Automation has transformed daily job scheduling and consistently saves hours per batch run
What is our primary use case?
My main use case for Control-M is scheduling jobs and maintaining the EM server and the Control-M server, along with giving support to the asset team on troubleshooting of job failures.
We typically schedule OS jobs and AFT jobs in Control-M, and we also have SAP jobs and Informatica jobs running on Control-M.
Regarding my main use cases with Control-M, we are scheduling jobs for the asset team and maintaining the architecture of Control-M.
What is most valuable?
Control-M offers several great features, with scheduling jobs being a very good feature, while the GUI feature is user-friendly and makes scheduling jobs very easy, saving a lot of time compared to other scheduling tools.
The GUI helps my team day-to-day by making job scheduling very easy, as we can use planning tabs or the back-end of the job through drag and drop, and after adding a few job details, we are ready to proceed. The monitoring tab is also very useful for monitoring daily or scheduled jobs, and the forecast feature is excellent for predicting how jobs will execute in the future.
The reporting feature serves us well for extracting reports on job executions and past executions.
Control-M has positively impacted our organization as we have saved a lot of time and money by utilizing its features, which we found to be very convenient compared to other workload automation tools.
We are saving a lot of time as earlier we had numerous manual activities that usually took four to five hours to perform, and since automating those tasks in Control-M, we now execute them within two hours, effectively saving two hours per batch execution.
What needs improvement?
The reporting feature has limitations with job execution, and I believe there should be integration with Power BI or any visualization tool to provide a detailed summary of each job instance on a single dashboard.
Control-M could have more types of jobs that could be integrated with it, but for now, the features are adequate.
For how long have I used the solution?
I have been using Control-M for the last eight years.
What do I think about the stability of the solution?
Control-M is stable in both production and non-production environments.
What do I think about the scalability of the solution?
Control-M's scalability is convenient, easy to use, and flexible with various integrations.
How are customer service and support?
The customer support for Control-M is convenient, providing us with 24/7 assistance for architecture and job execution issues.
How would you rate customer service and support?
Which solution did I use previously and why did I switch?
Previously, we were using AutoSys, but we found AutoSys not user-friendly based on feedback from the asset team, prompting us to switch to Control-M, which is better suited for our organization.
How was the initial setup?
Control-M is deployed in my organization on a private cloud.
We use AWS as our cloud provider.
What about the implementation team?
We require around five to six staff for the deployment and maintenance of Control-M, all of whom are Control-M admins assisting in deploying Control-M for various asset teams and maintaining their services.
What was our ROI?
We have seen a return on investment due to money and time saved as we automate tasks in Control-M, allowing us to reduce staff numbers as well.
What's my experience with pricing, setup cost, and licensing?
The pricing for Control-M is genuinely fair compared to other workload automation tools in the market, and its features add value, making us satisfied with its pricing structure.
Which other solutions did I evaluate?
We evaluated AutoSys before choosing Control-M as our solution.
What other advice do I have?
The biggest lesson I have learned from using Control-M is that automation is very convenient, with workload automation and job scheduling being easy and maintaining jobs in Control-M being very manageable.
My advice for others considering Control-M is that it is definitely a reliable option since it is convenient, flexible, and stable.
Control-M is extensively used as we have deployed it for many asset teams, and we plan to increase its usage as we are in discussions with different teams to migrate their manual activities into Control-M.
I would rate this review as a nine out of ten.
Which deployment model are you using for this solution?
Private Cloud
If public cloud, private cloud, or hybrid cloud, which cloud provider do you use?
Workflow automation has reduced manual effort and now manages cloud jobs from a business view
What is our primary use case?
In our project, we are using Control-M for job scheduling and monitoring. We have data workflows and many other components that we can manage from a business point of view. We can manage processes across on-premises and all kinds of environments.
What is most valuable?
Control-M is the easiest tool available because we can accomplish what we want. We can automate processes and reduce manpower, which is the primary benefit. We can manage all workflows across different cloud environments with the help of batch scheduling, automating, and controlling jobs. It is easy to handle if you are confident with scheduling and related components. We can improve Service Level Agreements and SLA management.
Integrations are available through API and Control-M automation API to build, run, and manage workflows. We can integrate with CI/CD pipelines. As an automation solution, Control-M provides cost and licensing benefits that are good for our ownership considerations. Flexibility is also available. Job failure monitoring includes email notifications and alerts. Some users feel that the interfaces, both web and desktop, could be more streamlined.
What needs improvement?
IBM workload automation is another tool, but we are satisfied while using Control-M and comparing it to other solutions. IBM is primarily suited for mainframe integrations only, whereas Control-M is a workload automation platform where we can implement job as code and use it easily.
Deployment and agent upgrades are straightforward with Control-M. If you want to upgrade one agent version or the client version, Control-M is easier to manage compared to other tools. If we have Java capabilities, we can easily perform these upgrades. Moving to Oracle 19c would be beneficial. TLS protocols are in place while fixing vulnerabilities. TLS 1.2 and higher versions are good, and we could upgrade to TLS 1.3 for better security.
From a security perspective, communication protocols like TLS are available. SAP optimization would be beneficial if possible. Improving the overall application path would enhance the solution further.
For how long have I used the solution?
We have been using Control-M for four years.
What do I think about the stability of the solution?
We experience all kinds of stability issues, and they are difficult to manage.
What do I think about the scalability of the solution?
Compared to all other tools, the scalability is moderate only.
How are customer service and support?
We are receiving all the good support we need. Even when we encounter issues with vulnerabilities that we cannot fix internally, the vendor provides excellent response times and support. Everything has been positive.
How would you rate customer service and support?
Which solution did I use previously and why did I switch?
We have used other vendors in the past, including solutions from Azure, AWS, and Salesforce.
What was our ROI?
We have achieved nearly 30% return on investment.
What other advice do I have?
Nearly 100 users are using Control-M in our organization. We previously used BMC Eclipse, which is a Software as a Service solution, for three years. Control-M has enabled us to transition from mainframe to the cloud environment with Azure. We are using this on a video conference basis. My overall rating for Control-M is 8 out of 10.
Powerful Automation with Centralized Control
What do you like best about the product?
I like Control-M for its centralized visibility and reliability. The ability to manage complex workflows across different systems from a single interface makes operations much smoother. I appreciate its strong monitoring and alerting features, which help us quickly identify and resolve issues before they impact the business. The centralized visibility gives us a single dashboard to track all jobs and workflows across servers, applications, and environments. Instead of checking multiple systems, we can see job status, dependencies, and bottlenecks in one place. The strong monitoring and alerting features are valuable because we get real-time notifications if something fails or is delayed, allowing us to respond quickly and reduce downtime. Control-M integrates with our databases, ETL tools, and cloud platforms to orchestrate end-to-end workflows. Connecting it with monitoring and ticketing systems helps streamline operations and reduce manual intervention. The platform has proved stable and reliable once set up properly, and it's beneficial for managing complex, interdependent jobs across multiple systems.
What do you dislike about the product?
While Control-M is very powerful, there are a few areas that could be improved. The initial setup and configuration can be complex and time-consuming, especially for new teams. The user interface, although functional, can feel a bit heavy or less intuitive at times. Additionally, licensing and overall cost can be a concern for smaller teams or organizations. In Control-M, I think the user interface could be made more intuitive and modern. Navigation sometimes requires multiple clicks, and new users may find it difficult to quickly locate job definitions, logs, or dependency views. A more streamlined dashboard with customizable widgets and simpler workflow visualization would improve usability. Additionally, better in-product guidance, clearer error messages, and more contextual help would make troubleshooting easier—especially for teams that don’t have deep administrative experience.
What problems is the product solving and how is that benefiting you?
Control-M solves the challenge of managing complex jobs across systems, providing centralized control, monitoring, and faster issue resolution. It improves reliability and visibility, reduces downtime, and enhances operational efficiency by orchestrating cross-platform processes and monitoring critical data pipelines.
Centralizes and Automates Complex Workflows
What do you like best about the product?
I like Control-M for its flexible scheduling, which allows me to manage complex job dependencies easily across multiple systems without manual coordination. I also appreciate its centralized monitoring and clear visibility, which improve my ability to keep track of processes. Additionally, the reliable failure alerts are great because issues are detected immediately, reducing downtime and improving overall operational efficiency. The strong automation, reliability, and enterprise workflow management capabilities make it a solid choice for our needs.
What do you dislike about the product?
The user interface feels outdated, the setup is complex, and performance slows with large workloads. Also, the licensing costs are comparatively high.
What problems is the product solving and how is that benefiting you?
Control-M eliminates manual work, reduces errors, manages complex dependencies, ensures timely batch processing, and improves visibility. Its flexible scheduling and reliable alerts help manage workloads efficiently across systems, reducing downtime and enhancing operational efficiency.
Reliable Automation with a Steep Learning Curve
What do you like best about the product?
I like Control-M’s reliability and centralized scheduling. It makes managing complex job workflows easy, provides clear monitoring, and ensures smooth, automated execution with minimal manual intervention. Control-M solves scheduling complexity, reduces manual errors, ensures reliable job automation, improves visibility, streamlines dependencies, and guarantees consistent execution across environments. Its reliability ensures my Java automation jobs run consistently without failures, building trust in nightly test executions and releases. The centralized scheduling lets me manage all workflows from a single dashboard, making it easy to track dependencies, monitor job status in real time, and quickly troubleshoot issues. This saves time, reduces manual effort, and improves overall test pipeline efficiency.
What do you dislike about the product?
Control-M’s interface can feel complex for beginners, setup requires expertise, troubleshooting sometimes lacks clarity, and licensing costs can be relatively high.
What problems is the product solving and how is that benefiting you?
Control-M schedules and monitors my Java test runs, solving scheduling complexity, reducing manual errors, ensuring reliable job automation, improving visibility, streamlining dependencies, and guaranteeing consistent execution across environments.
Reliable Automation with a Learning Curve
What do you like best about the product?
I like Control-M's reliability and centralized job management, which ensures that workflows run consistently without frequent issues, providing confidence that critical jobs will execute on time. The monitoring and alerting features provide real-time visibility into job status, making it easy to track running, completed, or failed jobs. If a job fails, it quickly alerts, allowing for prompt issue identification and resolution. I also really appreciate how Control-M handles job dependencies and complex workflows smoothly, even with multiple systems and applications involved, which reduces the need for manual coordination. Overall, Control-M simplifies daily operations, reduces stress for support teams, and enhances overall efficiency by automating and streamlining workload management.
What do you dislike about the product?
While Control-M is a very powerful and reliable tool, there are a few areas where it could be improved. The biggest challenge is the initial learning curve. For new users, especially beginners, the UI and configuration options can feel a bit complex at first. If onboarding and tutorials were more beginner-friendly, it could make adoption easier. Another area is the user interface, which sometimes feels slightly dated and overwhelming due to the number of options available on a single screen. A more simplified or customizable UI would improve the overall user experience. Additionally, the licensing cost is on the higher side, which may not be ideal for small teams or organizations. More flexible pricing options would make it accessible to a wider range of users. That said, these are minor concerns compared to the stability and functionality Control-M provides in enterprise environments.
What problems is the product solving and how is that benefiting you?
I use Control-M to automate, schedule, and monitor batch jobs across environments, saving time and reducing errors. It solves manual and error-prone job execution, manages complex dependencies, and provides real-time monitoring, improving reliability and operational clarity.
Streamlines Scheduling with Room for Improvement
What do you like best about the product?
I use Control-M to monitor automated jobs and manage workflow, which is very helpful for scheduling tasks and handling alerts. I like that it ensures smooth and reliable application operation daily. Control-M reduces manual monitoring, prevents job failures, improves workflow visibility, and ensures timely task execution. It simplifies control with its centralized scheduling, which improves visibility and reduces errors. Automating cross-job dependencies is also done efficiently.
What do you dislike about the product?
I find the UI complexity a bit of a challenge. The licensing cost can be high, which is something to consider. There's also a steep learning curve involved, which can be daunting at first. Additionally, the limited cloud-native flexibility restricts some operations.
What problems is the product solving and how is that benefiting you?
I use Control-M to monitor automated jobs, manage workflow, and schedule tasks. It reduces manual monitoring, prevents job failures, improves workflow visibility, and minimizes downtime. Control-M centralizes scheduling, simplifies control, reduces errors, and automates cross-job dependencies.
Empowers Seamless Workflow Automation
What do you like best about the product?
Control-M is a powerhouse orchestrator that simplifies complex enterprise workflows by connecting diverse technologies into a single automated stream. I appreciate the Automation API, which treats complex enterprise workflows as simple versionable code. Treating workflows as versionable JSON code aligns automation with my React development cycle, enabling seamless CI/CD integration with peer review and instant rollback. I integrate Control-M with GitHub and Jenkins to automate deployments, ensuring my React frontend only updates once backend data pipelines successfully finish. The switch to Control-M from legacy tools like AutoSys or Tidal offers better cloud integrations and a Jobs as Code API approach.
What do you dislike about the product?
I don't like the high licensing costs, which can be a hurdle. The GUI is outdated, making it less appealing for modern and fast-moving frontend development. Also, the initial setup is complex, often requiring significant infrastructure configuration before developers can start coding workflows.
What problems is the product solving and how is that benefiting you?
Control-M simplifies complex enterprise workflows into a single automated stream and ensures reliable data flows in my React app. It aligns automation with my React cycle, enabling seamless CI/CD integration through versionable JSON code, supporting peer review and instant rollback.
Control M Makes Debugging Easier with Predictable, Proactive Error Handling
What do you like best about the product?
The debugging part , where we usually get in this mess where we cant figure out the flaws or the errors take place , but control m helps anticipating the issues with predectiable operations along the rate of error handeling increases we can have a early hand on the things before they do get noticed.
What do you dislike about the product?
There’s very little here for a frontend developer or a full-stack guy. Also, there might be agent issues they just pop up at times. It would be a little better if there were a roadmap for beginners on what to do.
What problems is the product solving and how is that benefiting you?
Hey, I just like to explore things at times. For now, I’m not actively using it, but I really love the report handling and generation for every run it does. It cuts down a lot of the time I used to spend making my reports for my boss.
Centralized Dashboard and Visual Dependency Mapping That Simplify Workflow Orchestration
What do you like best about the product?
Orchestration focus: "I love the centralized dashboard that gives me a single view of all workflows across on-prem and cloud. It simplifies complex job dependencies so I don't have to check multiple systems manually".
Visibility focus: "The visual dependency mapping is excellent. It helps me understand exactly how different systems depend on each other and see where a delay might impact later steps in the process".
What do you dislike about the product?
The initial learning curve is quite steep for new team members, and the licensing cost is on the higher end of the market. Also, the legacy desktop interface can feel a bit cluttered compared to modern web-based tools.
What problems is the product solving and how is that benefiting you?
Control-M solves the problem of managing fragmented workflows across our hybrid cloud environment. By centralizing our job scheduling, we've reduced manual monitoring by 50% and significantly lowered our risk of missing critical business SLAs through its proactive alerting system.
