Profisee Reviews

We use Profisee for mastering data between multiple systems like ERP and CRM within our company.

The product helps us by allowing us to bring data in from any system that we need, master it, and deliver clean records for data and analytics.

Profisee's ability to master data using the Goldstein record concept is valuable. Additionally, creating our own interface and having it work in the way we want is beneficial.

Profisee is making improvements for the year 2024, including integrating directly with other solutions.

We have been using Profisee for going on three years.

Profisee allows us to master any data from any source efficiently.

The scalability is fabulous, allowing us to bring data from various sources and master it.

Profisee's customer service is very responsive, and they have a comprehensive training academy, Profisee Academy, that helps guide the implementation process.

Positive

Previously, data management was done manually, which was cumbersome. Profisee has been used at the last two places I worked.

Profisee's initial setup was straightforward. However, some security complexities might add time to the setup.

Deployment involved roles varying from associate to lead in MDM and typically included a cloud service engineer and data engineer.

Profisee's pricing is comparable to other MDM tools.

I'd rate the solution nine out of ten.

We deploy this solution within the Qatar government to enhance business analytics and streamline data management processes.

As of now, the initiative is in its initial stages, and we are actively engaged in testing and refining various aspects of the implementation.

The process of categorizing data, creating glossaries, and generating metadata is streamlined and less time-consuming. This simplicity is in stark contrast to Informatica, where hosting involves setting up virtual machines, installing software, and configuring various elements. The offered SaaS solution is notably more straightforward and user-friendly. Additionally, the Power BI dashboards are impressive, allowing the creation of numerous dashboards at a lower cost. The presence of multiple filters facilitates easy extraction of information from unstructured data.

There are three components: Data Fabric, Data Hub, and Profisee. A more convenient approach would involve integrating all the pre-existing elements into Profisee itself.

I have been using it for a month now.

Currently, we haven't encountered any stability issues. However, it's worth noting that when transitioning to the cloud, occasional challenges may arise due to network issues or problems with data center storage. Instances such as cluster or rack failures, often caused by power outages, might necessitate failover procedures to another region or data center. I would rate it eight out of ten.

Scalability poses no challenges; it's seamlessly integrated with elasticity on the backend. The level of scalability and elasticity is contingent upon the subscription tier chosen—whether it's standard, premium, or enterprise. I would rate it nine out of ten. Initially, we plan to commence with approximately one to two thousand users and gradually expand the user base to around fifteen thousand.

Previously, we had our own on-premise data solutions that relied heavily on manual processes. The entire workflow required significant manpower, involving manual checks within data stores and manual code writing for report generation and dashboard creation in tools like Power BI. The process became repetitive and monotonous. When we discovered an automated option, we saw the opportunity to streamline and decided to make the switch.

The initial setup was straightforward. I would rate it nine out of ten.

The deployment process is incredibly simple—no setup is required on my end. There's no need for me to configure anything. I just create pointers to my data stores where the information is stored, and from there, the system takes over. It handles categorization, cleansing, structuring the data, and utilizing data breaks, ultimately transforming it into tabular data. The deployment took less than a week. Maintenance requirements vary based on the number of data sources. If an organization has ten distinct data sources with individual departments preferring data isolation, then ten personnel might be necessary for maintenance. However, if the organization is open to centralizing data management, encompassing cleansing, governance, and other tasks, then a more streamlined approach with two to three individuals could be effective. 

They offered a cost-efficient approach by presenting an upfront cost structure, encouraging a three-year reserved instance commitment with associated discounts. With our organization predominantly using Microsoft-based and volume-licensed tools, there were no extra costs, as we didn't require third-party integrations unsupported by Microsoft. The simplicity of the tool was a standout feature, requiring minimal training for both users and administrators.

The pricing is moderate, falling in the middle range—not excessively low nor overly expensive. I would rate it five out of ten. It is reasonably priced for medium-sized optimization needs and is suitable for scalability in both medium and large enterprises. However, it may not be as suitable for small businesses and very small startups due to cost considerations.

We initially considered deploying Informatica but decided against it due to its complexity. We evaluated IBM Cloudpack and Informatica, considering the pros and cons of each, ultimately opting for Profisee. One significant factor in favor of Profisee was its cost-effectiveness, fitting well within our budget. The user interface was user-friendly and less complex, making it accessible even for those without extensive technical expertise. Creating dashboards was notably easier compared to IBM or Informatica, and the platform required minimal training. The robust support from Microsoft further solidified our decision, with cost playing a pivotal role in the selection process.

Organizations considering Profisee need to establish a solid business case as it might not be suitable for everyone. The annual cost of $2.5 million is substantial, especially for smaller entities. The pricing provided to us was influenced by the extensive implementation across Qatar with a large user base. However, for those with a smaller user base and limited data requirements, exploring alternative, more cost-effective options may be a prudent choice. Overall, I would rate it eight out of ten.

We use Profisee for MDM. It integrates with tools like Purview for data cataloging and matching and then writes records to a master data database. We transfer the data to a data warehouse for analysis and troubleshooting. It helps us manage data from various sources and apply rules for data governance.

The most valuable features for ensuring data accuracy and quality are mappings and creating business rules. Profisee's adaptive approach and data monitoring are also beneficial. Adaptive cards facilitate collaboration among team members for updating master data. While the basics of data management are similar across platforms like Talend, Profisee's Azure-centric approach is now more convenient for us.

Profisee could improve in providing clearer data lineage information. Currently, I find it easier to gather this from Purview rather than Profisee. However, I haven't fully explored all of Profisee's functionalities, so there might be options I'm unaware of.

I have been using Profisee for a year.

We haven't had any stability issues with Profisee so far.

I would rate Profisee's tech support at around an eight out of ten. 

Positive

The main difference between Purview and Profisee is their focus. Purview concentrates more on data cataloging and metadata management, helping users understand their data profiles and lineage. On the other hand, Profisee emphasizes MDM, particularly in managing master data databases and applying business rules to ensure data quality and consistency. While they have some overlapping functionalities, they serve different stages of the data lifecycle.
Some users may still be exploring Profisee's capabilities, and not everyone fully understands all of its functions. 

The Profisee user interface has positively impacted our data management. As a data architect and enterprise developer, I have seen that it is convenient for the data storage team to complete their work. The interface is visually clear and easy to understand, streamlining the entire process.

Profisee's scalability and integration capabilities with other systems are highly effective, particularly within an Azure-centric environment. Its seamless integration with Azure services like Purview enables comprehensive data lifecycle management, including data lineage and management.

Implementing Profisee has potentially made our time to market for new products and services more efficient. Qualifying master data and making it available downstream for data consumption seems smoother now. As a bank, our response to data availability might differ from other industries like advertising. Overall, I see positive impacts from using Profisee.

I would recommend Profisee to others, but it depends on various factors such as how well it fits with their business domain, cost considerations, and resource availability. If they have centralized their data in Azure, Profisee is a no-brainer for data management.

Overall, I would rate Profisee as an eight out of ten.

We use this solution for matching and merging priorities and creating records for providers.

We just did the POC. I work mostly on the MDS side of it. Our DBA handles all maintenance-related issues.

We really like the matching and merging features. Also, the harmonization — it's true MDM competence.

When we updated to version 7.1, there were some workflow issues. 

Initially, we were using an older version, but we were required to dynamically kick-off the workflows from the patients. That's when we had some issues. When we reached out to Profisee, they said, "We don't have that feature right now, you'll have to wait until version 7.1". We had to wait for at least a month to get that fixed.

At that time, they only offered technical training for version 6.5, not the latest version. It should be updated. As soon as the new version was released, they should have updated the technician component of the training part.

I have been using Profisee for two years.

Stability is good, but they need a lot of new customers and other clients to compete with  Informatica — the big guys.

Before Profisee, we were using Microsoft MDS. We just did a POC to see if Profisee would be more compatible.

We didn't have any issues with the initial setup

Our DBA installed it with the help of Profisee advisors. Overall, deployment took less than one day.

We didn't come across any additional licensing fees.

Initially, Profisee was built on top of MDS. If you wanted to work with Profisee, you needed to have Microsoft MDS installed and have a license. You needed to install MDS, then on top of it, you needed to install Profisee. That was true with version 6.5, but from version seven onwards, they decoupled from MDS. Now you no longer need a Microsoft MDS license. They've come up with their own scheme on everything, right from scratch.

Profisee is an all-in-one tool. All you need to do is plug in your data points from various data sources and you are good to go.

Overall, on a scale from one to ten, I would give this solution a rating of eight.

The client wanted a way to master their clients, which were within a foster care system. The solution would be used for a client that would be a foster care student.

I felt that their ability to support workflow was really good and this client really needed that as they needed to be able to manage the mastering of those clients through their stewardship cycle. Profisee did a good job with that. 

I was really impressed with their out-of-the-box data quality reporting features. There's a lot that they have out of the box that is very, very useful. In some of the other tools, you're on your own when it comes to building the reporting features, although all of the MDM vendors are making that piece more robust. However, I thought that Profisee did a really good job with that.

The product is able to utilize the SQL server toolkit and it has tight integration with the SQL server.

The solution offers lots of good training, including videos, to help you learn aspects of the product. They have all those modules that offer web training. Experts get up and they talk and there are class discussions, and they show you the demos of everything.

Profisee needs to better highlight data profiling. At least when I was using this a year ago, the features for data profiling were buried. In other words, they don't pull it out as a key feature, and it really should be. Often, that whole life cycle phase is overlooked, the data profiling aspect.

One of the strengths, like being able to utilize the SQL server toolkit and it's tight integration with SQL server, can be a disadvantage too, as there are some things that they pushed down to the database that makes it difficult when trying to figure out where and how you achieve that functionality. It's buried in the database functionality or in one of the database tools for SQL Server. They need to make it more clear and bring it out more effectively.

If you were to compare it to Informatica, that's where Informatica does a really good job in their tool suite. They've got their whole platform and each one of the tools, they spell out exactly what they do. Even though there is some overlap in functionality, you know what the best practice is and where to do what.

The way training is laid out in their Profisee University, makes it really, really hard to find what you need fast. They'll have these one-hour long video clips and you need to fast forward or rewind to find the actual useful details. There's an index that allows you to just jump to the correct information. That is very frustrating as a developer that needs the information. You can't find the information fast for support at all. They need to be able to articulate their training into something that is searchable. Online training that is text-based and not just buried in a super-long video. A product like SUMADI is a great example of training done right.

When I left that client, I really wanted them to put more emphasis on profiling. I'd have to go back out there to their website and see if they actually have anything of that nature. It wasn't obvious to me, even their best practices with profiling. In Informatica, profiling isn't overlooked at all. In Profisee, it seems it might have been. I'd like more emphasis placed on the tool if possible.

I've been using the solution for a year and a half at this point.

The solution is very stable. It's a reliable product.

The solution can scale very well. It's so tightly coupled with the database platform and you've got somebody that is managing your SQL Server environment. They're going to be able to take on managing the growth of that software tool as well.

Technical support is excellent. I'm quite satisfied with the level of service provided.

I've used a few different solutions such as Informatica and Semarchy.

There are certain things in our tool evaluation between Semarchy, Profisee and Informatica where I thought that Semarchy was the easiest one to stand up with and get it up and running really, really fast. 

If you have users that aren't really technical, then Semarchy is the way to go. If they don't need very sophisticated workflow functionality, Semarchy is a lot cheaper and you can get it up and running right away. Their ability to support REST APIs is really, really simple. So in that way, Semarchy wins. 

I've found, for example, that while Profisee's ability to support workflow was really good, Informatica was even better at that aspect. There are other things like profiling and data quality stuff, Informatica beats everybody hands down.

I'd rate the initial setup at a six out of ten. It's not straightforward, or too complex. If you compare it to a solution like SUMADI, that's quite straightforward, and this is more moderate in the level of difficulty. Some tasks flow nicely and in other areas, you struggle.

It wasn't cohesive. Looking back, there were some things in the DBA that were being a little bit cantankerous, and that was hard to communicate with the client sometimes. Installing and configuring it was not straightforward. They could do a better job if I'm trying to be fair and honest with them. They could do a better job and have a more comprehensive install guide for their product.

There may have been issues associated with the APIs and stuff you had to do on SQL Server. You just had to spend too much time chasing things. 

There are videos, whoever, that cover large aspects of the implementation that are helpful. I'd take screenshots at key points in the video and that would help me figure out what to do. Still, it would be helpful to have a search feature within the videos, so that you could go to the exact spots you needed more easily.

The client is doing really well. In fact, they've been published in several IT magazines for their efforts, and also for their Data Cleansing efforts and their Data Stewardship. They've learned how to use the product already. They're comfortable with it. They are in an effort to monetize some of their functionality, and they're a non-profit, so they're doing a lot of really cool things and they're doing a great job with everything. I'm very proud of them.

We handle many aspects of the solution, including initially handling the tool evaluation and then installing it and doing proof of concepts, build-outs, and training of the client.

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

I'd advise new users to just have fun with it. Master Data Management can be a daunting endeavor. Just take small use cases, and do a proof of concept and take it end to end. That is the best way to be successful. And we made it fun with the users. We would start off with a little animated video as those in the Foster care system are into early childhood development. We showed them a small use case and we walked them through the process. In the end, we just had a lot of fun.

Our biggest lesson was learning how to gain the trust of our client community, especially if they're non-technical. Learning how to gain their trust and make it fun was huge. It's so daunting and typically clients are more concerned about their daily jobs. If you can gain their trust and make it fun they don't resent the process. They got excited and so did we. Just that trust, that initial trust component is key. 

Overall, I would rate the solution eight out of ten. The only thing they really need to do is to fix the online training so that users can zero in on specific areas a bit easier. Indexing the videos would go a long way towards solving this one issue.