IBM Tivoli Workload Scheduler (TWS) was renamed IBM Workload Scheduler, part of the broader IBM Workload Automation suite (WLA), reflecting IBM’s shift toward hybrid cloud and advanced automation. Yet, Tivoli remains as a significant tool that is commonly used by enterprises across the globe.
Therefore, we recommend exploring its pros and cons and comparing it against its competitors:
| Tools | Score | ERP Integrations | |
|---|---|---|---|
1. | 4.4 based on 251 reviews | MS Dynamics, Oracle PeopleSoft, SAP BusinessObjects, SAP NetWeaver | |
2. |  RunMyJobs |
4.8 based on 140 reviews | MS Dynamics, Oracle PeopleSoft, SAP BusinessObjects, SAP NetWeaver |
3. |  Stonebranch |
4.8 based on 79 reviews | MS Dynamics, Oracle PeopleSoft, SAP BusinessObjects, SAP NetWeaver |
4. |  IBM Workload Automation (Tivoli) |
4.4 based on 13 reviews | Oracle PeopleSoft |
5. |  AutoSys Workload Automation |
4.5 based on 44 reviews | MS Dynamics, Oracle PeopleSoft, SAP BusinessObjects, SAP NetWeaver |
6. |  Control-M |
4.7 based on 150 reviews | MS Dynamics, Oracle PeopleSoft, SAP BusinessObjects, SAP NetWeaver |
Overview of IBM Tivoli Workload Scheduler
IBM Tivoli Workload Scheduler (TWS) is an enterprise job scheduling and workload automation solution for platforms like Windows, Linux, AIX, Solaris, and z/OS. In version 9.3 (2015), TWS was renamed IBM Workload Scheduler, part of the broader IBM Workload Automation suite, reflecting IBM’s shift toward hybrid cloud and advanced automation.
IBM Workload Scheduler executes jobs in the correct sequence, respecting dependencies and time constraints. This way the tool optimizes resource utilization and minimizes idle times. The scheduler’s architecture comprises a master domain manager, domain managers, and agents, facilitating centralized control and distributed execution. This setup allows for effective management of workloads across complex IT landscapes.
Gartner places IBM among leaders of service orchestration and automation platforms (SOAPs), signaling the importance of Tivoli Workload Scheduler in the market (See Figure 1).
Here are some pros and cons of IBM Workload Automation platform and Tivoli Workload Scheduler based on B2B user reviews gathered from various sources:
Pros
1. Comprehensive automation capabilities
The platform offers extensive automation features, including batch and real-time workload management, job dependencies, and integration with various applications. This versatility makes it suitable for automating complex workflows.
2. Strong integration with IBM ecosystem
IBM WLA integrates with other IBM products, providing a cohesive solution for organizations already invested in the IBM ecosystem. This integration can lead to streamlined operations and reduced compatibility issues.
Cons
1. User interface and usability
While IBM WLA offers a graphical user interface, some users find it less intuitive compared to competitors like Control-M and ActiveBatch. These competitors are praised for their user-friendly interfaces, which can reduce the learning curve and improve user adoption.
2. Integration with non-IBM tools
IBM WLA’s integration capabilities are often centered around IBM products. IBM TWS does not work with all legacy systems and SAP modules, such as SAP RISE/BTP/SAP S/4HANA Solutions.
In contrast, tools like ActiveBatch and RunMyJobs offer broader integration with a wide range of third-party applications, providing more flexibility for heterogeneous IT environments.
3. Cloud-native features
Some users have noted that IBM WLA’s cloud-native features are not as advanced as those offered by competitors. For instance, the lack of native integration with Oracle Fusion Cloud necessitates reliance on Oracle’s native scheduler or the development of custom connectors, which can be resource-intensive and may not offer the same level of functionality or ease of use.
On the other hand, IBM competitors like ActiveBatch, provide a modern, web-based interface and robust cloud integrations, which can be advantageous for organizations leveraging cloud infrastructures.
Features
IBM Tivoli Workload scheduler offers all common WLA capabilities and several other capabilities that are less common in the market. Here are some of these unique features:
AI anomaly detection
Recent IWA versions embed AI/ML for workload insights. The AI Data Advisor (AIDA) analyzes historical workload metrics to predict anomalies (job delays, volume spikes) and sends proactive alerts before they become critical.
This AIOps capability helps administrators prevent issues (e.g., late jobs or SLA breaches) before they occur. This capability moves beyond static thresholds to a proactive issue resolution that enables reducing downtime, improving SLA compliance and enabling intelligence scheduling and predictive orchestration.
Pre-2015 TWS had no built-in analytics; this intelligent monitoring is an IWA innovation.
Specialized orchestration capabilities
While many WLA solutions offer general application integration, IBM focuses on specialized orchestration domains, showcasing advanced capabilities for critical enterprise workloads.
- Cloud orchestration for dynamic provision and scaling of resources, and smooth communication between cloud components.
- Managed file transfer (MFT) for transferring, monitoring, and controlling large-scale file exchanges across complex on-premises and cloud setups.
- Data pipeline orchestration for extraction, transformation, loading, and validation tasks to maintain smooth data flow and quality across systems.
What-if
IBM Workload Scheduler (IWS) includes “what-if” analysis as part of its Dynamic Workload Console (DWC). This feature allows users to simulate changes to job schedules, dependencies, or resource allocations before deploying them to production.
What-if analysis includes steps like:
- Scenario testing
- Simulate adding/removing jobs, adjusting priorities, or modifying dependencies.
- Predict bottlenecks, resource conflicts, or SLA breaches.
- Example: Test how adding a nightly COBOL batch job impacts CICS transaction processing.
- Impact forecasting:
- Model changes to mainframe resources (e.g., CPU, storage) and predict downstream effects.
- Example: Estimate delays if a Db2 backup job runs longer than expected.
- Visual workflow validation:
- Graphical representation of job streams and dependencies to spot risks.
DevOps and API integration
IBM TWS provides API and DevOps support. It exposes REST, SOAP and Java interfaces, enabling integration into pipelines and external tools. It also supports “jobs as code” workflows (via JSON/YAML definitions) and can be integrated into CI/CD toolchains.
For instance, IBM workload automation platform integrates with Instana (IBM’s application performance monitor) for AI-driven observability. TWS lacked these cloud-native/DevOps integrations.
z/OS Automation
IBM’s solution requires permanent agent software installed on both the mainframe (z/OS) and connected distributed systems. These agents communicate through IBM’s proprietary JES (Job Entry Subsystem) infrastructure to submit and manage JCL jobs. This architecture provides direct, low-level access to z/OS job scheduling functions.
The agent-based approach enables deep integration with core mainframe components like CICS regions and IMS subsystems. However, it creates fixed dependencies on IBM’s ecosystem. Each managed system requires agent installation and maintenance, including version updates and security patches.
This design is optimal for enterprises running homogeneous IBM environments where control outweighs flexibility needs. The trade-off is reduced adaptability for hybrid cloud or multi-platform workflows compared to modern API-driven alternatives.
IBM Tivoli alternatives with real-life examples
There are several alternatives to IBM workload automation tools:
| Tool | Agentless | z/OS Method | Hybrid (Cloud + Mainframe) | IBM’s Weakness Addressed |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| ActiveBatch | ✅ | JES internal reader | ✅ | Agent bloat, fragmented tooling |
| RunMyJobs by Redwood | ✅ | FTP/Scripts | ✅ Cloud-first | Poor SAP/cloud integration |
| Stonebranch | ✅ | JES REST API | ✅ | Legacy JES, no cloud-native support |
| Fortra's JAMS | ✅ | FTP/CLI scripts | ✅ | Siloed tools for distributed vs. mainframe jobs |
| BMC Control-M | ✅ | FTP/API | ✅ | Scalability gaps in hybrid workflows |
| IBM Workload Scheduler | ❌ | Native agent-based JES | ⚠️ IBM-centric | N/A (baseline for comparison) |
| Broadcom Automic | ❌ | Agent on z/OS | ⚠️ Limited | Unified mainframe/distributed control |
ActiveBatch
ActiveBatch offers a low-code, drag-and-drop workflow designer, facilitating easy integration across various systems and applications. It provides real-time monitoring from a single pane of glass and meets high security and compliance standards.
ActiveBatch’s competitive strengths
- No z/OS agents required: Submits jobs directly via JES internal reader, eliminating agent installation/maintenance on mainframes. This way it reduces operational overhead, like agent-related security patches, updates, and compatibility issues on z/OS.
- Hybrid workflow integration: Connects z/OS jobs with Windows, Linux, cloud, and ERP platforms (e.g., SAP, Oracle) in unified workflows.
- Reduced vendor lock-In: Works natively with JCL/JES but isn’t tied to IBM’s ecosystem, enabling multi-vendor IT environments.
- Centralized control: Manages mainframe and distributed workloads from a single pane of glass (unlike IBM’s fragmented tools).
Explore more features and evaluate pros and cons of ActiveBatch.
Case study 1
PrimeSource, one of the largest suppliers of fasteners and distributors of building materials in North America, faced challenges due to the lack of integration between IBM Tivoli and its SAP environments. To address these issues, PrimeSource required:
- Automation of its data warehouse using SAP BusinessObjects Data Services (BODS)
- Process automation within the SAP NetWeaver platform
- Compatibility with Windows-based scheduling
- Orchestration of workflows across various enterprise systems
To meet these needs, PrimeSource implemented ActiveBatch to manage its data warehouse processes. ActiveBatch also enabled better control over data transfers between its EDI software and SAP, as well as issue identification and alerting for relevant teams. As a result, the company achieved:
- A reduction in processing time from 9.5 hours to just 1 hour
- Coordination of four different teams through a unified monitoring panel
- Faster customer billing by automating invoice generation.5
Case study 2
Xcel Energy, a major U.S. utility company, faced challenges with manual processes and complex IT operations, particularly within their nuclear division. Their existing workload automation tools lacked the flexibility and integration capabilities needed for efficient operations. To address these issues, Xcel Energy required:
- Automation of complex IT processes to reduce manual intervention
- Integration across diverse systems and applications
- Enhanced visibility and control over workflows
The firm deployed ActiveBatch Workload Automation to streamline and automate their IT operations. With ActiveBatch, Xcel Energy achieved:
- Significant reduction in manual tasks, leading to improved efficiency
- Simplified management of complex workflows across various systems
- Enhanced operational reliability and compliance within critical divisions.6
RunMyJobs by Redwood
RunMyJobs is a cloud-native, SaaS-based workload automation platform designed for seamless orchestration across hybrid IT environments. It offers a low-code, drag-and-drop interface, facilitating easy integration with various systems and applications. The platform provides real-time monitoring from a single pane of glass and meets high security and compliance standards.
RunMyJobs’ competitive strengths:
- Integration capabilities: RunMyJobs integrates with various systems, including SAP S/4HANA, SAP BTP, and other cloud applications, offering pre-built connectors and a secure gateway. IBM Workload Automation also supports extensive integrations but may require additional configuration for certain systems.
- Discover more on integrations and Redwood- SAP partnership.
- Agentless z/OS integration: RunMyJobs submits JCL to z/OS via FTP or custom scripts without needing agents. This eliminates IBM’s agent maintenance burden (e.g., patches, compatibility checks) and simplifies compliance audits.
- Cloud-first approach: As a SaaS-native tool, RunMyJobs excels at hybrid workflows like triggering an AWS Lambda function after a mainframe job completes, or passing SAP data to Snowflake. IBM struggles here due to its on-prem legacy focus.
Case study
A global enterprise sought to modernize its workload automation by moving away from IBM Tivoli Workload Scheduler (TWS), which was increasingly unable to meet the demands of their evolving IT landscape. Their objectives included:
- Adopting a cloud-native, SaaS-based automation solution
- Ensuring seamless integration with existing ERP systems, including SAP
- Reducing the operational overhead associated with on-premises infrastructure.
The company implemented RunMyJobs by Redwood, benefiting from its cloud-native architecture and robust integration capabilities. With RunMyJobs, the enterprise achieved:
- Streamlined automation processes with reduced complexity
- Improved scalability and flexibility to adapt to changing business needs
- Lower total cost of ownership by eliminating the need for extensive on-premises infrastructure.7
Discover more features, pros and cons of RunMyJobs.
Stonebranch
Stonebranch offers a cloud-native, agent-based workload automation platform with a low-code interface, emphasizing real-time monitoring and simplified job scheduling. It supports hybrid IT environments and integrates well with ERP systems like SAP and cloud platforms such as AWS, Azure, and Google Cloud. Users appreciate its intuitive design and robust integration capabilities.
Stonebranch’s competitive strengths:
- API-driven approach: Stonebranch replaces IBM’s legacy JES/internal reader with a JES REST API, enabling real-time job tracking and control. For instance, DevOps teams can query z/OS job statuses via API calls or trigger Kubernetes pods after mainframe batch jobs finish.
- Hybrid orchestration: Stonebranch unifies z/OS, cloud (AWS/Azure), and containerized workloads in one platform.
- A common use case: running a COBOL batch job on z/OS, then processing its output in a Python container on Kubernetes—all in a single workflow. IBM lacks native container support.
Case study 1
A Dutch financial institution sought to modernize its IT operations by moving away from IBM Tivoli Workload Scheduler (TWS), which was no longer scalable for their hybrid and cloud-oriented architecture. Their goals included:
- Replacing mainframe-centric scheduling with distributed, event-driven workload automation
- Increasing transparency and simplifying job configurations
- Reducing the total job volume through better design and control.
The firm deployed Stonebranch Universal Automation Center (UAC) to implement a dynamic, event-based workload automation framework. This enabled them to run and coordinate jobs across modern and legacy systems more efficiently. With Stonebranch, the bank achieved:
- 45% reduction in the total number of scheduled jobs
- 86% increase in process transparency and simplification
- 60% decrease in operating costs.8
Case study 2
Bankia, one of Spain’s leading financial institutions, faced difficulties managing workload processes across diverse platforms including z/OS, AIX, Linux, Windows, and Solaris. Their existing solution, IBM Tivoli, lacked the flexibility and cross-platform capabilities required for enterprise-wide orchestration. To overcome these limitations, Bankia needed:
- Centralized process control across distributed and mainframe systems
- Improved cross-platform job scheduling and data movement
- Seamless integration with legacy infrastructure without complex redeployments
The firm deployed Stonebranch Universal Agent and Universal Data Mover to manage and orchestrate enterprise jobs and data transfers. This solution enabled platform-agnostic automation and greater operational visibility. With Stonebranch, the firm achieved:
- Centralized orchestration of cross-platform workloads
- Significant reduction in operational costs and complexity
- Improved process quality and efficiency across business-critical systems.9
Learn more on Stonebranch alternatives.
Find out more case studies where business users switched from IBM Tivoli Workload Scheduler to other WLA solutions:
| Company Name | New WLA Tool | Use Cases | Pain Points with Tivoli | Results Achieved |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Xcel Energy | ActiveBatch | Automating batch jobs in mixed Windows/UNIX environments | Scalability issues with increasing workloads | - Reduced manual DB processes by 80% - Eliminated overnight shifts - Dynamic workflows without scripts - Centralized control |
| XTRA Lease | ActiveBatch | Coordinating workflows across multiple business systems | Fragmented IT, no centralized monitoring | - 1.3M jobs/year with 99.1% success - Automated reporting - Proactive customer notifications |
| First Rate | ActiveBatch | Automating investment and client reports | Unreliable, lacked error logging | - Automated 99% workflows - Reduced downtime - Scalable for thousands of jobs daily |
| Amec Foster Wheeler | ActiveBatch | Integrating Microsoft Dynamics AX with other apps | Limited native scheduling | - Automated AX integration - Streamlined payroll, project updates |
| Statkraft | ActiveBatch | Automating energy pricing and data modeling | OS/app integration and logging challenges | - No custom coding needed - Built-in alerts and reruns - Increased job volume and frequency |
| PrimeSource | ActiveBatch | Automating SAP data warehouse and business workflows | Poor IBM Tivoli-SAP integration; scheduling limits | - Cut processing from 9.5 to 1 hour - Unified monitoring panel - Automated invoice generation |
| Global Energy Services | RunMyJobs by Redwood | Automating SAP supply chain, finance, and HR tasks | Complex, high-maintenance, and costly support | - Migrated to cloud in 90 days - Manages 2M processes/month with 1 employee - Faster system upgrades (2-5 mins) |
| Bankia | Stonebranch UAC & Data Mover | Cross-platform job automation and file transfers | Difficult multi-OS process management | - Simplified secure cross-platform processes - Improved operational quality and deployment speed |
| Dutch Bank | Stonebranch UAC | Modernizing mainframe workloads | Complex mainframe-centric workloads | - 45% fewer jobs - 86% improved transparency - 60% lower operating costs |
Learn other IBM WLA alternatives:
- Control-M Scheduler for Enterprise Workload Automation
- Compare Top 10 Azure Scheduler Alternatives: Pros & Cons
Further reading
Explore and compare other WLA solutions through our benchmarks :
External Links
- 1. Invest Implications: Magic Quadrant for Service Orchestration and Automation Platforms.
- 2. Workload Automation | IBM.
- 3. Workload Automation | IBM.
- 4. Workload Automation | IBM.
- 5. PrimeSource Case Study .
- 6. Read Now: Xcel Energy Case Study .
- 7. Tech-Forward Oil And Gas Company Case Study.
- 8. Workload Automation Case Study | Modernizing WLA.
- 9. Bankia Replaces IBM Tivoli Agent Technology with Stonebranch’s Universal Agent.
Comments
Your email address will not be published. All fields are required.