Which Pega alternative fits your workflow and case management?
If your renewal, data residency rule or dependence on Pega Cloud is pushing you to look elsewhere, the short answer is this: Flowable covers BPMN, CMMN and DMN in one engine, so it is the closest match when case management is central to your workflow. Operaton covers BPMN 2.0 and runs DMN models, which suits teams whose work is mostly structured process flows with decision tables. CIB seven is a BPMN 2.0 engine running inside the Java Virtual Machine, a fit for process automation without a need for case management. No Pega licensing change is supplied for this page, so do not treat one as the trigger. The decision points are more practical: how much of your Pega application is case-based with unpredictable steps, how many decision rules sit in declarative form, and how much of the user interface you are prepared to rebuild yourself.
Pega also offers a client-managed option, so the question is not only where the platform runs. Pega's client-managed cloud model lets clients run Pega Infinity with Docker, Kubernetes and Helm on validated providers, including Amazon EKS, Azure AKS, Google GKE, Red Hat OpenShift, VMware Tanzu Kubernetes Grid Integrated Edition and bare metal Kubernetes. Under that model, the client runs the infrastructure while Pega provides certification and 24/7 support. Moving to an open-source engine changes who holds the license and who operates the stack, which matters as much as residency. Ask your team to map, for each application, who currently owns the runtime, the license, the upgrade cycle and the support contract, and confirm with Pega exactly which of these would change under each target.
Flowable, Operaton and CIB seven compared for Pega workloads
Pega combines case management, decisioning and a low-code UI in one platform, so no single open-source engine replaces all of it. The three options below are Apache-2.0 process engines, and each one covers the workflow layer differently. Compare them on the BPMN, CMMN and DMN support you need, the engine's upstream and lineage, and how much of the UI and rules work you will build yourself.
Flowable for case and decision workloads
Flowable is an Apache-2.0 Java engine that supports BPMN, CMMN and DMN, which makes it the option in this group closest to the case management and decisioning features many Pega applications use. It can run embedded inside your application or as a standalone service with REST APIs. The trade-off is that the open-source edition leaves you to design the case model, the decision tables and the user interface yourself. Confirm which CMMN features your Pega case types depend on, such as stages, milestones and sentries, and test them against Flowable's documentation. Flowable also sells commercial editions, so ask the vendor which support and feature differences apply to the version you choose.
Operaton for Camunda 7 migrations
Operaton is an Apache-2.0 BPMN 2.0 engine born from the Camunda 7 codebase. Its repository states a fully compatible REST API, database schema and deployable BPMN and DMN models, and it offers an OpenRewrite recipe for migrating from Camunda 7. It fits best when your Pega workflows have already been modeled or integrated in a Camunda 7 estate, or when you want the smallest change to existing process models. Its scope is BPMN, so confirm whether it provides the CMMN case management your Pega case types require. Pega's rule-based decisioning and case lifecycle features will need to be rebuilt either way.
CIB seven as a JVM-native BPMN engine
CIB seven is an Apache-2.0 workflow and process automation framework whose core is a native BPMN 2.0 process engine that runs inside the Java Virtual Machine. It suits teams that want a Java-only runtime they can embed, test and operate with their existing JVM tooling. Because its documented core is BPMN, treat case management and decisioning as open questions. Confirm whether CIB seven supports CMMN and DMN, how it handles long-running human tasks, and what its upgrade path looks like before you commit a Pega migration to it. Your team will also own the forms, rules and dashboards that Pega provides out of the box.
Which Pega capabilities map to open-source engines
This table maps common Pega case management, workflow and decisioning capabilities to Flowable, Operaton and CIB seven, with a coverage mark for each row. Read full as a feature the engine provides out of the box, partial as a feature that needs configuration or custom code, and to confirm as a point to verify against the engine version you select. The main takeaway is that BPMN and DMN carry process and decision logic well, while UI, rule authoring and connectors are work you build yourself.
| Pega capability | Open-source option | Coverage note |
|---|---|---|
| Case lifecycle and stages | Flowable CMMN engine | Partial. CMMN in Flowable models adaptive case work with stages, milestones and sentries. Operaton and CIB seven are BPMN 2.0 engines, so case-style work needs BPMN modeling or a custom layer. |
| Workflow and task assignment | Flowable, Operaton or CIB seven BPMN user tasks | Full. User tasks, candidate groups and assignees are standard BPMN. Confirm how each engine exposes task inboxes through its REST APIs. |
| SLAs and escalations | BPMN timers and boundary events | Partial. Timers and escalation events cover deadlines and routing. Business calendars, SLA reporting and breach dashboards usually need custom build. |
| Decisioning rules and decision tables | DMN decision tables in Flowable, Operaton or CIB seven | Full. DMN covers decision tables and hit policies. Confirm the FEEL expression support and any Pega strategy features you rely on. |
| Declarative or low-code rules | No direct equivalent in the engines | To confirm. Engines do not provide a Pega-style declarative rules designer. Plan for rule authoring in code, DMN models or a separate tool. |
| UI and portals | Custom front end or a separate UI layer | Gap to fill. Engines expose REST APIs but no case UI. Budget for your own front end, forms and portal. |
| Connectors and integration | Service tasks, REST calls and custom adapters | Partial. Service tasks and scripts handle many integrations. Pre-built Pega connectors have no open-source counterpart, so each system needs a built or adapted connector. |
| Reporting | Engine history tables and external analytics | Partial. Historic data is queryable, and Flowable and Operaton can feed external BI tools. Operational dashboards need to be built or added. |
| Identity and access | Your identity provider with engine group and user management | To confirm. Engines handle task assignment against groups, but authentication, SSO and fine-grained case access depend on your identity stack and must be verified per engine. |
What Pega case management logic carries over to Flowable CMMN
Case management carries over to Flowable most cleanly when you treat a Pega case type as a set of CMMN concepts rather than as a file to convert. In CMMN, a *case plan* holds *stages* and *tasks* that can run in any order, *milestones* record that a business condition has been reached, and *sentries* are the entry and exit criteria that decide when a task or stage becomes available or closes. Most Pega case types have a stage-and-step shape that maps reasonably well onto these elements, but the mapping is not one to one. Pega's flow-level rules, declarative processing and case lifecycle conventions do not have direct CMMN equivalents, so each one needs a deliberate decision: model it as a sentry, move it into a service, or drop it because the business no longer needs it.
The harder reinterpretation sits in data and declarative rules. Pega data pages, declarative expressions and when-conditions often hold logic that recalculates values automatically whenever a related property changes. Flowable has no equivalent of that automatic propagation, so you will need to decide where each calculation lives: in a case variable updated by a task, in a Java service the case calls, or in a DMN decision that the case invokes. DMN decision tables cover the classic Pega decision tables and many business-rule style conditions well, with hit policies controlling how multiple matching rows are resolved. Expression-based rules that depend on Pega's property model, clipboard lookups or Java-embedded logic usually need to be rewritten as DMN with FEEL expressions where the logic is simple, or as tested Java services where it is not. Before scoping, inventory every rule type in the application and tag it as CMMN, DMN, service or retire.
Moving a rule set is therefore a design exercise, with a workshop of business analysts, case owners and developers, not a file conversion. Ask the business to confirm the case lifecycle for each case type, the decisions that must be auditable, and the rules that exist only because of past system limitations. Plan test cases from production data for each decision and each sentry, and compare outcomes between Pega and Flowable before cutover. Confirm with Flowable whether the engine version and commercial edition you choose include the features your case types rely on, and verify the behavior of your chosen components directly in a proof of concept rather than relying on the mapping in this section.
What running an open-source Pega replacement costs over several years
This table breaks total cost into the components you pay for under a Pega subscription and under a self-hosted Flowable or Operaton stack, showing who is paid, whether each cost is one-time or recurring, and what moves it. Use it to build a like-for-like quote request, since no vendor price or DeployOpen fee is stated here.
| Cost component | Who is paid | One-time or recurring | What drives it up or down |
|---|---|---|---|
| Software license | Pega: subscription fee under Pega Cloud or client-managed cloud. Flowable, Operaton, CIB seven: no license fee for Apache-2.0 code | Recurring (Pega). Optional commercial support or editions from Flowable are also recurring if chosen | Pega term, core count and environments. Open-source cost falls to zero license, so review optional Flowable commercial editions against your support needs |
| Infrastructure | Pega Cloud provider, or your cloud, data center or Kubernetes vendor (Amazon EKS, Azure AKS, Google GKE, Red Hat OpenShift, VMware Tanzu, bare metal) | Recurring | Node count, environments (dev, test, production, DR), database and storage choices, and whether you already run a validated Kubernetes platform |
| Platform engineering | Your staff or an implementation partner for installation, clustering, upgrades and backups | Mostly one-time for setup, then recurring for upgrades and patching | Degree of automation, number of environments, and whether you adopt the engine's standard deployment patterns |
| Rebuilding rules and UIs | Your developers or a partner, because Pega rules, flows and case types must be re-expressed in BPMN, CMMN, DMN and your own front end | One-time, sized to the number of case types, rules and screens | Amount of Pega rule logic in use, how much low-code UI you replace, and reuse of existing DMN decision tables |
| Integration rework | Your integration team or partner for connectors, APIs and message flows that Pega currently handles | One-time, with some recurring maintenance | Number of connected systems and whether interfaces are already exposed as stable REST or messaging endpoints |
| Testing and parallel run | Your QA team, business users and any external testing provider | One-time for cutover, with recurring regression testing | Regulatory evidence expected, volume of cases run in parallel, and how much automated test coverage exists |
| Support | Pega: 24/7 support under the subscription. Open-source: a retainer with a support provider or in-house on-call rota | Recurring | Required response times, staffing model and whether you need after-hours coverage for case queues |
| Internal skills | Salaries or training for engineers who run BPMN, CMMN and DMN engines and Kubernetes | Recurring, with one-time training | Retention of Pega-trained staff, hiring market, and how much knowledge is documented during migration |
What you give up when you leave Pega and how teams close the gap
Leaving Pega means taking on work that the platform currently handles for you. Each gap below names the usual workaround and the effort it adds, so you can price the move before you commit to it.
Vendor-managed upgrades and support
Under Pega Cloud, Pega operates the platform, and under client-managed cloud, Pega provides certification and 24/7 support while your team runs the infrastructure. Once you leave, you own upgrade testing, patch cycles, on-call coverage and vendor escalation paths. The usual workaround is a retainer with a support partner plus an internal platform team. Ask any provider which versions they will patch, how long they keep them, and what response times they commit to in writing.
Packaged low-code rule and UI studio
Pega's rule designer, case designer and UI builder let business analysts change rules and screens without writing much code. Flowable and Operaton provide BPMN, CMMN and DMN engines but no equivalent studio for rules and screens. Teams usually close this gap with a custom front end built on a standard framework, plus a decision table editor for DMN. Budget for the design work, for user acceptance testing of every screen you rebuild, and for ongoing change requests that Pega's studio used to absorb.
Prebuilt connectors and industry frameworks
Pega ships connectors and industry-specific applications that cover common systems and regulated processes. Open-source engines give you REST and service task extension points, but connectors to your core systems must be written and maintained by you. Inventory every integration Pega handles today, including authentication, retries and message formats, before estimating the rebuild. Integration services firms and your own developers usually take this work, and it recurs whenever a connected system changes its API.
Pega-specific skills and certification
Pega has a large certified developer ecosystem, so hiring and contracting for Pega work is straightforward in many markets. Flowable, Operaton and CIB seven are Java-based engines, so your team needs BPMN, DMN and Java skills and the time to learn each engine's API. Internal training, pairing with an experienced engine consultant and documented coding standards are the usual ways to build capacity. Check whether your existing Java teams can absorb the work or whether you need new hires.
Built-in case and rule analytics
Pega provides operational reporting on case volumes, rule usage and service levels within the platform. Open-source engines expose history and audit data through their own tables and APIs, but dashboards must be built on top. Common workarounds include custom reporting on a read replica, an open-source BI tool, and event exports to a data warehouse. Confirm which history events your chosen engine records by default and how long you need to retain them for audit.
Managed compliance tooling
Pega's cloud options come with controls and evidence that your compliance team may rely on during assessments. In a self-hosted model, your team owns access control, logging, backup, change management and evidence collection. DeployOpen can prepare systems, controls and evidence for a compliance assessment, but independent auditors issue any report or attestation. Ask your auditor early which evidence they will request, and confirm with your Pega account team which controls they supply today so nothing is lost in the move.
How a Pega to Flowable or Operaton migration runs in phases
The sequence turns an opaque Pega estate into an inventory, a proven pilot and a cutover you can reverse, so each phase ends with evidence the business and auditors can check. It is designed so that no case type moves until its rules, data and controls have been validated.
Inventory case types, rules and integrations
Catalog every case type, flow, rule, data page, report, connector and scheduled job in the Pega application, with its owner and its volume of open work. Business analysts confirm which rules still reflect policy and which are dead code, and the integration team lists each system that calls or is called by Pega. The step is done when the business owners have signed the inventory and every item is marked keep, rebuild, retire or defer.
Decide data export and retention
Decide which running cases move, which close in Pega, and which history must be kept in an archive that can be queried later. Records, attachments and audit trails are separated because they carry different retention obligations. Legal, records management and privacy staff approve the retention schedule before any export job is written. The output is a signed retention matrix and an archive target that the compliance team has reviewed.
Map cases and decisions to BPMN, CMMN and DMN
Translate each Pega flow into a BPMN process for fixed sequences and into a CMMN case model where work is driven by unpredictable events and human judgment. Decision tables and declarative rules move to DMN, and rules that cannot be expressed declaratively are documented as custom Java. Expect gaps in Pega features such as its rule-level UI generation and its built-in declarative engine, which need a replacement UI or service. The step closes when a reviewer has traced each Pega rule to its new model or to a documented exception.
Pilot one bounded case type
Choose a single case type with limited integrations and a clear owner, then build it in Flowable or Operaton with its own user interface and data store. Run it against a copy of real or anonymized data in a non-production environment, with business analysts validating outcomes against the Pega results. Security reviews the role model and the access paths before any user is onboarded. The pilot is complete when the owner accepts the outputs and the defects found are fixed or accepted in writing.
Run in parallel and reconcile
Feed the same work to Pega and to the new platform for an agreed period, and reconcile case counts, decision outcomes, SLA timers and audit entries between the two. Discrepancies are logged with a root cause and assigned to the rule owner or the engineering team. Reconciliation reports are reviewed by operations and the risk function. The step ends when the outstanding discrepancies are either zero or explicitly accepted by the accountable owner.
Cut over with written rollback criteria
Before cutover, agree in writing the conditions that trigger a rollback, such as reconciliation failures above an agreed threshold, unavailable integrations or access control defects. Freeze the Pega rules for the migrated case type, move in-flight work according to the retention matrix, and switch integrations to the new endpoints. Operations confirms monitoring, backup and restore runbooks are in place before go-live. The cutover is done when the rollback criteria have been checked and the business signs the go-live record.
Decommission and retain evidence
Once each case type has run stably on the new platform, retire its Pega rules, revoke service accounts and remove unused integrations. Security performs a final access review of both platforms and deletes credentials that are no longer needed. The migration record, reconciliation reports, approvals and access reviews are stored in the archive so auditors can trace decisions after Pega is gone. Done means the decommission checklist, the access review and the evidence index have all been signed by the accountable owners.
Which Pega alternative fits by situation
When the main driver is where data lives, the question is whether you can run the process platform in the required region or inside an air-gapped network that you control. Flowable and Operaton are Java engines that you deploy into your own cloud accounts, data centers or isolated networks, so process state, task data and history stay where your residency rules require. Both are Apache-2.0 licensed, so no license server or vendor call-home is needed to run them.
- Region placement: You choose the cloud region, data center or on-premises cluster, and the engine runs there with its database.
- Air-gapped operation: Once artifacts are mirrored into your network, the engine, models and database can run without outbound internet access.
- Database location: Process history, variables and audit tables live in a database you select and back up.
- Operational access: Your staff, not a vendor, control who can reach the engine and its logs.
- Build pipeline: Container images and dependencies must also be mirrored, or the pipeline becomes the residency gap.
Confirm with your data protection or legal team which data counts as personal or regulated, and whether backups, logs and monitoring data fall under the same rule.",
When the driver is dependence on one vendor's proprietary model, standard BPMN 2.0, CMMN and DMN files plus documented REST APIs reduce how much of your process logic is tied to a single product. Flowable supports all three notations, and Operaton and CIB seven run BPMN and DMN models. Lock-in shrinks most on the process and decision layer, but it does not disappear, because the user interface, case screens, rule logic built in visual tools and integration connectors still need to be rebuilt.
- Portable models: Standard BPMN and DMN diagrams can be deployed to any compliant engine, though vendor extensions need review.
- Open APIs: REST interfaces let other systems start, query and complete work without the vendor's client libraries.
- Rebuild scope: Forms, portals, rule authoring screens and reports are new work in most cases.
- Data export: Your own database holds the runtime and history, which makes extraction a database task.
- Skills: Your team must own Java, the engine configuration and the UI stack, which changes the hiring profile.
Ask the vendor which Pega-specific constructs appear in your case types and rules, then map each one to a standard notation before estimating the rebuild.",
This path keeps Pega as the platform. Pega's client-managed cloud option lets you run Pega Infinity with Docker, Kubernetes and Helm on validated providers, including Amazon EKS, Azure AKS, Google GKE, Red Hat OpenShift, VMware Tanzu Kubernetes Grid Integrated Edition and bare metal Kubernetes. You take over infrastructure operations, while Pega provides certification and 24/7 support, so the licensing, rules and application code remain Pega assets. It addresses infrastructure control, not vendor dependence.
- Infrastructure ownership: Your team operates the clusters, storage, networking and patching for the Pega deployment.
- Platform continuity: Existing case types, rules and applications carry over without rewriting into a new notation.
- Support split: Pega still supplies support and certification, so confirm which responsibilities sit with your staff.
- Cost shift: Infrastructure spend moves onto your accounts, and the Pega subscription terms should be reviewed.
- Provider validation: Only the listed providers are validated, so confirm your target cluster is among them.
Ask Pega to confirm the subscription terms, support boundaries and validated versions for your chosen Kubernetes provider.",
When your processes need custom logic that is hard to express in a low-code rule designer, an embedded engine can be more direct. Flowable can run embedded inside a Java application, so process steps, decisions and case rules become part of the same codebase, release pipeline and test suite. Operaton and CIB seven, both derived from the Camunda 7 lineage, offer the same embedding model for teams that already work in Java.
- Code-level control: Process logic, service tasks and decision tables are versioned with the application.
- Testing: Unit and integration tests can run against the engine during builds.
- Standalone option: Flowable can also run as a separate service with REST APIs when several applications share one engine.
- Custom UI: Forms and case screens are built with your front-end stack, which is more work than configuring Pega screens.
- Ownership cost: Upgrades of the engine and its dependencies become your responsibility.
Confirm which Pega features your applications use heavily, such as built-in reporting or visual rule editing, and plan how each will be replaced before choosing embedded or standalone deployment.
In banking, healthcare, public sector and critical infrastructure, moving to self-hosted software does not remove compliance duties. The controls, evidence and audit responsibilities remain with your organization, whether the platform is Pega or an open-source engine. Moving to self-hosted software changes who operates the controls, so the new operating model must document access management, change control, backup, logging and retention for the process platform. DeployOpen prepares systems, controls and evidence for compliance assessments, but it does not issue audit reports, attestations or certifications. Independent auditors and certification bodies perform those.
- Control ownership: Access reviews, change approvals and vulnerability management now sit with your team.
- Evidence collection: Logs, configuration baselines and test results must be retained in a form assessors accept.
- Security testing: Application and infrastructure testing can be scheduled against the new deployment before go-live.
- Backup and recovery: Restore tests for the engine database are needed as evidence, not only as a plan.
- Auditor role: Independent assessors, not DeployOpen, decide whether controls meet the applicable framework.
Ask your auditor which framework and control IDs apply to the process platform, and agree the evidence list before the migration starts.
Questions teams ask before replacing Pega
How much effort and cost does a Pega migration involve?
The cost depends mainly on how much Pega logic you have built, not on the engine license, since Flowable and Operaton are Apache-2.0 licensed and carry no license fee for the core product. The main cost drivers are the number of case types, the volume of decisioning rules, the number of screens and integrations, and how much of the work is custom Java inside Pega. Costs fall into one-time items (analysis, rebuilding processes and decisions, building the user interface, testing, cutover) and recurring items (hosting, patching, support, and the staff who run the platform). Ask any implementation partner for a written quote that lists the inventory of Pega artifacts in scope, the target architecture, the parts you handle yourselves, and the assumptions behind each estimate. Also ask what is excluded, such as user training, data cleansing and retirement of the old system.
How long does it take to replace Pega with open source?
Timing is set by the size and complexity of the Pega application, the number of integrations, and how much of the case logic must be rebuilt rather than reused. Teams with a small set of case types and a clear owner usually move faster than teams with many interdependent applications, long-running cases and rules that depend on Pega's own data model. Approval cycles, test environments and the availability of business subject-matter experts also set the pace. Ask for a phased plan with dated milestones, the order in which case types will move, and the exit criteria for each phase. A plan without an inventory of Pega artifacts is an estimate you cannot check.
What does the work require from our own team?
The work needs people who know the business processes, people who can operate the platform, and people who own the integrations. Business analysts must confirm case lifecycles, stages, decision tables and service-level expectations. Platform engineers must provide Kubernetes or virtual machine capacity, databases, identity integration, logging and backup. Application owners must sign off on the replacement user interface, because Pega's low-code screens do not carry over automatically. Security and compliance staff must review access control, audit trails and data handling. Confirm with the provider which of these roles they fill, which they expect you to fill, and how much of your team's time each phase needs.
Can our internal team migrate Pega without an outside partner?
A capable internal team can do the work, but only if it has engineers who have built BPMN and DMN solutions, experience with Java and Spring-style deployment, and enough capacity to run the existing Pega system while building the new one. Most teams underestimate the rebuild of the user interface and the testing effort, which are often larger than the process model work. An outside partner can cover parts of the work under a fixed scope, such as the inventory, the engine setup, hardening, or the parallel run. The practical test is whether your team can name an owner for every Pega artifact and a test plan for each. If not, a scoped assessment is a reasonable first step.
Does Flowable CMMN cover all Pega case management features?
Flowable's CMMN support covers the core of case management, including case plans, stages, human tasks, milestones, sentries and case-level decisions, but it does not cover every feature of Pega's case management. Pega's case designer, its built-in case work list, its SLA and escalation features, its rules-based routing and its data model are different products with different assumptions. Treat the question as a feature-by-feature mapping: list each case type and rule in use, mark whether Flowable covers it natively, covers it with custom code, or needs a different tool, and confirm each mark in a proof of concept with your own cases. Ask the provider for that mapping in writing before committing to scope.
How do we keep Pega running during a parallel run?
Run both systems in parallel for a defined set of case types, with a clear rule for which system owns each new case. Routing decisions, shared data, and reporting must be settled before the parallel run starts, because duplicate cases or split data create the most damage. Use a single source for reference data, define a freeze window for changes to the migrated case types, and compare outcomes from both systems on the same inputs. Plan the Pega license and support term so that the parallel run does not end early. Ask for the parallel-run plan, the reconciliation method, the rollback criteria and the decommissioning steps as part of the written scope.
What changes with Pega client-managed cloud compared with Pega Cloud?
The main difference is who operates the infrastructure. In Pega Cloud, Pega manages the hosted service. In Pega's client-managed cloud model, you run Pega Infinity with Docker, Kubernetes and Helm on a validated provider such as Amazon EKS, Azure AKS, Google GKE, Red Hat OpenShift, VMware Tanzu Kubernetes Grid Integrated Edition or bare metal Kubernetes, and Pega provides certification and 24/7 support. Your team then owns cluster operations, patching, backups and capacity. For a migration to open source, this matters because the operations skills you build for client-managed Pega carry over to a self-hosted Flowable or Operaton platform. Confirm with Pega which support terms and version commitments apply to your contract.
How DeployOpen scopes, migrates and supports a Pega replacement
DeployOpen is a Chainscore Labs company that plans, implements, integrates, hardens, backs up and documents self-hosted open-source platforms inside your own cloud accounts, data centers or air-gapped networks. For a Pega replacement, we start by agreeing in writing which case types, decisioning and integrations are in scope, then build and hand over the result with its documentation.
How we scope
- We inventory your Pega case types, decision logic, integrations and reporting before naming any target engine.
- The written scope lists which BPMN, CMMN and DMN features are covered and which Pega rules are retired or rebuilt.
- Engagements are fixed-scope, so deliverables and timelines are agreed in writing before work starts.
- We confirm your hosting model first: client-managed Kubernetes, Pega Cloud exit or a different target environment.
How we build
- We deploy the chosen engine, such as Flowable or Operaton, inside your infrastructure with your identity and logging controls.
- Case models and decision tables are rebuilt and tested against sample cases agreed with your process owners.
- Custom user interfaces replace Pega portals, and we document each screen against the process steps it serves.
- Security testing of applications and APIs runs before any cutover, and findings are tracked to closure in the written scope.
How we hand over
- You receive architecture, configuration and runbook documentation written for your operations and security teams.
- Backup, restore and upgrade procedures are tested in your environment so your staff can run them without us.
- Compliance evidence and control mappings are prepared for your assessors, who issue any audit report or certification.
- Knowledge transfer sessions cover BPMN and DMN model maintenance, so your team can change processes after handover.
How we support
- Ongoing support, upgrades and continuous testing are available as a retainer after handover.
- Retainer scope, response expectations and service levels are written into the agreement and confirmed before signing.
- Engine upgrades are planned against the vendor's release notes and tested in a non-production environment first.
- Ask any provider, including us, to confirm license terms for production use before you commit to an engine.
