Orchestration has transformed complex batch invoicing and now simplifies cross-platform workflows
What is our primary use case?
I lead a team of Control-M schedulers and operators, and I also do some scheduling myself. A specific example of a task or workflow I manage with Control-M is that I have re-engineered a monolithic script. The process I re-engineered was designed for printing invoices, specifically the invoices of EDP clients, which amounts to about eight million invoices per month.
To handle that scale with Control-M, I made changes by decomposing the monolithic script, which was made in shell scripting, into Control-M jobs, getting the complete workflow, a PDF, and transforming it into a Control-M workload. I do a lot of transformation from monolithic scripts or jobs that can be transformed into workloads within Control-M.
What is most valuable?
The best features Control-M offers include cross-platform dependency management, which is interesting because a job on the mainframe depends on a file arriving from a Unix system that, in turn, depends on a Windows process completing, and Control-M handles that heterogeneous dependency chain natively.
A time when this feature really made a difference for my team was when we had several workloads that are dependent on each other, using different platforms, and that interconnection between those platforms is really relevant to the whole process. There are more features that add value to Control-M, such as the calendar and condition system, which is really powerful to schedule almost to perfection many workloads that are critical for the business, whether in energy, insurance, banking, etc., because it maintains the logic.
Using the conditions allows me to create the re-engineering process that I have mentioned, which depends not only on the conditions but allows everything to run smoothly and on time. Tasks that in the original monolithic script would take about two hours now take at least fifty percent less time because it is more efficiently designed. The time savings were enabled mostly by parallelization, but not only that; I can adjust several aspects.
Control-M has positively impacted my organization because if some condition fails or if a calendar is incorrectly defined, a simple error in a condition can stop a critical workload, stop invoicing, and stop files that should go to the banking system.
What needs improvement?
Control-M can be improved with better integration with modern DevOps toolchains, as while it has made strides with APIs and the automation API, integration with tools such as JIRA and ServiceNow could be more seamless out of the box.
There is also a knowledge barrier that BMC should be aware of; Control-M has a steep learning curve for deep operational mastery, where basic administration is fairly accessible, but truly understanding the platform takes months to years for a new person, and BMC could invest more in advanced training and certification paths beyond the basics.
For how long have I used the solution?
I have been using Control-M for more than twenty years, since around 1996.
What do I think about the stability of the solution?
Control-M is stable in my experience. I have worked with Control-M environments processing tens of thousands of jobs, and currently, we have around six thousand jobs in the energy company.
What do I think about the scalability of the solution?
Control-M is used quite extensively; we execute around six thousand jobs a day, serving around seventy to eighty applications, and it is always growing, also serving many DevOps teams.
How are customer service and support?
BMC support is generally competent for standard issues.
How would you rate customer service and support?
Which solution did I use previously and why did I switch?
Before choosing Control-M, I always worked with it and know alternatives such as TWS, Autosys, and other platforms similar to Control-M, but I have never worked with them.
What was our ROI?
The ROI of Control-M in critical infrastructure is less about percentage savings and more about what does not fail, such as when a national payment system opens every morning on time, or when millions of transactions are processed without a missed dependency.
What's my experience with pricing, setup cost, and licensing?
Control-M has premium pricing, which is justified for enterprise-scale operations, as we are paying for a platform with decades of maturity, proven reliability, and the capacity to handle complex orchestration scenarios that simpler tools cannot manage.
What other advice do I have?
I have always worked with Control-M, first on banking systems and then on energy systems, and though I worked with other systems, Control-M was always present. We have many users in many different roles; there are maybe four or five administration roles along with operation roles.
The biggest lesson I have learned from using Control-M is that it makes your life easier in dealing with batch processing, whether on mainframe or distributed servers, allowing you to define everything the way you want. I advise others looking into using Control-M to invest in people, not just the tool, emphasizing that a well-configured Control-M environment with experienced operators is essential for reliability.
Integrating Control-M with technologies for our data ops and DevOps processes can be difficult as technologies change. I would rate this review nine out of ten overall.
Which deployment model are you using for this solution?
Public Cloud
If public cloud, private cloud, or hybrid cloud, which cloud provider do you use?
Reliable tool for job automation
What do you like best about the product?
I like how it makes it much easier to monitor jobs, manage dependencies, and identify issues
What do you dislike about the product?
The interface can be sometimes a little bit complex for new users
What problems is the product solving and how is that benefiting you?
It helps manage and automate jobs across different systems. The main benefit would be that everything is in one place so it’s much easier to monitor jobs and see if something goes wrong
Powerful Automation with a Complex Interface
What do you like best about the product?
I like Control-M for its centralized job scheduling, reliable dependency management, and clear monitoring of workflows. It provides reliable job dependencies and useful alerts, and I appreciate the centralized workflows monitoring.
What do you dislike about the product?
The interface can be complex, and troubleshooting failed jobs sometimes requires too many steps. Configuration and maintenance can also be time-consuming. The interface is complex and navigation can be slow when finding job details or troubleshooting failures.
What problems is the product solving and how is that benefiting you?
I use Control-M to automate job scheduling and workflow management, reducing manual intervention and improving reliability. It centralizes job scheduling, manages dependencies, and monitors workflows, ensuring processes run reliably.
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 management has become highly reliable and has saved significant scheduling time
What is our primary use case?
My use case for Control-M includes file transfer and workload balancing, but it is mostly focused on workflow management.
What is most valuable?
I love Control-M's reliability and ease of use. It offers ease of adaptability for upgrades, and the GUI features have been enhanced for better readability. Their reporting improvements are notable, and they developed software that helps manage licensing effectively.
Control-M is incredibly reliable, rarely having issues from an administrative standpoint. The high stability means I am rarely surprised by problems. Additionally, time-saving is significant; previously, scheduling involved paper and took much longer. Control-M reduced the scheduling time drastically, taking only about five to ten minutes to add a new job to the workflow.
What needs improvement?
One area that has room for improvement is support. Early on, support was fabulous, with efficient issue resolution processes. However, since approximately 2015, support has been lackluster, relying too much on email. I would suggest a return to hands-on support engagement.
Aside from the support aspect, I cannot think of anything else that needs improvement.
For how long have I used the solution?
I started using Control-M in 2000.
What do I think about the stability of the solution?
Regarding stability, I would give Control-M a ten. Control-M is such a reliable piece of software. I rarely, if ever, have to do anything from an administrative point of view. When someone calls me with a Control-M problem, it surprises me as it is mostly stable.
What do I think about the scalability of the solution?
Control-M is scalable. The easiest way to express this is regarding licensing; as you are scaling up, you should keep up with your licensing. BMC does an annual review, and your account representative will reach out for a licensing software run that generates a report using all Control-M components.
How are customer service and support?
From one to ten, with ten being the best, I would rate their technical support about a seven.
How would you rate customer service and support?
Which solution did I use previously and why did I switch?
Concerning Control-M, I previously started out with scheduling package software back in the old Uccel, which was bought by Computer Associates and called CA-7.
How was the initial setup?
Installing Control-M was really quite easy; you simply download it and do the installation. The biggest thing is the front-end work prior to installation, such as deciding which database you will use.
What about the implementation team?
My relationship with BMC is probably transactional. I rarely have to reach out to them.
The BMC service team could be better at being more involved in mapping out migration strategies, though they have a really good process called AMIGO that yields positive outcomes.
What was our ROI?
In terms of time savings with Control-M, I spend maybe thirty minutes a week, if that, on Control-M compared to other software products I have dealt with.
What's my experience with pricing, setup cost, and licensing?
I did not have much engagement in the pricing area.
Which other solutions did I evaluate?
Regarding other solutions, Redwood was the only one I was familiar with. I saw a demo on that before 2010 when management was looking at maybe replacing Control-M.
What other advice do I have?
Deployment is on a Windows platform in a high availability environment.
I would recommend Control-M to others looking to implement it, but it is essential to ensure it fits your environment, so doing a proof of concept is always beneficial.
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.
Effortless Task Management with Moderate UI Improvements Needed
What do you like best about the product?
I like Control-M for its handling and managing of complex tasks. It provides a single point of contact for managing disconnected IT systems, which solves many complex challenges. The reduction of manual tasks through automation and the automatic identification of risks really stand out for me. It makes things more efficient by reducing the need for manual intervention.
What do you dislike about the product?
The UI can be enhanced a little, as the menus and buttons are not user-friendly.
What problems is the product solving and how is that benefiting you?
I use Control-M to manage and monitor complex applications, providing a single point of contact for disconnected IT systems. It handles complex tasks, automates processes, reduces manual intervention, and identifies risks automatically.
Unified automation has improved cross-application workflows and simplified complex file transfers
What is our primary use case?
I have several use cases for Control-M. I have been implementing Control-M for a long time in several enterprises in Brazil, and then five years ago I moved to the US. I started working here in the US as well. I have several use cases for insurance companies and bank companies in Brazil, and currently, I am working with Bank Charles Schwab using this tool to transfer internal files between systems and applications.
We also have user-defined transfers to move files to business partners. Overall, I have been using this solution for 17 years and have many use cases to speak of.
When I joined Bank Charles Schwab, Control-M was already implemented, but I also work on implementing Control-M from scratch.
Recently, I did an integration involving Control-M with Pentaho and Power BI. Even though Control-M did not have the plugin for Pentaho, I managed to run a data pipeline using scripts and successfully integrate it into Power BI dashboards.
What is most valuable?
In general, the ability to check all your processes in a unified view that Control-M provides is what I appreciate the most about it.
Control-M helps to integrate processes across various applications in big enterprises, making it significantly easier since you have a single point of control and can see failures and impacts on the flow.
Now, with the new plugins that they launch every month, it is easy to integrate with technologies for my DataOps and DevOps processes.
What needs improvement?
I think they are going in the direction of managing data that Control-M orchestrates. Currently, it is hard to get data from the process that Control-M is processing.
The ease of deploying Control-M depends on the architecture chosen, as some configurations can require more setup.
For how long have I used the solution?
I have been working with Control-M for 17 years overall in my career.
What do I think about the scalability of the solution?
In terms of scalability, I think it is good. I have seen effective escalation when necessary during issue resolution.
How are customer service and support?
I have contacted BMC technical support, especially when I cannot solve certain issues myself, but I have a good handle on it due to my long experience.
The quality of support is fast during production emergencies, but it can take longer when issues are not critical, with interactions sometimes taking several days.
They have limited support for native language issues, which can create challenges for non-English speakers.
How would you rate customer service and support?
What about the implementation team?
Usually, I handle the deployment myself, but I need a team to implement large numbers of jobs after the deployment.
Which other solutions did I evaluate?
I do not have experience using alternatives to Control-M, as I was directly presented with Control-M when I started working with workload automation.
What other advice do I have?
Control-M tends to be the most expensive compared to other competitors. However, I believe it is worth the price since it delivers the most.
It requires some maintenance on my end occasionally, especially when compliance or security updates are needed.
