Pipefy Reviews

My main use case for Pipefy involves its intuitive user-friendly interface. I am impressed with how easy it was to get started and use complex features without feeling overwhelmed. With this efficient tool, I was able to quickly create functional flowcharts that accurately represented my idea or plan, making it a very invaluable resource for professionals.

Pipefy facilitates real-time communication between team members, which makes collaboration much easier than using traditional design documents. Overall, I find Pipefy's mobile app extremely useful because I can use it on the go.

Pipefy has positively impacted my organization by helping us save on time and cost through automation of repetitive tasks and reduction of errors. It facilitates real-time communication between team members, which makes collaboration much easier than using traditional design documents.

It has a very intuitive and user-friendly interface where it is easy to get started and use complex features without feeling overwhelmed. Pipefy's mobile app is very intuitive and user-friendly, allowing me to use it on the go, and I rarely miss any notifications.

I consider Pipefy's mobile app to be one of the best features because it helps me use it on the go, and I do not have to miss any notifications. I also love the real-time communication between team members, which makes collaboration much easier than using traditional design documents.

It has a very intuitive and user-friendly interface where it was easy to get started and use complex features without feeling overwhelmed.

The real-time communication and mobile app features are valuable for my work because with Pipefy's mobile app, I can use it on the go, so I do not have to miss anything.

Although Pipefy is a great platform, I find that there are certain areas where it could be improved, especially the registration process, which leaves a lot to be desired as its complexity makes the entire sign-up process time-consuming and cumbersome.

Registration is the main area I would like to see enhanced. Whenever I need help to pull a report or anything more complicated, Pipefy's technical team is there to help.

I have been using Pipefy for the past five years.

Pipefy is stable.

Pipefy's scalability is very good and handles my organization's growth perfectly.

Pipefy's customer support is very solution-oriented, and they have been very proactive in helping us with any queries or challenges that we face.

I previously used Lucid and Lucidspark.

I switched from Lucidspark to Pipefy because it is more cost-effective and has great customer support. Overall, it helps to create brilliant organizational designs with Pipefy conceptual maps.

Deploying Pipefy in my environment was very easy.

My experience with the configuration process was smooth.

The procurement process is not applicable since I did not encounter any issues.

Since using Pipefy, I estimate that we have saved 50% in time and costs.

My experience with pricing, setup cost, and licensing has been cost-effective.

Before choosing Pipefy, I evaluated ClickUp as another option.

My advice to others looking into using Pipefy is that it is a good Kanban system with a clear and easy-to-understand organization of information, making project management easy and requiring very little learning to get onboarded. I highly recommend this tool.

If I start working on a project, I am guaranteed that it will get done in due time, thanks to Pipefy's clear-cut software that allows it to happen.

Using Pipefy has allowed the recruitment process to happen seamlessly with all the details and negotiation regarding a new hire happening in one place, so there are no fragmented emails or texts. Through automation, I have been able to save time and cost because of automation of repetitive tasks. I give this product a rating of 5 out of 5.

I use Pipefy mainly for workflow automation, internal process management, and organization operations requests between teams. We used it to start tasks, approvals, and record information activities for two years.

My main use case for Pipefy is workflow automation, internal process management, and organizing operational requests between teams. We use it to standardize tasks, approvals, and recording operational activities.

One of the workflows I automated with Pipefy is the flexibility of creating customized workflows and automation without requiring heavy development effort. The interface is user-friendly and helped improve visibility across processes and teams. It has improved process organization, task tracking, visibility, and reduces manual follow-ups between teams. It has also rapidly centralized the operational requests in one place.

For example, when managing internal operation requests between infrastructure and development teams, before Pipefy, many requests were handled manually through chat messages, emails, and spreadsheets, which made tracking difficult and sometimes caused delays or duplicated work. With Pipefy, we created a structured workflow where requests automatically move through stages such as triage, approval, execution, validation, and completion. Each stage had assigned responsibilities, deadlines, and automated notifications. This helped centralize communication, improve visibility, and reduce the amount of manual follow-up needed between teams. We also used automation for approvals and status updates, which reduced repetitive tasks and made the process more organized and predictable. Overall, it improved workflow transparency and helped teams collaborate more efficiently.

Pipefy has had a positive impact on my organization primarily by improving process organization, collaboration, and operational visibility across teams. One of the biggest improvements was reducing the amount of manual follow-up work. Before using Pipefy, teams often relied on chats, emails, and spreadsheets to manage requests, which sometimes caused delays, lost information, or duplicated efforts. After implementing structured workflows and automations, processes became more standardized and easier to track. Teams could clearly see task status, responsibilities, priorities, and pending approvals in one centralized platform.

In terms of productivity, it helped reduce repetitive administration tasks through automation, especially for approvals, notifications, and status updates. That allowed teams to focus more on execution rather than manual coordination. Collaboration also improved because both technical and non-technical teams had better transparency into workflows and deadlines. It reduced communication gaps and made cross-team coordination more efficient.

Another important improvement was process visibility for leadership and management. It became easier to identify bottlenecks, monitor SLA performance, and track operational metrics in a more organized way. Overall, Pipefy helped create more predictable, organized, and scalable operational processes.

In my opinion, some of the best features Pipefy offers are workflow customizations with low-code configuration, automation of repetitive tasks and approvals, an easy-to-use and intuitive interface, visibility and tracking across teams and processes, integration capabilities with other tools, centralized process management, notifications, and SLA tracking. One feature I particularly appreciated was the ability to standardize processes while still keeping workflows flexible enough to adapt to different team needs. Teams interact with Pipefy mainly through structured workflows for operation requests, approvals, and task tracking. Instead of relying on scattered communication through chats and emails, they use Pipefy as a centralized platform to submit requests, follow progress, assign responsibilities, or monitor deadlines. It improved collaboration between technical and non-technical teams because everyone had better visibility into the status of tasks and processes.

The flexibility of Pipefy helps my teams because our workflows often change depending on team priorities and operational needs. For example, we initially created a simpler approval workflow for infrastructure requests. Later, as the process evolved, we needed to add new validation stages, automatic notifications, SLA controls, and different approval paths depending on the request type. With Pipefy, we were able to adapt the workflow without needing major redevelopment or complex technical changes. That made it easy for teams to continuously improve processes as requirements changed. Another positive aspect was how quickly non-technical teams could understand and interact with the workflow. The visual organization and automation features helped reduce confusion and improve collaboration across departments.

I also appreciated the reporting and tracking visibility because managers and the team could easily monitor bottlenecks, pending tasks, and process performance in a centralized way.

Overall, I had a positive experience with Pipefy, but I think there are still some areas that could be improved. One area would be advanced workflow management and scalability for more complex enterprise environments. As workflows grow larger and involve many teams, pipelines and automations can become difficult to maintain and organize over time.

I also think reports and analytics could be more flexible and customizable for operational and management level insights. More advanced dashboard capabilities would be helpful for larger organizations. Another improvement could be deeper native integrations with technical and DevOps-oriented tools, especially for infrastructure and engineering workflows. In some cases, more advanced automation logic or conditional workflows require additional configurations or effort. Simplifying this experience could improve usability.

Finally, while the platform is very useful and user-friendly for non-technical users, governance and permission management in larger environments could become easier to structure and manage at scale.

While I do not have exact official metrics available, based on our internal experiences, I would estimate that Pipefy helped reduce manual follow-up and coordination work by around thirty to forty percent. Processes that previously required constant status checks through chat messages and emails became much more centralized and automated. We also noticed faster response times for operational requests because responsibilities, approvals, and deadlines became clearer inside the workflow. From a productivity perspective, automation for notifications, approvals, and task movements probably saved several hours per week for the teams involved, especially for recurring operational processes. Another important improvement was reducing communication gaps and duplicated work. Since everyone had visibility into the workflow status, teams spent less time searching for updates or clarifying ownership. Overall, the biggest gains were in process visibility, operational organization, and reduction of repetitive manual coordination tasks.

One additional improvement that could make Pipefy even better would be stronger AI-assisted workflow recommendations and automation suggestions. For example, intelligent suggestions for process optimization, bottleneck detection, or automation opportunities could help teams continuously improve workflows more proactively. I believe enhanced observability and traceability for complex workflows would be valuable in enterprise environments, especially for teams managing many operational processes simultaneously. Another area could be improving the experience for highly technical teams by offering more advanced API integrations and infrastructure-oriented capabilities while still keeping the platform simple for non-technical users. Overall, I think Pipefy already delivered strong value for workflow and process management, especially because of its flexibility and the ease of adoption across different departments.

My advice would be to start with simple and well-defined workflows first. Then gradually expand automation and process complexity as teams become more familiar with the platform. Pipefy works especially well when organizations take time to standardize processes and clearly define responsibilities, approvals, and workflow stages before building automations. I would also recommend involving both technical and non-technical teams early in the implementation process because one of Pipefy's strengths is improving collaboration and visibility across departments. Another important point is to establish governance and workflow organization standards from the beginning, especially in larger environments. As the number of workflows and automations grows, maintaining consistency becomes very important. For organizations looking to improve operational organization, process tracking, approvals, and workflow automation without heavy deployment effort, I think Pipefy can deliver strong value and a relatively fast adoption.

Overall, I think Pipefy is a strong and flexible workflow management platform that can bring significant value to organizations looking to improve operational processes, collaboration, and automations. What I appreciated most was the balance between usability and flexibility. It allowed both technical and non-technical teams to collaborate more effectively while maintaining process visibility and organization. I also think Pipefy is especially valuable for companies that are transitioning from manual process management and want a more structured and scalable operational model without requiring large development efforts. At the same time, continuing to evolve in enterprise scalability, analytics, integrations, and intelligent automation features could make the platform even stronger for larger and more complex environments. Overall, my experience with the platform was positive, and I believe it can be a very effective solution for workflow and business process management. I would rate this review an eight out of ten.

I used Pipefy to organize expenses, reimbursement, and travel arrangements. When I enter the system, I can see various processes, such as travel and expenses.

I was using Pipefy for travel arrangements in my previous role as an executive secretary, where I was responsible for scheduling arrangements. In the system, I can analyze when something is not approved, and I can review all the steps to determine if it is in progress or if it has been concluded.

When I was using Pipefy for expenses, I would send the information and attach the receipts, and it would go to my boss for approval. I cannot access the steps for the expenses process, but for travel, I can check all the steps.

In my opinion, the best feature is being able to look at all the steps to see what is in progress, what is at the beginning, and what is necessary to accomplish. Because you can see the flow, and it is clear for you and for your manager or someone else.

Pipefy has had an excellent impact on my organization. When I see the steps, I can organize my routine and determine which people I need to ask to approve the next step. I can organize when the process will be concluded to have an idea of the whole process and which step comes next. For example, if something is taking too much time, I know I need to talk with my manager to approve. I can organize the process, I can organize who is the next person to approve, and if this person takes more time than necessary, then I need to find a solution. In the end, we can prepare a result.

Pipefy system works really well. A potential improvement would be for Pipefy to send a message when something takes, for example, four days with nothing happening or it is still waiting for an answer or needs approval. A notification stating something like 'It is waiting for your answer for ten days or five days' would be helpful. When you receive the message, you can see that you need to check on it.

I chose a rating of nine because if the system sent a message when someone is taking more time to approve or it takes five days without making progress, it would be really helpful for the user.

Pipefy is stable.

Pipefy handles scalability by increasing team output and improving the process, particularly when the process volume is very high. It is a proportional increase in output without a proportional increase in headcount.

The customer support was very good. Sometimes for me, it was not necessary to get in contact with customer support, so it really worked very well.

I can advise that this system is really helpful for users. The support is good, and the team support is excellent.

Before Pipefy, there was no system. We used to write emails, and we would receive a lot of emails, and sometimes it was a mess and difficult to organize. When we found Pipefy, it was an excellent solution for the organization.

After using Pipefy, there was consideration about using the Argo system, which is related to travel arrangements.

Pipefy helped me tremendously because working as a secretary, it is extremely important to see all the steps to manage my time in a good way and not waste time or negatively impact the process. It is very useful, important, and clear. This kind of system helps me with my routine.

Pipefy really improved my routine and reduced some errors. The communication was clear and faster than before. In the beginning, the process was done by email where I received the email and sent the email. With Pipefy, everything is there, and you can see all the steps.

By using Pipefy in my previous company, we improved the time significantly. It was very efficient because instead of sending emails to customers and employees throughout the company, it was very useful for everyone. I can see the steps, and the employee can see them at the same time. It is good to not waste so much time. There is a specific system for organizing travels, for example. It was excellent because in the beginning, it was difficult to deal with only using emails.

My experience with pricing is limited because I work in the administrative area, not in supply. I do not have knowledge about the license or pricing. I work only with administrative support. I would rate this product as a nine out of ten.

I believe the most important process at Berneck is the automation of emails, as we send a lot of emails to our customers and suppliers through automation, which reduces a lot of the manual work.

For email automation, we used to schedule our shipments manually by email, and we often sent wrong emails or addressed the schedules incorrectly for the right factory. Since we started using Pipefy, we implemented automation to handle this, and today we have zero problems with wrong email addresses.

Additionally, we use the AI from Pipefy to check our documents, ensuring there are no errors in texts such as addresses on documents, certificates, bills of lading, invoices, and packing lists, so we rely heavily on Pipefy at our organization.

The best feature of Pipefy is that the system is low-code, which allows us to model and change processes very quickly without needing to open a process with the IT department, enabling us to make changes in approximately five minutes.

We utilize our analyst to model Pipefy, and this low-code feature enables us to do it very fast because it is very user-friendly, allowing the team to learn quickly how to implement improvements within the system. The conclusion is very simple: it is very functional, and we can easily teach someone very young, such as a 19 or 20-year-old, to learn how to use it effectively.

The impact of using Pipefy has been very positive, as we have significantly reduced manual emails and wrong email addresses while being much faster in our responses to customers, which has also benefited them. Although I don't have the exact numbers, I know we reduce the time spent on emails by approximately 20 to 30 percent, and the mistakes related to emails have been reduced to almost zero.

For our company, the best improvement for Pipefy would be to integrate it with our ERP system. Currently, we use SAP but face challenges because we often input some information in Pipefy and have to duplicate that in SAP.

I want to emphasize that I would appreciate the ability to perform calculations within Pipefy, as I sometimes prefer to work with Excel. If Pipefy could handle these calculations, it would be very helpful for us.

I have been using Pipefy since 2017, which means I have been using Pipefy for the last nine years.

Regarding Pipefy's governance and security, I find it very trustworthy. We have been using Pipefy for the last seven years and have encountered only one instance where the system made a mistake, indicating that it is a reliable system.

Pipefy's accuracy and reliability of output are very good, and we don't have problems with that aspect.

I believe the ability for Pipefy to support Excel format calculations would be significantly valuable for us.

My main advice for others considering Pipefy is to start using it in conjunction with your main system, making the integration at the beginning to avoid headaches later on.

Pipefy was deployed in 2017 specifically for the export processes, and we utilize it extensively in that area. We manage our processes using a kanban system with cards, which is excellent for controlling exports, with approximately 2,000 containers exported per month.

I would rate this product 9 out of 10.

My main use case for Pipefy is to monitor the operational routine of my entire team, for registering claims processes, very specifically in the group life insurance area, and also as a sales funnel.

A quick and specific example of how I use Pipefy in these claims processes or in the sales funnel is that everyone who contacts us through our customer service channel opens a card in Pipefy, which communicates all the client's information, the company that this client is related to, the reason for the claim, and it already sends them a link for them to upload all the documents necessary to open that claim. For example, a life insurance claim for natural death has specific documents for this type of claim. A personal accident claim requires another type of document. So we can separate and send a targeted link, a specific link for that type of open claim.

A relevant use, besides tracking the number of claims opened per day, month, and year, is the whole part of the automatic link for the person to connect there and upload the documents so we can view them on the other side. There is also the sales part, which is very good. We have a sales channel and all our warm or hot leads go to another pipeline directly in Pipefy for follow-up, for routing, and, hopefully, a sale and an approach.

In my opinion, the best features that Pipefy offers include that it is very intuitive. You do not need a lot of knowledge, and you do not need to be a computing genius or a website genius to understand how to handle Pipefy. It is self-explanatory enough that you can already understand its dynamics and the whole process. That helps a lot because you do not waste time teaching your operations team.

Beyond this ease of use, a specific feature such as automations, integrations with other systems, or reports that I find especially valuable in Pipefy is that it has integrations. Since we only generate the monthly report in Pipefy and then this report goes into another workflow, which is the company's internal system, we end up not using many of the other features in the system. I know it is very complete, but we limit ourselves to the monthly report.

The way Pipefy has had a positive impact on my organization is that the major positive impact was being able to visualize the project as a whole, not only at the micro level, but also at the macro level. Understanding where the real bottlenecks are, understanding the number of openings that each team member and each of our professionals handles and opens per month, and how many they can follow up on. This clarity about the project in the overall context is a big differentiator for us.

I think an improvement, a good improvement, would be on the cost. I think it is a slightly expensive platform and a slightly expensive system. It could improve in terms of cost.

On a scale from one to ten, I rate Pipefy overall as eight. I rate it as eight because it is very good and it has several features that we do not even end up exploring. However, because it has so many features, it is very expensive. Sometimes you do not use all of its features, and then it ends up being an investment that is not so attractive because you will not use one hundred percent of the platform. For those who manage to use it one hundred percent, I believe the rating is ten and there is nothing to complain about.

I choose the score of eight specifically because when a platform is very good with several functions, it becomes expensive. Sometimes the person who is buying this platform is not going to use all these functions. So there could be smaller, intermediate plans so you can use Pipefy up to a specific point, and then you would have lower costs. Not a full cost for using everything when sometimes you do not use it all and end up paying for the whole process.

I have been using Pipefy for three years when I worked at another institution called Alden Seguros.

Pipefy is stable in my experience.

The scalability of Pipefy in my organization is good because we can track the whole process. Since we can track the whole process, its scalability is very good because we can analyze the entire macro. So it is good.

Pipefy's customer support is good. You get in touch with them, and they send you an email afterwards. I think it is good.

I would rate customer support on a scale from one to ten as ten.

We were previously using a different solution, and that solution was not a system; it was an internal Excel spreadsheet.

We have already gotten a return on investment with Pipefy, and our savings came from the number of employees. Sometimes we needed to hire more employees because we did not have a standard workflow. With the entire service being constantly evaluated and with us having a trace of all this operational side, we are able to measure the quality of the service, how much each of the employees worked, and sometimes even replace an employee instead of hiring more people for the team, making some specific changes in the team so the service could keep evolving quickly.

My experience with pricing, setup costs, and licensing is that it was expensive. I found the cost experience a bit high.

Before choosing Pipefy, I did not evaluate other options. I went straight to Pipefy.

The advice I would give to others who are thinking about using Pipefy is to look for something already validated in the market that runs very well and has already gained market space, as Pipefy is the best option. I rate Pipefy overall as eight on a scale of one to ten.

I used to work with logistics, and we used Pipefy to register the truck drivers and also to send requests to other areas.

We used Pipefy to fill in the information that we received from the truck drivers on WhatsApp and then we added it to a board to register this information in Pipefy, so that other people could access it according to the order in which the cards arrived and register them in the system. There we could flag if there was any pending issue, and we could see how long that card had been sitting waiting to be resolved.

We also used automations inside Pipefy. For example, when the truck driver's registration had already gone through successfully and he had already completed his run, and then he was just waiting for payment, there was an automation to send this information to another Pipefy board, as well as email automations and automations when something had been stuck for too long or when it was approved.

One of the best features that I identify in Pipefy is mainly the automations. For example, as I mentioned, when the card reaches a certain status, it creates another one in another board, or it sends an email, or it gets flagged when it's late. These kinds of automations are very good features.

The one I mentioned in Pipefy, creating a card in another board for the other team to follow up with payments or resolve any pending issues the truck driver might have, saved the team a lot of time because it reduced the manual work of previously having to notify the other team or having to go there manually to copy and paste the information.

Pipefy had a positive impact mainly on the ease of documentation, the ease of automations, communication, and reduction of manual work.

The ease of automations in Pipefy is something that is very good, but if the user doesn't know how to use it, it can create rework and errors, because sometimes the logics conflict with each other.

I would say that in Pipefy, creating alerts that identify when one condition is conflicting with another would be very useful, because the user would know why the automations stopped working.

The only gap in Pipefy is related to the automations, but this could be avoided if the team doing the customization had logical thinking or better knowledge of the rules they themselves created. I don't see it as a problem with Pipefy, but it could alert in case there was some possible conflict.

I have been using Pipefy for two years.

Pipefy is stable.

Pipefy is a very scalable tool, precisely because of this ease of use and customization, and users don't have difficulties using it because it's quite user-friendly. It is scalable.

Customer support is very fast. I remember that I needed to contact them a few times and they were very quick and effective. I would rate customer support on a scale from one to ten as ten. They always assisted me very quickly and were very effective.

We didn't use any different solution.

Regarding the automations I mentioned in Pipefy, they reduced manual work. We gained in that area. The return on investment was good from the moment we started to use the platform in the best possible way, with automations, with alerts and everything else. We had time reduction and financial savings with respect to the time and productivity of the users. They stopped doing so many repetitive tasks, copying and pasting information from here to send it there, when the automation already did that.

That wasn't a problem for the company with Pipefy. I also didn't have access to the prices, but I know that we had several users and, given what the platform delivers, it was a fair price.

I didn't evaluate other options before choosing Pipefy. It was already implemented in the company.

I would advise them to use the automations in Pipefy, but be careful with the logics they will create in order to avoid conflicts with other logics. Avoid logics that are redundant or one logic that says to create and another logic that says to delete. Avoiding this kind of confusion is important because then the system might not perform properly, precisely because of the poor configuration done by the users. I would rate this review as a nine out of ten.

My main use case for Pipefy is for quotations and some automatic orders. I start by filling out the inbox part in Pipefy for quotations and automatic orders because there are several phases. In the inbox, I enter the person responsible for the request and the requester's email, which usually appears in another system. Then I have to check it to put it there in Pipefy, then send it to the next phase which would be the request analysis, where I put the details of the material. For example, the categories that material belongs to and how long the request has been open. Then it moves to another phase, the RFQ creation, where I create the quotation by entering more detailed information and selecting the suppliers I want to invite to the quotation, which is then sent automatically to all suppliers.

The best features that Pipefy offers are its various automations and it is also very detailed, with a Kanban format that makes day-to-day work easier.

Regarding automations that make my work easier, when I send the quotation, there is a button that says Send RFQ. I just click it and it goes by itself. I refresh the page and it automatically sends an email to each supplier, so I just wait for the supplier to respond to that email sent to each one.

I find the Kanban format in Pipefy very useful because it has individual phases including inbox, which is when the request enters the system, and then it goes to another phase called request analysis. There is also tax escalation for any problems with the NCM or tax issues. The RFQ creation phase is for filling in the data needed to send to the supplier, and the saving registration part is to register any discount on that purchase, among others. I find it very useful because of all these functionalities.

Pipefy has had a positive impact on my organization and it made day-to-day work much easier. Due to its various features in the phases specific to each situation and the automation, the high technology that Pipefy has is very useful in the company's daily operations and processes.

Sometimes there are errors such as outages or instabilities in Pipefy. Sometimes I have to log in two to three times a day. For example, I log in at 8 in the morning to work and by about 3 or 4 in the afternoon, the system goes down, and an error message appears. I then have to close the page, open it again, and log in again. I believe this part could be improved because this kind of error should not happen while someone is using Pipefy.

I have been using Pipefy for almost two years.

Apart from the instabilities I mentioned, Pipefy is totally stable and works fine in my day-to-day use.

Pipefy's scalability handles the volume of requests very well, and when new demands arise, it does not freeze or lag. It responds very well and rarely encounters issues; the problems I faced were more about being on the page too long, causing an unavailability error that requires closing and reopening the page to log back in. Other than that, it works very well.

Before Pipefy, we used to send quotations through Outlook, which was a manual model. Sometimes we still use it for urgent cases, but on a daily basis, we use Pipefy as the standard. When I arrived here, they were already using Pipefy because it was an investment made by the client in the project with Accenture. I know they hired me because Pipefy is widely used by companies and is very agile and useful, as well as fast.

I have obtained a return on investment with Pipefy; there is a considerable increase in productivity due to the agility of the things done through Pipefy. Due to the technology and phases for each process, the Kanban model makes it very technological, leading to increased productivity compared to something done manually, such as sending quotations by email. The time savings are large as well since things done in Pipefy are very fast because it is an agile system.

I would rate Pipefy a nine on a scale from one to ten. I did not give it a ten because of the crashing and instability issues I mentioned earlier while using Pipefy. I did not give a lower score because it is very useful in my daily work and really speeds things up a lot. All the quotations are done through it, and I really love this system for all these processes. It is very useful in my work.

There is a measurable result I can mention regarding time saved after implementing Pipefy. The process of sending a quotation via Pipefy is much faster than sending it by email or another system, which is more time-consuming. Through Pipefy, it is faster due to the practicality of just filling in some parts of the things that are requested in the phase and the fact of just clicking to send it, allowing it to automatically create the RFQ after filling in all the necessary data. I consider this a very positive impact and I think it takes very little time. The entire process takes about two to three minutes at most. I consider it very useful.

I strongly recommend Pipefy and advise others to do everything through it if possible, including automatic orders. Before, I only did the monitoring of the phases of the acquisitions, but now I do the quotations directly in Pipefy and some automated orders. I would recommend using it because it is very agile and very useful, particularly because of the Kanban model and the detailed phases, making it very organized for the company's daily work. I do not have information on Pipefy's pricing, setup costs, and licensing. My overall review rating for Pipefy is nine out of ten.

Pipefy is used to handle tickets, ticketing, inquiries, and help desk pipes. I currently manage two pipes for ticket handling, and there are upcoming pipes that align with different use cases.

Reporting is a main tool I use in Pipefy, following through the tickets especially when connecting with outsourced companies to manage them. Pipefy speeds up my process significantly. Previously, managing emails was cumbersome with around 200 to 500 tickets daily. Pipefy categorizes and moves cards into various phases easily, a stark contrast to following progress in Outlook.

Pipefy's scalability is noteworthy too. It increases awareness through auto replies and emails, smooth ticket category automation, and helps different departments with additional pipes.

The user interface and ease of use are typical, much resembling a usual Kanban board. However, Pipefy requires integration with existing workflows to enhance its functionality, which is still developing. What is lacking is direct support, since I am required to go through a third-party outsourcing company to connect with Pipefy. It would also be beneficial if internal integrations were enhanced for tools such as Power BI, avoiding additional payments.

I started working with Pipefy late twenty twenty four, but I gained my admin access late twenty twenty five.

Pipefy is stable.

Pipefy's scalability is definitely noteworthy. It contributes positively to my workload, allowing me to handle more pipes.

My concern is that I am connected to an outsourcing company, so any request to Pipefy goes through this third party. This is cumbersome, and I find direct customer service with Pipefy to be lacking.

I did previously use ServiceNow in my past work, but in this current employer, it was not Pipefy; it was just Outlook email, which was the best solution for the Outlook migration.

In terms of money and time saved, Pipefy is a great time saver overall, reflecting in analysts handling additional projects beyond ticket management. This has reduced the need for more employees, as I alone can manage the growth using my admin access.

I think it is important to determine first what you need for the solutions because there are also other alternatives, Kanban solutions, or ticketing solutions that you might need; what matters most here is the usability of the interface.

Pipefy is easy to navigate, resembling a more straightforward and user-friendly Kanban board. It could have been better with more integration features in development. It is not Pipefy's fault about some support issues but rather third-party complications. For usability, Pipefy is favorable given its diverse team adaptability. However, lacking innovative features compared to other existing systems is a downside. I rated this review an 8 out of 10.

My main use case for Pipefy is for many things; I didn't have access to SQL, so I use Pipefy to create a database and store information there. I use Pipefy to make calls to buy and sell assets, to orchestrate processes, and to document everything related to funds by cataloging every step to ensure indicators are correct. I can use Pipefy as a document storage system similar to Google Drive, to schedule work, and to integrate email and Python with Pipefy, making various signals sendable via its API. Pipefy adapts to your needs based on your creativity. The more creative you are, the more Pipefy can accomplish.

One specific process where Pipefy made things easier for me is validating documents. When a manager sends us a document valid for six months, I use Pipefy to extract the date from the document, and using Python, I add six months to that date. If the document passes that date, it is "parecer vencido"; if not, it remains approved for the manager to buy.

The best features of Pipefy are comprehensive; the tool is excellent when you have creativity, as you can use various data types. Pipefy has strong orchestration capabilities that allow you to treat and retrieve data as needed. When you leverage this tool effectively, you can accomplish a lot.

Pipefy has impacted my organization positively by allowing us to orchestrate everything within the company. For example, at Solis, I use Pipefy for "enquadramento," integrating fund indicators with SQL data to monitor our fund's correctness in real time, enabling proactive actions based on the information.

The API integration specifically helps me because Pipefy acts as a graphical SQL interface; I retrieve and query all the fields, compose emails with Python, and send them through Power Automate. I work with data from Pipefy and send feedback back to the Pipefy card, creating a cycle of data management.

An area for improvement in Pipefy is customer support; when I encounter issues, I lack access to human assistance, and I find the training for Pipefy inadequate. The rules and automation often have bugs, which can be frustrating.

The interface is acceptable to me; as a coding person, I prefer back-end functionalities and find it useful. While I don't know how to improve the front-end, I would prefer SQL over graphical SQL for its familiarity and would love to see a chatbot feature for low-code development within Pipefy.

I would like to see improvements in the chat feature; I don't find the current chat helpful and wish there were better support options available when I need assistance with Pipefy.

I have been using Pipefy for approximately four or five years.

Pipefy has stability challenges; the connection drops frequently, but at times it performs well, so I would rate its stability at approximately 80 percent reliability with 20 percent downtime.

Pipefy's scalability is really good; it can handle growing workloads and many users easily.

I find Pipefy's customer support really bad and unsatisfactory.

I have not used a different solution; my tools are Python, Pipefy, Databricks, and Power Automate, which are all very helpful for my work.

I cannot share specific metrics on return on investment because the team handling those metrics is different, and I only have access to limited data myself; essentially, I am aware that there is a team evaluating the value of our tool investments.

I give Pipefy a nine out of ten rating because the support team is a significant pain point for me, and the tool is quite expensive.

The real-time information from Pipefy allows me to act before others; I can anticipate issues affecting our funds before they escalate, preventing mistakes that could have significant consequences. The value of this proactive capability is immense.

My experience with pricing has been one of shock; when the bill arrives, it is apparent that Pipefy is a very costly tool, prompting discussions about whether we could recreate its functions with alternative systems.

My advice for those looking into using Pipefy is to focus on creativity; if you are creative, you can achieve a lot with Pipefy, utilizing automation and understanding how to orchestrate data flows effectively.

My main use case for Pipefy is receiving requirements from drivers in the systems. Drivers fill up a form on Pipefy, and I have personalized it for them to include all the fields they wanted.

In my day-to-day work, I fill up the forms with information from the drivers inside Pipefy. I also need to create Pipefy instances for other areas in the company so that all areas can use Pipefy in different ways, with different fields, attachments, and options. For the drivers, I fill up the information with driver truck details so the team can enter them inside the system and provide new routes for their logistic operations.

I truly enjoy working with Pipefy because it is so intuitive that even when I needed to create fields with formulas and other non-standard field types, they are very easy to customize. I can teach other people how to create and edit their own Pipefys.

One of the best features I appreciate on Pipefy is the opportunity to customize fields, such as creating formula fields and automations. For example, when a card reaches the done status, it creates another card on another Pipefy and sends a notification to users, making this type of automation very valuable.

I mainly create automations to send emails when a card reaches a certain status so users can be updated on what is happening with their requirements. The automation for sending emails and the automation that creates another card in another Pipefy when a card reaches a certain status helps reduce manual processes. Pipefy is very easy to customize and access. The automations I have mentioned are simple enough for initial users who are not familiar with systems, the internet, or computers, so they have no difficulty using them.

I have noticed improvements in time savings and error reduction, primarily because of the automations I mentioned. Before I implemented email sending and card creation automations for other areas, I had to manually send messages saying someone needed to create a card because a driver achieved a certain status on another Pipefy. This increased our performance significantly because we could reduce manual work.

I think Pipefy could be improved by providing better assistance to users who are customizing or creating automations, as it can become confusing when users do not know how to customize or do not think through the logic they are building for fields, which can lead to conflicts. For example, when a card reaches the done status, you might create a card, and then another rule states that when a card reaches the done status, you do not create a card. Pipefy should alert users when they are creating conflicting rules. At the time I used Pipefy, it did not have AI, and I think an AI could help with this type of analysis.

The only improvement I feel is needed with Pipefy is alert functionality for users when they are creating rules and automations that have conflicts between them.

More than two years.

My advice for others looking into using Pipefy is to be careful when creating automations to avoid conflicts and to create the correct rules by using logical thought when building the automations. I would rate this product a 9 out of 10.