to continue using this solution and I would definitely recommend it.

I would rate K2 an eight out of ten.

So we have a process flow for which we wanted to use Nintex Workflow. So in SharePoint currently, we have set up that Nintex Workflow. So users used to submit and raise requests in the solution, and that is used to trigger the automatic workflows on the fact that a ticket is raised. Then, the approvals are taken. So all those things we had coded in Nintex Workflow. So, the solution was for some kind of an approval process within our company because there are multiple stakeholders, so it goes to multiple stakeholders for approval, and they approve it. All that happens when working with Nintex Workflow.

Within Nintex Workflow, I think the automatic triggering of the multiple workflows and the setting up of the auto trigger of those workflows are some of the valuable features of the solution. So that is nice.

I think we could have more interfaces with other applications. So I think it was lacking a little bit in its multiple in-house processes and other processes. So there is a little bit of a gap in collaboration.

I have experience with Nintex Workflow. I have been using the solution for a year. I am a customer of the solution.

I rate the solution's stability a seven out of ten. Sometimes it breaks, and then we need to manually restart Nintex Workflow, so it had that kind of intermittent disturbances.

I rate the solution's scalability an eight out of ten. There weren't any scalability issues, really. I think that we found it to be a little bit of a scalable device, but we were not able to achieve it. So there were limitations. So, maybe on the SharePoint side, there would be a limitation that we can raise only these many requests, and the space is about to get full. So that kind of scalability issue, I can remember.

In my organization, around 1,000 users were using the solution.

I never contacted Nintex Workflow's support team.

I think the initial setup is fine.

To those planning to use it, I think it's a good tool to start with.

I rate the overall solution an eight out of ten.