Answers → governed execution
Discovery is necessary. But audits and reliability require an execution control plane that produces proof as work happens.
Evidence completeness
68%Workflows can enforce completeness at gates.
Operating path
Execution: evidence produced during work
Workflows guide teams and produce structured evidence artifacts. Dashboards show completeness and drift.
Discovery output
Owner: IT Ops
Policy: approval required above threshold
Related: SOP version link
Known exceptions: codes + owners
Great for discovery—insufficient for proof.
Execution artifacts
approval_record (who/when/why)
exception_record + rationale
evidence_artifact_id + metadata
version_log (what/why/impact)
Completeness
68%
Evidence completeness is measurable when artifacts are structured and produced at gates.
Why this matters
Approvals
Who approved what, under which policy.
Evidence
Queryable proof with IDs and timestamps.
Dashboards
Completeness + drift you can act on.
Choose Glean when your primary bottleneck is discovery. Choose Process Designer when your bottleneck is governed execution with approvals, exceptions, and audit-ready evidence.
Best for Process Designer
- Audit-ready workflows (approvals, exceptions, evidence)
- SOP lifecycle governance (scorecards + remediation)
- Cross-team handoff clarity and measurable drift loops
Best for Glean
- Enterprise AI search across many SaaS tools
- Fast Q&A over documents, tickets, chats, and wikis
From signal to governed execution
Voice + screen-assisted understanding feed Operational Knowledge. Workflows then execute with approvals, exceptions, and evidence artifacts.
Governance strength
72%Higher = stronger gates and evidence requirements.
Pipeline
What this unlocks
Decision points
Approval gates
Exception paths
Evidence artifacts
Operating score
66/100
Higher score = clearer decisions + better proof during execution.
Governed execution primitives
Decision points
Make criteria explicit.
Approval gates
Who can approve what, by threshold.
Evidence artifacts
Queryable proof with IDs + timestamps.
These primitives are what turn knowledge into reliable operations under change.
Deep comparison
Feature-by-feature analysis
A nuanced look at how each platform handles key capabilities.
Primary job to be done
Process Designer
StrongTurn knowledge into governed execution: workflows, approvals, exception paths, evidence artifacts, dashboards.
Glean
StrongFind the right information fast across company systems and summarize it as answers.
Many teams need both. But only one system can own audit-ready execution and evidence trails: the workflow operating layer.
Evidence and audit readiness
Process Designer
StrongEvidence is produced during work: approval records, exception records, timestamps, version logs.
Glean
NeutralSearch can retrieve evidence if it exists, but it doesn't enforce that work produces structured artifacts at decision points.
Drift management (should vs is)
Process Designer
StrongDrift becomes measurable through conformance loops and scorecards; remediation is routed to owners with SLAs.
Glean
GoodCan surface information about deviations (tickets, chats) but does not provide a workflow-level should-vs-is loop.
Adoption and onboarding
Process Designer
GoodGuided execution (HEIDI) and workflow-based SOPs reduce tribal knowledge and speed up onboarding.
Glean
GoodSearch helps new hires find information quickly, but onboarding still relies on humans following procedures correctly.
Knowledge Graph / system of record
Process Designer
StrongOperational Knowledge connects processes, decisions, documents, and owners into a queryable graph that supports impact and dependency reasoning.
Glean
GoodSearch indexes content across systems for retrieval. It is optimized for answers, not as an execution system of record for decision points and evidence.
Voice-guided execution (HEIDI)
Process Designer
GoodHEIDI can guide teams through steps, prompt for approvals, and standardize exception handling—grounded in your Operational Knowledge.
Glean
NeutralVoice/assistant experiences may exist for Q&A, but they typically do not enforce workflow gates or produce execution evidence as first-class artifacts.
Screen + recording-assisted understanding (training)
Process Designer
GoodProcess Designer supports screen/voice-assisted training for structured understanding (e.g., IDP) and reduces manual re-entry by grounding outputs in defined schemas.
Glean
NeutralSearch can retrieve what is already written. It does not provide a workflow layer to capture structured evidence during execution.
Automation and exception handling
Process Designer
StrongAutomation is governed: decision points, approval gates, exception paths, and evidence artifacts are part of the workflow so reliability survives change.
Glean
WeakSearch is not an automation runtime. It can help discover how-to information but cannot execute governed workflows or capture exceptions as artifacts.
Quick comparison
Feature comparison table
High-level summary
| Feature | Process Designer | Glean |
|---|---|---|
| Primary focus | Governed execution + operational proof | Discovery (answers) across tools |
| Automation with approvals | ||
| Exception paths + rationale | ||
| Evidence artifacts (queryable records) | Not primary | |
| Knowledge Graph (system of record) | Not primary | |
| HEIDI voice guidance | Varies / Q&A-focused | |
| Screen/recording-assisted training (e.g., IDP) | ||
| Drift loops + SOP health scorecards |
Decision guide
Which tool is right for you?
Answer these questions to find your best fit.
Do you need to prove approvals/exceptions with structured artifacts?
If yes → Process Designer
You need an execution operating layer (Process Designer).
If no → Glean
Search may be enough as the primary system.
Are SOPs changing weekly across teams and tools?
If yes → Process Designer
You need lifecycle governance + drift loops.
If no → Glean
A lighter documentation + search approach may work.
Do you want the assistant to guide execution (not just answer questions)?
If yes → Process Designer
Use HEIDI + workflows so the assistant prompts approvals and produces evidence during work.
If no → Glean
Search-only assistants can still be useful for retrieval and summarization.
Do you need screen/recording-assisted training for structured understanding (e.g., documents)?
If yes → Process Designer
Add Process Designer’s screen/voice-assisted training and tie outputs to evidence artifacts and workflows.
If no → Glean
Discovery-focused systems may be sufficient for the current need.
Migration stories
Before and after switching
From “answers” to “audit-ready execution”
Before
Teams find the policy, but approvals and exceptions happen in chat and email—proof is reconstructed later.
After
Decision points become workflow gates. Approvals, exceptions, and evidence artifacts are produced during work and visible on dashboards.
From onboarding Q&A to guided operations
Before
New hires search for the right doc and ask senior teammates to confirm exceptions.
After
HEIDI guides the run: prompts for approvals, records rationale, and routes remediation when drift signals appear.
Getting started
How to migrate from Glean
- 1
Keep search for discovery
Use enterprise search for Q&A and fast retrieval of owners, policies, and context.
- 2
Pick one evidence-heavy workflow
Incident response, access requests, procurement approvals, HR onboarding.
- 3
Model decision points + evidence artifacts
Control → decision point → evidence artifact mapping.
- 4
Add drift loop + dashboard
Should vs is conformance signals and SOP health scorecards.
- 5
Add HEIDI as the guided interface
Use voice guidance to standardize execution and reduce tribal knowledge during rollout.