
What I like most about Airtable is the combination of a relational database with a front end that non-technical teams can actually use.
I build operational systems for small businesses, memberships, masterminds and service-based businesses, and Airtable gives me the flexibility to take processes that are scattered across spreadsheets, inboxes and multiple tools and bring them into one connected system.
I particularly like being able to link data across tables, build formulas and automations, and then use Interfaces to give different people a much simpler view of the information they actually need.
That means a business owner can have a high-level command centre showing things like revenue, client or member status, renewals, payments and operational risks, while the team works from completely different views designed for their day-to-day responsibilities.
It is flexible enough that I can build systems around the way a business already works rather than forcing the business into a rigid piece of software. Review collected by and hosted on G2.com.
The flexibility is also one of Airtable's weaknesses.
Because you can build almost anything, it is very easy for a base to become overly complicated if the underlying process and data structure have not been thought through properly first.
There are also still situations where I would like more control over Interfaces and the end-user experience. Airtable has improved enormously here, but there is a gap between building a great internal operational application and having the level of front-end flexibility you would get from a dedicated application platform.
As someone who builds Airtable systems professionally, I also have to think about long-term platform dependency. When a business puts a significant part of its operations into one platform, portability and future platform changes naturally become part of the architectural decision. Review collected by and hosted on G2.com.