My use case with Control-M is for job automation and job scheduling. Instead of making 10 different technologies where we need to run jobs, automation allows us to reduce the number of people needed. Cost-cutting is significant; instead of 10 people, we can handle the work with only one or two people.
Control-M SaaS
BMC SoftwareExternal reviews
176 reviews
from
and
External reviews are not included in the AWS star rating for the product.
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".
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.
Reliable Automation with Initial Setup Challenges
What do you like best about the product?
I find Control-M to be a powerful workload automation solution that provides centralized visibility and control over complex solutions. It is widely used in enterprise IT environments to manage complex jobs, eliminating manual job execution and handling complex job dependencies. I also appreciate how it improves visibility across processes.
What do you dislike about the product?
The initial setup and configuration process is complex and time-consuming. There are limitations in customizing the dashboard. The installation and configuration needed proper support.
What problems is the product solving and how is that benefiting you?
Control-M eliminates manual job execution, handles complex job dependencies, and improves visibility in our enterprise IT environment.
Automation has reduced manual jobs and now supports high-volume 24x7 operations efficiently
What is our primary use case?
What is most valuable?
The best features in Control-M that I like the most are job scheduling and monitoring.
Earlier, I worked for many clients, and currently I am working for Zurich, Japan. There, we used different vendors such as Infosys, Cognizant, DXC Technologies, and two others. The project operates 24/7 as an insurance project where transactions happen during daytime, so we need to run jobs during nighttime as well to upload data, take backups, and complete other necessary tasks. Instead of managing this manually, I have automated everything related to job scheduling and job configuration.
What needs improvement?
The areas that have room for improvement are the GUI to make it more user-friendly. The interface is very easy, very good, and secure. Currently, I have not found any significant improvements needed. Every year the versions improve, and everything is progressing well.
For how long have I used the solution?
I have been working with Control-M for almost 16 years.
What do I think about the stability of the solution?
Control-M is a stable product, and I would rate it 10 as a stable product.
What do I think about the scalability of the solution?
The scalability is an eight out of 10. It is easy to upscale or downscale.
How are customer service and support?
I can give the technical support a nine out of 10.
How would you rate customer service and support?
Positive
Which solution did I use previously and why did I switch?
With Control-M, I compare the solution with other solutions I have worked on such as TWS (Tivoli Workload Scheduler), CA7, AutoSys, Tivoli DC (Tivoli Workload Dynamic Schedule), and Job Scheduling Console. I find that Control-M is more secure compared with the firewall system.
How was the initial setup?
Deployment is very easy with no issues.
What about the implementation team?
For the clients, they have to buy licenses, which are reasonable.
What was our ROI?
With Control-M, I would recommend implementing this product. It is a more secure solution.
What's my experience with pricing, setup cost, and licensing?
The solution requires easy maintenance because most of the time we take care of it on weekends like Saturday and Sunday, or during public holidays.
Which other solutions did I evaluate?
There is nothing difficult about integration. It is very easy to integrate technologies for data ops and DevOps processes.
What other advice do I have?
Currently, I am taking care of almost 10,000 jobs in an insurance company.
I would assess the BMC service team for helping map out migration as effective. For migrations, we perform them in development first. We configure the jobs in development, then move to SAT testing, UAT testing, and ST testing, and then to pre-production and production. If there are more jobs, we do migrations on weekends, on Saturday and Sunday, or at midnight one day before.
Deployment takes approximately one or two days and depends on the job types. Installing Control-M can take up to one or two days maximum. For scheduling, we need to configure different agents in different vendor systems such as UNIX systems, Informatica systems, or Tandem systems. For these configurations, we need to install the agents and define them in Control-M.
To make the solution a 10, there could be more automation. I would rate this review overall as a 9.
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?
Amazon Web Services (AWS)
Automation has streamlined massive file transfers and scheduling and now saves critical processing time
What is our primary use case?
My main use case for Control-M is scheduling jobs, monitoring the jobs, and monitoring application scripts that are working fine or not through Control-M, along with doing some automation. File transfer is the core focus of my main use case, while we have some other SAP jobs that trigger the job at a certain time frame from a SAP point of view.
What is most valuable?
The best features Control-M offers are ease of use, with everything very clear, including the agent-less scenarios, the Control-M Configuration Manager which provides a detailed view, and a very user-friendly scheduling system.
Ease of use in Control-M means we have everything on the GUI, so we do not have to jump to different locations to find out the issue or problem; we can find everything on a single screen and for scheduling, it has all the options needed, you just need to know the basics to figure out anything you want to do.
Control-M has positively impacted my organization greatly as we are running more than 5,000 jobs, including around 5,000 MFT jobs that transfer files from SharePoint to another server or between servers, helping us automate manual processes and reduce timeframes. Previously, while doing file transfers, we had to check for at least a two-hour timeline, but now through Control-M, we do it automatically with no manual intervention, reducing it to 45 minutes.
What needs improvement?
I believe Control-M can be improved as there is news about shutting down its GUI; I believe the GUI is more impactful than the web version, so continuing to use the GUI would be more useful. In addition to the GUI changes, introducing more types of jobs, such as for cloud usage, would be more helpful and versatile.
For how long have I used the solution?
I have been using Control-M for more than six years now.
What do I think about the stability of the solution?
Control-M is stable.
What do I think about the scalability of the solution?
Control-M's scalability is good; it was a very easy process and did not require much work.
How are customer service and support?
The customer support for Control-M is great.
How would you rate customer service and support?
Positive
Which solution did I use previously and why did I switch?
Previously, we used Cisco Tidal but switched to Control-M due to limitations with Tidal, such as agent-less scenarios not working properly and missing functionalities.
What about the implementation team?
We have two teams using Control-M: L1, which monitors job failures and takes requests from application teams to run certain jobs, and L2, which is responsible for scheduling jobs and configuring agents from Control-M, along with L3, which creates the environments.
We require an L3 team of three people for deployment and maintenance; they mainly take care of deployments and maintenance without taking much time due to the guidelines provided by BMC, with roles including SMEs and Control-M administration experts.
What was our ROI?
I have seen a return on investment, as the MFT jobs reduce the time frame from two hours to 45 minutes, allowing us to utilize that time for other platforms, technologies, or automation processes.
What's my experience with pricing, setup cost, and licensing?
My experience with pricing, setup cost, and licensing of Control-M is that it is very minimal and optimal, making the cost good.
What other advice do I have?
My advice to others looking into using Control-M is to go for it without any hesitation or questions, as you will not regret it due to the many options for automation and the time frame reduction along with reduced manual efforts. I would rate this review at 9 out of 10.
Which deployment model are you using for this solution?
Hybrid Cloud
If public cloud, private cloud, or hybrid cloud, which cloud provider do you use?
Amazon Web Services (AWS)
Rule-based scheduling has transformed how I design and monitor complex production workflows
What is our primary use case?
I mainly use Control-M for scheduling jobs according to my requirements, which allows me to include holidays or exclude Saturdays, Sundays, or any specific time.
I also use cyclic jobs that run in a recurring period and can set up prerequisites before the job runs.
I can implement a File Watcher to establish a rule that a particular job can only run after the upstream job is completed.
I have created several new jobs using these capabilities.
Within Control-M, I use smart folders and jobs, and I can approach scheduling the way I want, so I have used it fully from start to end.
Control-M is straightforward for building, scheduling, managing, and monitoring production workflows.
I use the XML side for configuration, which requires importing, and I find it user-friendly.
Control-M has been used for building, scheduling, managing, and monitoring production workflows, especially at JPMorgan Chase Bank where most production support is monitored through Control-M.
I worked as a developer, developed jobs, and sent them to production, and the process was seamless.
What is most valuable?
My favorite feature about Control-M is the rule-based calendar feature.
The initial deployment of Control-M is straightforward, as it involves a simple installation of a Control-M agent within the server.
Control-M demonstrates strong scalability.
My application alone uses approximately 65 jobs, and for each folder, there are thousands of jobs that can load immediately in production.
When using a filter, the search is quick, and overall scalability has been excellent.
After migrating to Control-M, the positive effect on business-critical applications is evident: whenever a job ends successfully or fails, notifications are sent immediately.
These notifications go to EventBridge, alerting the team to any critical jobs.
High-priority jobs trigger alerts to engage developers immediately, ensuring there is no delay in response.
What needs improvement?
One area for improvement in Control-M could be in the logs, as they only show when the job started and whether it ended successfully or not.
Since the Control-M agent is running on the servers, we could pull up logs and display the actual error to aid in debugging.
For how long have I used the solution?
I have been using Control-M for approximately eight to nine years in my career.
What do I think about the stability of the solution?
Regarding stability, I do not experience any lagging, crashing, or performance issues with Control-M.
What do I think about the scalability of the solution?
Control-M demonstrates strong scalability.
My application alone uses approximately 65 jobs, and for each folder, there are thousands of jobs that can load immediately in production.
When using a filter, the search is quick, and overall scalability has been excellent.
How are customer service and support?
I have never contacted technical support or customer support from BMC regarding Control-M because we have sufficient in-house expertise to share knowledge about it internally.
How would you rate customer service and support?
Positive
Which solution did I use previously and why did I switch?
I started on TWS, Tivoli Workload Scheduler, which is an older tool with a poor user interface.
After transitioning to Control-M, I have been very satisfied with it.
I have not identified pain points until now because the use cases I addressed were fully satisfied by Control-M's capabilities.
Whatever use cases I needed, they were fulfilled by the product.
I used Tivoli Workload Scheduler earlier, but now the company has standardized on Control-M without using any other schedulers.
How was the initial setup?
The initial deployment of Control-M is straightforward, as it involves a simple installation of a Control-M agent within the server.
What about the implementation team?
Only one person is required for deployment, and it can be completed without needing a team.
For both job deployment and software installation, one person typically handles it, as we use an automation process with no manual work, making it a self-service operation.
Which other solutions did I evaluate?
I have personally used TWS as an alternative to Control-M.
I prefer Control-M over TWS.
The biggest difference between TWS and Control-M is that TWS has a poor user interface, while Control-M has an excellent user interface and alerting capabilities.
TWS requires monitoring on one page without navigation directions, whereas Control-M uses smart folders with parent and subfolders, maintaining a clear graph structure and allowing the creation of custom workspaces.
What other advice do I have?
Regarding data pipelines, I have not explored integrating them via Control-M.
Non-technical users or business users do not need to use Control-M, as they primarily rely on developers or application support.
Currently, all employees at JPMorgan use Control-M for everything except mainframe jobs, which are monitored and developed through Control-M.
For maintenance, a patching team manages it, and I do not experience any downtime with Control-M.
I might not notice maintenance communications since they could be performed behind the scenes or during off-business hours.
I would rate this review an 8 out of 10.
Centralized Orchestration with Robust Automation, Monitoring, and Integrations
What do you like best about the product?
1.Centralized "Single-Pane-of-Glass" Orchestration
2. Robust Automation and Reliability
3. Proactive Monitoring and SLA Management
4. Advanced Integration Capabilities
2. Robust Automation and Reliability
3. Proactive Monitoring and SLA Management
4. Advanced Integration Capabilities
What do you dislike about the product?
1. High Cost and Complex Licensing
2. Limited Reporting Capabilities
2. Limited Reporting Capabilities
What problems is the product solving and how is that benefiting you?
Eliminating Manual Bottlenecks
Manual task execution is slow, error-prone, and scales poorly.
Problem: Teams often waste time manually triggering scripts, verifying data, or checking for file arrivals.
Benefit: Automation of repetitive tasks saves massive amounts of time. It also allows team to focus on high-value strategic work rather than routine maintenance.
Manual task execution is slow, error-prone, and scales poorly.
Problem: Teams often waste time manually triggering scripts, verifying data, or checking for file arrivals.
Benefit: Automation of repetitive tasks saves massive amounts of time. It also allows team to focus on high-value strategic work rather than routine maintenance.
showing 1 - 10