Try our new research platform with insights from 80,000+ expert users
Targetprocess Logo

Targetprocess pros and cons

Vendor: Apptio
4.4 out of 5

Pros & Cons summary

Buyer's Guide

Get pricing advice, tips, use cases and valuable features from real users of this product.
Get the report

Prominent pros & cons

PROS

Targetprocess has increased agility health measures by 30% and improved feature cycle time across the ART by 50% over three years.
Targetprocess has enhanced visibility, as PI objectives achieved are now at 80 to 90%, compared to 55% initially.
Targetprocess reduces waste by maximizing integrations, allowing for a more data-driven approach and improved portfolio change management.
Targetprocess has halved cycle time from 97 to 45 days by identifying bottlenecks and improving flow with visualization and tracking functionality.
Targetprocess dramatically increases productivity through integration with other tools, reducing time to market and project planning by half.

CONS

Costing can become substantial when using Targetprocess across all teams.
Dashboards with large data sets can cause performance lags or time-outs.
Introducing more flexible, template-based RBAC configuration would be beneficial.
Self-service in configuring new item types, workflows, and automation is not user-friendly and requires external help, making it expensive.
Integration, user experience, and customer support require improvements.
 

Targetprocess Pros review quotes

JP
Senior Software Engineer at AT&T
Feb 9, 2026
It is a very recommendable tool because it has had a significant positive impact on our organization, and the ability of Targetprocess to integrate with other tools has dramatically increased productivity by cutting down the time to market and project planning by half.
Terry Wanjiru - PeerSpot reviewer
Technical Lead at Cardinal Health
Feb 24, 2026
Targetprocess has positively impacted our organization by reducing waste through maximizing integrations, allowing us to move away from manual rate management and tracking, enabling greater visibility to portfolio change management, and enabling us to become more data-driven.
Mike Trevis - PeerSpot reviewer
Fleet Manager at UPS
Feb 24, 2026
I have seen a return on investment with Targetprocess, including improvement in cycle time from 97 to 45 days by understanding the bottlenecks and flow improvements through visualization and tracking functionality.
Learn what your peers think about Targetprocess. Get advice and tips from experienced pros sharing their opinions. Updated: February 2026.
884,797 professionals have used our research since 2012.
JasonLiu1 - PeerSpot reviewer
Senior Software Engineer at GE
Mar 3, 2026
Targetprocess has positively impacted the organization, as visibility was a crucial deliverable, agility health measures have increased by 30%, feature cycle time across the ART has improved by 50% over the past three years, and PI objectives achieved are now at 80 to 90% versus 55% when starting.
 

Targetprocess Cons review quotes

JP
Senior Software Engineer at AT&T
Feb 9, 2026
I believe that Targetprocess can be improved in areas such as integration, user experience, and customer support, which is somewhat slow and should be improved.
Terry Wanjiru - PeerSpot reviewer
Technical Lead at Cardinal Health
Feb 24, 2026
Dashboards with large data sets can cause performance lags or time-outs, and introducing more flexible, template-based RBAC configuration would be beneficial.
Mike Trevis - PeerSpot reviewer
Fleet Manager at UPS
Feb 24, 2026
One way Targetprocess can be improved is by making self-service in configuring new item types, workflows, and automation easier, as it currently requires us to pay a contractor to do these things, hence being a bit expensive.
Learn what your peers think about Targetprocess. Get advice and tips from experienced pros sharing their opinions. Updated: February 2026.
884,797 professionals have used our research since 2012.
JasonLiu1 - PeerSpot reviewer
Senior Software Engineer at GE
Mar 3, 2026
One area for improvement in Targetprocess is that costing can become substantial when wanting to use it across all teams.