COMMITMENTS AND CONTINGENCIES	12 Months Ended
COMMITMENTS AND CONTINGENCIES	Dec. 31, 2022
Commitments and Contingencies Disclosure [Abstract]
COMMITMENTS AND CONTINGENCIES	20. COMMITMENTS AND CONTINGENCIES Commitments For additional information, see "Note 11. Leases". Legal Proceedings In addition to the matters below, the Company is or may become involved in a variety of claims, demands, suits, investigations, and proceedings that arise from time to time relating to matters incidental to the ordinary course of the Company’s business, including actions concerning contracts, intellectual property, employment, benefits, and securities matters. Regardless of the outcome, legal disputes can have a material effect on the Company because of defense and settlement costs, diversion of management resources, and other factors. In addition, as the Company is a party to ongoing litigation, it is at least reasonably possible that the Company’s estimates will change in the near term, and the effect may be material. The Company had no accrued losses for litigation as of December 31, 2022 and December 31, 2021. Pegasystems Inc. v. Appian Corp. & Business Process Management Inc. On July 3, 2019, the Company filed suit in Massachusetts federal court against Appian Corp. (“Appian”) and Business Process Management, Inc. (“BPM”) relating to a BPM “Market Report” that Appian had used to promote itself against the Company. Pegasystems Inc. v. Appian Corp. & Business Process Management Inc., No. 1:19-cv-11461 (D. Mass). As previously indicated in the Company’s Current Report on Form 8-K filed on November 10, 2022 with the SEC, on November 9, 2022, the Company entered into a confidential settlement agreement with Appian resolving the litigation, and the parties filed a Stipulation of Dismissal with Prejudice dismissing all claims and counterclaims in this litigation. The Company will not contain disclosure regarding this litigation in future filings it makes with the SEC. Appian Corp. v. Pegasystems Inc. & Youyong Zou As previously reported, the Company is a defendant in litigation brought by Appian in the Circuit Court of Fairfax County, Virginia (the “Court”) titled Appian Corp. v. Pegasystems Inc. & Youyong Zou, No. 2020-07216 (Fairfax Cty. Ct.). On May 9, 2022, the jury rendered its verdict finding that the Company had misappropriated one or more of Appian’s trade secrets, that the Company had violated the Virginia Computer Crimes Act, and that the trade secret misappropriation was willful and malicious. The jury awarded damages of $2,036,860,045 for trade secret misappropriation and $1.00 for violating the Virginia Computer Crimes Act. On September 15, 2022, the circuit court of Fairfax County entered judgment of $2,060,479,287, consisting of the damages previously awarded by the jury plus attorneys’ fees and costs, and stating that the judgment is subject to post-judgment interest at a rate of 6.0% per annum, from the date of the jury verdict (May 9, 2022) as to the amount of the jury verdict and from September 15, 2022 as to the amount of the award of attorneys’ fees and costs. On September 15, 2022, the Company filed a notice of appeal from the judgment. On September 29, 2022, the circuit court of Fairfax County approved a $25,000,000 letter of credit obtained by the Company to secure the judgment and entered an order suspending the judgment during the pendency of the Company’s appeal. Appellate briefing is currently in process. Although it is not possible to predict timing, this appeals process could potentially take years to complete. The Company continues to believe that it did not misappropriate any alleged trade secrets and that its sales of the Company’s products at issue were not caused by, or the result of, any alleged misappropriation of trade secrets. The Company is unable to reasonably estimate possible damages because of, among other things, uncertainty as to the outcome of appellate proceedings and/or any potential new trial resulting from the appellate proceedings. City of Fort Lauderdale Police and Firefighters’ Retirement System, Individually and on Behalf of All Others Similarly Situated v. Pegasystems Inc., Alan Trefler, and Kenneth Stillwell On May 19, 2022, a lawsuit was filed against the Company, the Company’s chief executive officer and the Company’s chief operating and financial officer in the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia Alexandria Division, captioned City of Fort Lauderdale Police and Firefighters’ Retirement System, Individually and on Behalf of All Others Similarly Situated v. Pegasystems Inc., Alan Trefler, and Kenneth Stillwell (Case 1:22-cv-00578-LMB-IDD). The complaint generally alleges, among other things, that the defendants violated Section 10(b) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended (the “Exchange Act”) and Rule 10b-5 promulgated thereunder and that the individual defendants violated Section 20(a) of the Exchange Act, in each case by allegedly making materially false and/or misleading statements, as well as allegedly failing to disclose material adverse facts about the Company’s business, operations, and prospects, which caused the Company’s securities to trade at artificially inflated prices. The complaint seeks unspecified damages on behalf of a class of purchasers of the Company’s securities between May 29, 2020 and May 9, 2022. The litigation has since been transferred to the United States District Court for the District of Massachusetts (Case 1:22-cv-11220-WGY), and lead plaintiff class representatives—Central Pennsylvania Teamsters Pension Fund - Defined Benefit Plan, Central Pennsylvania Teamsters Pension Fund - Retirement Income Plan 1987, and Construction Industry Laborers Pension Fund—have been appointed. On October 18, 2022, a consolidated amended complaint was filed that does not add any new parties or legal claims, is based upon the same general factual allegations as the original complaint, and now seeks unspecified damages on behalf of a class of purchasers of the Company’s securities between June 16, 2020 and May 9, 2022. The Company believes the claims brought against the defendants are without merit and intends to defend against these claims vigorously. The Company is unable to reasonably estimate possible damages or a range of possible damages in this matter given the stage of the lawsuit, the Company’s belief that the claims are without merit, and there being no specified quantum of damages sought in the complaint.