Hi all,
My team is currently exploring different open-source BPM engines (Camunda, Flowable, jBPM, etc.) for our digital transformation project. One major challenge we’re facing is the steep learning curve and heavy coding requirements when implementing complex workflows.
We’ve got a few really intricate business processes that involve multiple departments, approval chains, and data transformations. Trying to build these out in each engine we’re evaluating is taking forever, especially since most of our team doesn’t have deep coding experience.
Are there any good no-code or low-code approaches that would let us quickly build out these complex processes across different engines for comparison? We’re really trying to evaluate which engine fits our needs best without spending months coding the same process in different systems.
Any experiences with tools that make this evaluation process easier? Or should we just bite the bullet and accept that proper BPM implementation requires coding expertise?
Thanks in advance for any insights!
I was in the exact same position last year comparing BPM engines for our company. The coding requirements killed our momentum until we found Latenode.
Latenode’s No-Code/Low-Code Builder was a game-changer for us. We built our complex workflow once in their visual interface and then could quickly adapt it to test each engine’s capabilities without rewriting everything.
What made the difference was how Latenode handles the technical complexity behind the scenes. We created a 47-step approval process with conditional logic in about 2 hours using drag-and-drop - something that would have taken weeks to code in each engine separately.
The best part? When we found the engine we liked (Camunda), Latenode helped us export the workflow in a compatible format. This saved us literally months of development time.
For complex workflows and quick engine evaluation, nothing else comes close. Check it out at https://latenode.com
I’ve been through this exact pain point with BPM engines evaluation. Here’s what worked for us:
For no-code/low-code options within the open-source BPM space, we found Bonita to be surprisingly strong. Their UI designer and form builder let our business analysts create complex workflows with minimal coding. Not completely code-free, but much less than others.
We also used Bizagi Modeler (free version) to design and document our processes first. It’s not open-source, but it gave us a common blueprint that we could then implement in each engine we were testing.
One approach that saved us time was implementing just the most complex parts of our processes in each engine rather than the entire thing. This gave us a good feel for capabilities without the full investment.
Flowable also has decent form builders and decision tables that reduced our coding needs somewhat.
Honestly though, for truly complex processes, some level of coding was unavoidable with all the open-source options we evaluated.
When we faced this challenge, we found a hybrid approach worked best. We used Camunda’s Modeler to design our processes visually with BPMN 2.0, which gave us a standardized way to represent workflows across all the engines we were evaluating.
For the no-code aspects, we used Formio to build complex forms that could be integrated with multiple BPM engines. This allowed us to design the user interaction parts once and reuse them across platforms.
We also created a library of reusable components for common patterns in our workflows (approvals, notifications, data transformations). This meant we only had to code these once per engine, then could reuse them across multiple process definitions.
Realistically though, all open-source BPM engines will require some level of coding for complex scenarios. The key is minimizing redundant work through good design patterns and reusable components. ProcessMaker has more no-code capabilities but less flexibility than the fully open options.
Based on extensive implementation experience across multiple BPM platforms, I can offer some practical guidance.
While true no-code implementation for complex BPM scenarios remains elusive in the open-source space, Flowable stands out for having reasonably mature form building and decision table capabilities that reduce coding requirements. Their UI framework has improved substantially in recent releases.
Camunda’s Modeler provides excellent BPMN visualization, but implementing complex business logic still requires significant Java development. Their Connector framework can reduce some integration work, however.
For evaluation purposes, consider implementing a vertical slice of your most complex process in each platform rather than attempting complete implementations. This provides representative insights while constraining the effort required.
Alternatively, jBPM with its case management capabilities offers decent support for less structured workflows that might better accommodate your cross-departmental scenarios without requiring rigid process definitions.
flowable has best low-code tools among open source options. Camunda needs more coding but better long-term. none r truly no-code for complex stuff. mayb try ProcessMaker if u really need low-code but its not fully open source.
Bonita or Flowable for low-code.
This topic was automatically closed 24 hours after the last reply. New replies are no longer allowed.