SAP Signavio Process Manager Reviews

My usual use cases for SAP Signavio Process Manager currently involve a bank migration project that is ongoing. The current company that I work for acquired a bank a year ago and after all the legal proceedings have been completed, now it is put on the technology team to perform the digital and process transformation. As part of process transformation, I am working with the automation center where we are trying to build the BPMN 2.0 process maps on SAP Signavio Process Manager platform using the Process Manager license. What usually happens is we get the inputs in the form of presentations and workshops that are usually conducted with the technology partners like Accenture and ANZ. Once these are done, all the inputs are taken together in order to put it into a process map so that the automation center can pick up the map. Since SAP Signavio Process Manager can be used in other RPA tools as well because BPMN 2.0 can adhere to tools like Camunda and Automation Anywhere, these maps, because of the capability of being interoperable, are being picked up to further perform automation enhancements as well as to find process improvement areas.

The features or capabilities of SAP Signavio Process Manager that I have found the most valuable so far include how every time there is a flag that shows up whenever we are trying to save a diagram if it is not adhering to the standards, which are the global standards. BPMN 2.0 is also an APQC standard, which is American Productivity and Quality Center standard. This is a benchmark. Every process map that we do ensures that a person does not override the rules that are set. The process map has to adhere to the standards. This way, we are avoiding rework. This is definitely something that performs at its best.

The second one is the way we can document items in detail, such as the ability to have sub-process and connect it via URL or documents. The range of things that could be connected despite being on multiple platforms is something that I really appreciate and without having to make the diagram look clumsy. The third most important feature from a process excellence standpoint is the repository that is provided. There is a dictionary feature that avoids duplication and allows processes to be standardized across regardless of which teams build the process maps. That is something commendable about it. Certainly, simulation analysis that comes later is a standout feature, but for SAP Signavio Process Manager specifically, I think standardization and the repository that it provides are great features.

SAP Signavio Process Manager's analytics have helped identify process bottlenecks very significantly in terms of where we used to assume being a critical path or a process area consuming a lot of time. After linking attributes such as risk, legal, and financial regulatory requirements, many process maps revealed bottlenecks that were regulatory requirements we cannot override. These bottlenecks are taking time for the right reasons. The analysis has helped us understand what is taking more time and if it is necessary whether it should take or otherwise. The second step of analyzing whether it is required or not helped us to do better with the process mining. While doing the process maps, we added regulatory requirements and controls. Had we not done it on SAP Signavio Process Manager, we would have never understood and simply gone ahead and automated it, putting us at great risk.

Aligning operational processes with business strategy using SAP Signavio Process Manager has helped our organization adapt to changes significantly because we have been working on process maps predominantly where the downstream is the operations team. The operations team churns out volumes and does not face customers directly, but are the ones who deliver what the customer needs toward the end. While preparing these process maps, we come across full-time equivalent (FTE) savings that we could achieve, and the number of hours that we could save. We could take this back to the operations team to help them understand that they need not speak to multiple teams to get data; they can look up the process. For initial days, whenever training occurs or there are changes in the process, the teams are empowered to refer to the process maps without needing to depend on people to understand what is going on. This means less rework and fewer errors due to a lack of process awareness. Additionally, when we calculate FTE savings, we can inform the operation team of the number of hours saved through automation after confirming regulatory aspects. We can channel that saved time into better value propositions without investing time in tasks that add little value.

I would assess the impact of process modeling features on operational transparency as a four. I give it a four because of how well the platform could be utilized if one has a license or would be able to access it via collaborative features, and as well be able to communicate, making it less people dependent and more process dependent. A small gap of one is only because if the map has to be shared or if somebody has to work together on a map, similar to how we have Google Forms where more than two people can make changes simultaneously, the map does not allow that. One has to close it, and the next partner can only access the map after I close it. The existing changes are lost if they click on ignore or if they close the diagram. This is one feature which is sometimes bothersome. The gap of one is something that is personal feedback from my end.

If someone is a newbie and they are building a map for the first time, they definitely go through a training module. But if somebody is jumping right in to build a map for the first time, which I did more than a couple of years ago, I felt that given the extent to which we have artificial intelligence capabilities right now, it would be nice if whenever you are saving a diagram and if I build it incorrectly in terms of adhering to BPMN 2.0, errors are shown, which is really nice. There are errors and warnings that need to be corrected to adhere to the standards. It is great that it allows me to save, but in order to correct the errors, if I do not understand what the error is trying to tell me. For example, sometimes it says that the element is named wrong. I understand that; it is a verb and noun that is a requirement. But sometimes it says the edge folding is not clear, and despite trying several times, I still do not get it. SAP could consider having AI capabilities to suggest how it can be done immediately on the screen itself, perhaps in the form of a virtual assistant or something. Today, for larger errors, I go to Google to check it and try to understand. If an assistant tells me that I think the arrow may be placed wrong, I think that would help me. It would save time and help me from looking up multiple dictionaries to understand what it is trying to say.

At the moment, we are not integrating SAP Signavio Process Manager with existing ERP systems because internally I think we are using multiple enterprise resource planning tools. Because of that, there is a restraint to connect it with SAP Signavio Process Manager, and there is a lot of concern in terms of how data could be used because we work in a banking environment. We are not leveraging, and we have SAP S/4HANA. It would be great if there is a data lake that connects to the process, but at the moment, we do not do that. Every time we build a process, it is picked up by a different team, and they try to connect it with the data lake. It is a great feature which I think can be leveraged, but with the range of legacy systems that the company is using today, there is not much I can comment about how the ERP can be leveraged internally.

I have been working with SAP Signavio Process Manager for about two and a half years.

SAP Signavio Process Manager is extremely stable and reliable. The loss of data is something that need not be worried about. It is definitely reliable. The multiple channels it offers in terms of transparency allow many people to share and communicate without needing external channels, which makes it very reliable.

SAP Signavio Process Manager is scalable. If it can connect with internal ERP tools, then it is very scalable. Almost all customers would buy into this because it is offering a benchmark, enabling them to see what they are investing in and its value. This would greatly improve the scalability of the solution, but complex API issues are currently limiting its use as primarily a BPMN 2.0 tool.

I used to communicate frequently with the technical support of SAP Signavio Process Manager when I was at Fidelity. We had issues with process taxonomies while working on it. The way Level one and Level two were considered by the building team versus our understanding was drastically different. We had countless connects with the product team to resolve issues related to LeanIX integration. The taxonomy needed to be redone because it was not providing the results we expected in LeanIX. We also had multiple discussions to understand how to set up attributes in the dictionary for reuse across multiple pages.

Before SAP Signavio Process Manager, I used to literally use Visio, PowerPoint, and Figma for whiteboards. It was the first time I ever did BPMN 2.0 on SAP Signavio Process Manager, so that was my first introduction. Up until then, it was just a redundant way of building process maps without any standards. How I built and how the other person built was extremely different, and we had to connect on calls to understand what the process map was trying to convey. Today we do not have that issue; that is covered because the standard speaks only one language.

I participated in the decision-making process about SAP Signavio Process Manager. We evaluated Oracle, which also has BPMN diagram capabilities, but SAP Signavio Process Manager was seen as providing more value. Despite being pricey, it offered value regarding multiple segments: one is process mining, another is data and analytics, and the third was how governance was built within itself, not needing to have an external framework to talk to it. All these factors gave SAP Signavio Process Manager that edge where we were ready to pay more. However, after implementing everything, we realized that mining had to be purchased separately. We compared the customer journey models of SAP Signavio Process Manager with those of Smaply and felt Smaply was more user-friendly. I worked on customer journeys and found it tough to connect them with datasets, NPS scores, and analytics in SAP Signavio Process Manager, making it challenging to get stakeholder buy-in. The limited options for customizing customer journeys, such as adding analytics, images, and modifying text styles, made it harder to present them effectively.

I am not aware of the pricing and licensing of SAP Signavio Process Manager in the current firm I am working for. However, in my last company, Fidelity International, I was introduced to SAP Signavio Process Manager. From an India INR standpoint, it felt pricey initially. But at the same time, I think the value it brought to the organization was much greater than what we paid for. The issue with Fidelity International was that being a very old company, it had many legacy systems. SAP Signavio Process Manager struggled to interact with the legacy systems due to API issues, which led to redundancy and diminished benefits in process visibility. We had limited licenses initially; we just had eight licenses for a team of thirteen. When one person had manager access, the other person could not use the Process Manager license. For process mining, we had to buy additional licenses, which felt like a significant issue since if we were already paying for Process Manager for process maps, we should have access to analyze it as well. It could have been provided as a bundle, but it was not. I think that is a significant pricing issue that could be worked on.

I do use the collaborative workspace feature of SAP Signavio Process Manager. Our stakeholders who are outside of SAP Signavio Process Manager environment do use the collaborative feature because they want to repeatedly. That is definitely there. Apart from the dictionary, there is this version control, which is brilliant because if I want to revoke my previous changes, I can come back to it as well as if there is a stakeholder who just wants to understand what has been changed in his or her absence, that could be tracked easily. At the same time, it gives a benefit of being able to add comments if he or she does not have the license. Through the collaborative mode, we have our stakeholders who are external to our technology environment. They would not enter the system, being able to delete or modify but being able to add comments that forms a communication channel for us to make changes that could accommodate the requirements.

I would rate SAP Signavio Process Manager an 8.5 overall.

My main use cases for SAP Signavio Process Manager relate to process analysis, optimization, and data-driven continuous improvement. I have experience working with SAP tools in the process management area, including Signavio and SAP HANA, particularly in environments where it was essential to combine operational data with process modeling.

In previous projects, when we needed to understand how a process was actually being executed versus how it was originally designed, we relied on analytical tools that allowed us to reconstruct the real process path using system data. This helped identify bottlenecks, inefficiencies, deviations, and improvement opportunities. The insights obtained supported initiatives to reduce operational costs, improve cycle and delivery times, and strengthen overall process performance.

I used SAP Signavio Process Manager specifically to access actionable data insights, visualize end-to-end process flows, and support optimization efforts. The platform was key for validating process behavior, enhancing transparency, and enabling informed decision-making in process improvement initiatives.

One of the best features of SAP Signavio Process Manager is its intuitive and powerful process modeling environment. The modeling tool is easy to use, provides clear structure, and supports standardization, which was especially valuable when comparing our internal processes against global frameworks such as APQC’s Process Classification Framework.

In addition to modeling, the most impactful feature for me is Signavio’s data-driven analysis. Its process intelligence capabilities identify real execution gaps and highlight improvement opportunities that are not always obvious through manual review. This ability to pinpoint inefficiencies, visualize deviations, and suggest areas for optimization is particularly valuable because it supports informed decision-making and facilitates alignment with leadership.

Overall, the combination of a strong modeling tool and powerful data analysis makes Signavio an effective solution for uncovering improvement opportunities and supporting continuous process optimization.

SAP Signavio Process Manager could be improved in several areas to make it more competitive and accessible. From my experience, the strongest opportunity lies in enhancing its process mining capabilities. While Signavio offers solid functionality, other tools like Celonis provide deeper insights and more seamless integrations, especially when working with large datasets or complex execution paths. Strengthening the integration layer and expanding native process mining features would significantly elevate the platform.

Another area for improvement is pricing. The solution tends to be positioned at a premium level, which can limit adoption compared to other tools that offer similar or stronger capabilities at a more accessible cost. A more flexible or tiered pricing model would make the product more appealing to a broader range of organizations.

Regarding usability, while the platform is powerful, it can feel advanced for users who do not have a process engineering background. Improving the user interface and offering more intuitive guidance for non-technical stakeholders would help increase engagement and ease of use across teams.

In terms of support, the setup experience is manageable, especially with technical assistance, but there is room for SAP to provide more consistent and accessible support to ensure a smoother learning curve for new users.

Overall, enhancements in process mining depth, integration capabilities, pricing flexibility, and user-friendliness would make SAP Signavio Process Manager a more compelling and widely adoptable solution.

I have used SAP Signavio Process Manager for less than a year, primarily through a desktop trial to evaluate the tool’s capabilities.

I would rate SAP support a seven. In my experience, the level of support can vary depending on the customer’s profile, and there is room for SAP to offer more consistent and accessible solutions for all types of organizations. Strengthening the responsiveness and ensuring a more uniform support experience would significantly improve the overall value of the platform.

The initial setup was relatively straightforward, but the overall experience depends on the user’s background. SAP Signavio Process Manager is a more advanced tool designed primarily for process engineers or users with experience in process management. For these profiles, the setup and onboarding are manageable. However, for users outside the process department, the tool can feel less intuitive compared to other platforms I’ve worked with. There is room for improvement in usability and guidance to make the setup and early adoption easier for a broader range of users.

Overall, I would score SAP Signavio Process Manager a seven because I actually prefer another tool, Celonis, which I think is a little bit better in process mining. I actually believe the integration of Celonis is better than SAP Signavio Process Manager for what I evaluated before.

My use case for SAP Signavio Process Manager is to refine processes.

I have not worked extensively with all features, but I can provide a basic overview. The SAP Signavio Process Manager operates smoothly.

SAP Signavio Process Manager is a good solution that can be used in various organizations.

SAP Signavio Process Manager is definitely a stable solution because it operates within the SAP universe.

The user interface can feel outdated and complex for non-technical users, so it should be improved. It should also integrate with non-SAP systems for better functionality.

I have less than one year of experience with SAP Signavio Process Manager, approximately 11 months.

I would rate technical support from SAP Signavio Process Manager a seven out of ten. I have not encountered issues myself, but one of my colleagues found that support was provided quite late, resolving the problem in one or two days rather than instantly.

Positive

SAP Signavio Process Manager is the only solution I have ever used.

The initial setup of SAP Signavio Process Manager was not very easy for me because I come from a non-technical background. With time, I found it became easier to use. Initially it was challenging, but it became easier as I progressed.

The price of SAP Signavio Process Manager was quite high but could be afforded by an organization with a sensitive data scale.

I did not evaluate other options before choosing SAP Signavio Process Manager because I believe in the market share statistics, as SAP has 23% of the market share.

I have worked with SAP Signavio and SAP platforms including SAP SD, SAP CC, and SAP FI, but I haven't worked with any other SAP tools.

I would rate SAP Signavio Process Manager 10 out of 10.

We use SAP Signavio Process Manager for drawing our processes.

The ability to perform queries is a feature unique to SAP Signavio Process Manager, and it proves to be very useful for our needs.

At the moment, I don't see any areas for improvement within SAP Signavio Process Manager.

I have used the solution for five years.

The stability of the solution is high; I would rate it a nine out of ten.

We don't use it extensively, and I haven't noticed any problems with scalability. For our use, it's just perfect.

There are no issues with the software. I would rate their technical support a ten.

Positive

I tried Bizagi and a lot of other solutions but decided to go for SAP Signavio Process Manager because of its query capabilities.

There was no trouble at all with the initial setup. It is web-based, we just log into Signavio remote, so there was no implementation needed in our systems. Technically, it is easy to set up. Training is not a big deal; it is quite easy to handle.

We deployed it in-house. Since it is a cloud-based solution, there is nothing much to do.

The solution is useful for time saving. We can draw and document our processes, then analyze data within SAP Signavio Process Manager, which is beneficial for me as an analyst. However, we don't use it extensively enough to see significant time savings.

After SAP acquired Signavio, the prices increased significantly, making it too expensive for our small company to afford.

Based on my experience, I would recommend SAP Signavio Process Manager to others if they can afford it. I rate this solution a ten out of ten.

I utilize it to relook at our ITSM processes to readdress and rebalance them because we've realized we have different processes for different customers we support.

Therefore, Signavio is a great place to start to identify those processes. And then, try and figure out things from these different variants. 

Many processes might have the same initial steps, but later on might have different steps. Signavio helps us identify the differences and figure out - even though the process name and first five steps might be the same, steps six, seven, and eight could be different variants.

We use it for our support process, ITSM stack. It includes chain incidents and so on. The most complex process we discovered is how T-Systems manages change requests for different customers. We have about 550 customers, almost all with different change processes, which is understandable because sometimes you need to tie into the customer's system. 

However, having 550 different variations of the same change process doesn't make sense. We're trying to rationalize it so that 80% of the process is harmonized, and the remaining 20% is unique to each customer. That's something we can live with; 550 completely different processes are not. So, that's something we recently discovered.

It has definitely reduced the time we take to do analytics or business processes. It's a great product to use.

Moreover, the collaboration hub in SAP enhances stakeholder engagement in our processes. 

We've also used another product, a third-party product called ARIS. ARIS, and in one point of time, used to be commended by SAP until they decided to build their own capability in their own product suite.

So having that visual representation of the process being able to let the stakeholders look at what that process does, how it could impact something, and also model a change and see the impact of that change is invaluable.

It's not just SAP. But if you have a tool like ARIS, then it could be JDE, it could be EBS, it could be Dynamics, it could be anything. The target system doesn't matter then.

But to be able to collaborate and make decisions. Because the faster you can close down a business process, the faster that value chain can go live for a company.

The visual representation is extremely powerful and easy to use in process modeling and analysis. 

I can show it to someone who doesn't know business process mapping, and they still understand because it's visually presented. It becomes easy to explain variants and what needs to change.

It's very easy and intuitive once the person understands it. It's like riding a bike. It's extremely intuitive, which is why some people on our team of 15-17 people, who had never done any business process work previously and come from a ServiceNow background, were able to see how these processes line up and model them easily.

There is room for improvement in analytics. People don't realize it, but the world has changed in the last six to eight months. Customers want to see AI like ChatGPT and ML capabilities in all aspects of business processes and reporting. That would be my recommendation for any OEM in this value chain.

Reporting could definitely be improved.

I would like to see new features in analytics. I like that they analyze the process and give it to me visually, but I'd like the option to use DPMM instead of just DPC. I'd also like the option to have the process map laid out top to bottom instead of horizontally.

Especially a choice between DPMN and EPC as a format. Because there are some people who are very comfortable with the EPC notation. The process is very clearly event-driven. There's an event, there's an action. It's very simple to understand.
BPMN, which is the most popular business process notation, generally tends to have multiple frames. Actually, in multiple swimlanes rather. And those frames could each represent a particular kind of entity. Maybe it's an action, maybe it's an actor, maybe it's an event.

So there are two different ways of notation. I just like Signavio to give us the ability to choose that notation. Because some companies use BPMN and some use the EPC. And then, if the minute you make that change, I'd like them to give us the flexibility of having an already plotted or vertically plotted option.

Moreover, I would like to see improvement in the visual part. It's the piece that needs improvement. Currently, you can plot the diagram horizontally or vertically. However, I'd like the option to change the way the diagram is created, like switching between different notations.

I have been using it for four years now. 

It is a fairly stable product.

Most issues in Signavio come about because of the initial deployment when you're looking at the target systems and the interface.

Maybe there are firewalls in between that need to be opened. You need special permissions from security for that. Otherwise, I haven't seen any big roadblocks or show-stoppers.

In the current system, about 12 users are working with it because we don't want a large team. 

In one other project, it was a tiny team. The largest team had 15 people in it. So, I don't have much experience with the scalability of this product. 

No problems with tech support as long as you articulate the problem well. Signavio is in a position to answer. There are a couple of things in Signavio that I'd like better.

For our specific use case, we decided to go with Signavio without looking at other options. We have a strong SAP team within our systems, and they are stakeholders. We asked them which process management tool they would recommend for business modeling. They suggested Signavio because they already had a good license agreement with them. So we decided to deploy it internally for our internal processes to see how well it works. We didn't do a formal evaluation.

The initial setup is not complex. The teams didn't reach out to SAP for help. 

We deployed it both on the cloud and on-premises.   

For the deployment process, we would have started with creating the business case or figuring out the value chains that needed to be impacted, then got into a little bit of data work, and finally the deployment.

For the deployment, we have one product owner in the system and two maintenance staff. So just three people are maintaining this product for us. I don't think it would be any different for other companies. 

It might be different because there'd be a shared services team that manages Signavio for multiple customers. 

Whereas in a team if it is for the internal team, three people are enough. It's one small team that is supporting us internally.

I have seen an ROI. Within six to eight months after deploying new processes recommended by Signavio, target effort saving is achieved. If there is effort saving, it translates to cost savings. 

We have a yearly basis license. We don't find it too expensive for our use case. 

It helps us harmonize processes and those processes result in significant effort saving, then the product is paid for itself.

Overall, I would rate the solution a seven out of ten. 

We primarily use SAP Signavio Process Manager to document processes, especially in the banking sector. Many sectors use it more heavily due to ISO and CMMI-related procedures. The processes need to be kept for collaboration, publishing, and other related activities. 

We are a partner with SAP, and I am a product manager for the process. I use the product as an end user and also sell it to customers.

The collaboration features have been very effective in eliminating a lot of wasted time between calls, sending emails, and reminders. With everything in one place, it provides transparency and accessibility to new procedures and updates.

The most valuable features in SAP Signavio include process mining tools, documenting the processes, and simulation. The Collaboration Hub is especially useful for collaborative tasks and ensuring transparency across teams.

The free trial needs to have more options for end users, such as including Process Intelligence as a trial version. Although mentioned on the website, the governance feature is not available in the free trial. More guidance from support is also needed, as users can get lost on the website when looking for specific features.

We have been working with SAP Signavio Process Manager for one year.

In my experience, the stability of SAP Signavio Process Manager is rated eight out of ten.

I rate the scalability of the solution as seven out of ten, mainly because we are seeking more support for Arabic applications. An Arabic interface and cloud hosting in Kuwait would also be beneficial.

SAP support responds instantly, but more guidance is needed. Users can get lost on the website and may need additional help to bring their requests and questions to the right place.

Positive

Setting up SAP Signavio Process Manager is very straightforward as it is a web application. There is no wizard or extensive setup required.

Our customers have not yet seen a return on investment as it is still relatively new in the market, and there are no success stories yet.

Due to its SaaS nature, it is slightly challenging as a BPM tool. The pricing could be reduced further. I don't have the exact figures, but I believe it can be lowered because it's cloud-based.

I highly recommend using SAP Signavio Process Manager as it is very useful. It assists with documenting, simulating processes, and saving costs on time, making it a very effective BPM tool.

I'd rate the solution nine out of ten.

I use SAP Signavio Process Manager to model processes to the former operating model.

SAP Signavio Process Manager can be a little bit clunky. The solution’s pricing could be improved.

I have been using SAP Signavio Process Manager for six years.

I previously used a different solution called Visio.

SAP Signavio charges a lot of money. It's 2,500 per annum for an enterprise license and 30 pounds per annum for a collaboration license, which you have to buy in 500. So, it's 500 lots of 30 pounds every year plus however many enterprise licenses you want to use. We're talking about 1,50,000 a year for what we use. If we were to increase that, that would be about 2,00,000 a year.

ARIS costs 1,75,000 a year. Pricing for both solutions is comparable to a certain extent. To me, that's still an extortionate amount of money for letting us use the tool, and we're still paying for it. However, they're not giving us any support.

I am satisfied with the solution overall since we've got 2,400 processes bundled. We are two companies that have merged together. One-half of the company uses ARIS, and the other half uses Signavio. We're looking to see which is the better tool so that we can move to one joined-up tool. Currently, there are 2,400 processes in Signavio and over 1,000 processes in ARIS, and both sides believe theirs is the best tool.

SAP Signavio Process Manager works fine with our existing systems and tools. It imports things we want and exports PDFs that we upload into libraries for our customers to use.

SAP Signavio Process Manager has got a lot more functionality than we use. Users should think about what they need it for and answer if it performs the functions that they need it for. We could use a lot more functionality if we had the time, but it does the job that we need it for. I make sure that people only pay this kind of money if they actually need what it offers.

Overall, I rate SAP Signavio Process Manager an eight out of ten.

We build up process management in the company. We started with the process landscape and are now doing a transformation.

I like the Collaboration Hub functions and the Process Manager's adjustability. It's easy and specific.

For the collaboration functions, we use the commenting and quick model functions for process owners who don't have specific knowledge about Process Manager. It's easy for them to do revisions with the quick model, and we also use the comment function on the diagrams.

There is a lot of room for improvement. We've submitted a lot of OSS requests for special inputs we need, like glossary or dictionary entries in Quick Model. Currently, that's not functional, so I have to go to Process Manager to create dictionary entries. It would be better to do this in Quick Model as well. 

Also, we often used the "create" button; there was a blue button in the right corner, but it's gone with the last release. Now, I have to go into Process Manager to access Quick Model. 

I have been using it since January.

There are no stability issues. We aren't using Process Mining. It's just Collaboration Hub and Process Manager. If there were issues, I would be concerned.

We have around 50 to 80 end users. 

We had three or four tickets, but they were answered quickly. If the customer service and support couldn't answer, they started a request for us, so it was okay.

Positive

We had ADONIS (BOC Group).

Pros: The collaboration function and Collaboration Hub. Adonis had no portal or anything like that. It was just the Process Manager. Also, Signavio's navigation is easier.

Cons: The price and limited licenses. Adonis was not as expensive.

ADONIS has more Process Manager functions and is more user-friendly, although it lacks a collaboration app. 

The initial setup process was easy.

We handled the entire deployment. We started using it in January. We're building the process landscape and involving employees with training sessions on the tool and its methodology. This way, they can use it in workshops for the transformation. That's our strategy to make it public in the company.

So, our deployment process is still ongoing.

It's easy to maintain, not difficult at all.

We just implemented it. We will see it in the next two or three years.

We have SAP Signavio Process Manager and Collaboration Hub licenses, and the company is fine with them.

SAP is always more expensive.  I don't think SAP is worth the expensive license. The per-user cost is hard to calculate and forecast for a big company like ours with 19 countries. 

We just started in Germany, and it's so expensive that we have to pause and evaluate the usability for all countries and determine the licenses needed. I don't think the price is justified by it being the best and most valuable tool.

I would recommend Signavio to other users looking to implement it. Overall, I would rate the solution a six out of ten. 

My advice:

You need a plan, and it must be a good one. We're not just deploying the process management tool; we're trying to implement process management in the entire organization. 

So, it's better to have a running process management system in your company before deploying Signavio. 

If you're starting with both, it's hard to maintain because Signavio has a lot of functions, and you have to decide which ones you need.

We use it for process management within our organization. It helps us map various processes, such as budget-to-report (B2R), High-to-rate (H2R), and Purchase to Pay (P2P), into SAP. It enables us to maintain an overview of all IT systems involved, allowing us to identify and analyze processes that help streamline across different locations and warehouses, facilitating collaboration and easy sharing of information.

It has streamlined and consolidated processes, offering a holistic view of the PTP process, and leading to the identification of gaps and inefficiencies. This consolidation has allowed a reassessment of supporting systems, potentially leading to their consolidation or elimination for more efficient maintenance. Additionally, it revealed redundant roles, enabling a more streamlined distribution of tasks. The analysis highlighted challenges in data maintenance across multiple systems, emphasizing the need for improved real-time transactions and informed decision-making on system usage and data management.

One of the most valuable features is the consistency across the process model. The drag-and-drop functionality in Signavio is impressive and user-friendly, allowing easy connection to other elements without the need for excessive back-and-forth. The consistency in diagrams and objects permits effortless dragging, dropping, and reuse. Signavio users can efficiently develop and prepare flows without the need for extensive time investment.

An enhancement I would appreciate is broader integration capabilities. Beyond connecting with SAP ERP, the ability to seamlessly integrate with various backend ERP systems, such as Oracle NetSuite or Microsoft Dynamics, would be valuable. This integration should facilitate data retrieval and direct connections to both the process flows and associated documents. An additional feature that would be excellent is the capability to execute database queries or actions directly from within the VPN model. The capability to create a process map and seamlessly initiate actions like generating a sales order, triggering delivery, and managing the pick pack process – all within the VPN model, would be beneficial.

I have been using it for a couple of years.

The stability is satisfactory, and I haven't encountered any issues while working with it. I would rate it an eight out of ten.

It offers good scalability. I would rate it seven out of ten.

Technical support has been somewhat challenging; there hasn't been much visibility on how to create a ticket or integrate with SAP. I would rate it a six out of ten, as there is room for improvement in terms of interaction and integration guidance.

Neutral

The initial setup was straightforward.

Introducing a sandbox system tightly integrated with SAP, offering a use case out of the box for a 30-day trial, would allow users to explore and assess the system's advantages. Similar to cloud providers like Azure, and AWS, providing free access for a year, Signavio could offer a 30-day subscription for users to play around and experience real-time benefits with predefined content. This approach would provide a hands-on experience beyond presentations and YouTube videos, fostering better understanding and showcasing the tool's advantages for organizations considering it. Overall, I would rate it eight out of ten.

When a client, primarily operating on SAP, required a new process for employee onboarding due to the inclusion and increased regulatory requirements, we documented it using Signavio Process Manager. This process involved thorough evaluation and implementation of regular checks to ensure compliance during project assignments and task completion.

To address the client's needs, the organization structure and implementation regions were required to be completely understood. The process was structured with levels, to easily distribute and define roles and applications. Onboarding included evaluation, regular checkups, third-party health assessments, and mitigation procedures for any issue that arose. Overall, a high-level process was defined from level one to level four to ensure comprehensive employee onboarding.

It is highly user-friendly and easy to use, even for those who are not familiar with product modeling. Its intuitive interface allows for easy understanding and navigation, ensuring that users of varying levels of expertise can effectively utilize the tool.

The main challenge is the lack of hierarchy or structure in defining the roles, organizations, and applications. This limitation hampers the ability to assess the impact of automating processes or changes in organizational structure. It would be beneficial to have a defined leveling or hierarchy system to facilitate better understanding and analysis. More openness and flexibility would enhance its capabilities.

I have been using it for six months.

It provides excellent stability. I would rate it nine out of ten.

It offers good scalability. I would rate it eight out of ten.

They provide outstanding customer support services.

Positive

We previously used ARIS for four years, but we switched to Signavio due to its seamless integration with SAP. This integration allows for effortless access to real-time information without requiring additional effort or manual input.

The initial setup was straightforward and efficient. I would rate it eight out of ten.

When the implementation process started, it took approximately fifteen to twenty days, involving three individuals who were responsible for it.

I found the pricing of the solution to be moderate compared to other choices. It is neither cheap nor expensive, falling in line with similar offerings in the market. I would rate it seven out of ten.

My advice is to primarily establish clear standards and conventions for documenting processes. Lack of it may lead to a loss of utility and effectiveness of the solution. It is crucial to have a virtual, standardized approach to ensure consistency. I would rate it eight out of ten.