We performed a comparison between OpenText Content Manager and SharePoint based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Enterprise Content Management solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."The tool's implementation has made life easier for customers. It is sold by SAP. The integration between SAP and the solution is good, making it easy to access the documents. It is widely recognized as a market leader in enterprise document management."
"It has a robust search but has often been difficult for people to learn."
"I did not face issues with the product's scalability...The solution's technical support is good."
"An advantage is integration with your IP directory."
"The product can be integrated with different solutions."
"We like how the solution allows us to have retention of records and workflows, as well as its fire plan."
"This solution has helped us with the categorization, organization, management, discovery, and delivery of program and project related information."
"The initial setup is easy."
"For SharePoint, I believe the most valuable feature is the customization and allowing you to share and edit files and documents. Being able to share externally and the precise administration of the files in terms of giving permissions and controlling who has access to what is a very good feature."
"It has helped us with storing all the documents, which means that people are not going to intervene. There is a way of extracting knowledge within documentation and tracking it. There are knowledge assets for where documentation is stored, indexed and searchable through SharePoint."
"It has good integration with other MS products."
"The product makes it easy to manage lists, forms, searching, and security. One of the most valuable features is its integration with Active Directory."
"The metadata services, the WCF service integration and the Voxel feature are three most valuable elements of this solution."
"The most valuable feature of SharePoint is its ease of use."
"Support could be enhanced. The first line of support consists of individuals who lack experience with some key aspects. When you create a support ticket, the time to resolve the issue may be prolonged because the first person may not understand the system or the solution."
"OpenText Content Manager needs to improve its user interface. Its installation process is difficult and can be made easier."
"Due to very limited use in the industry, vendor and contract support are hard to find."
"The stability of the solution is an area of concern where improvements can be made."
"The ease of use should be addressed."
"The product could improve its scalability."
"The company also needs to make sure that their policies are dictating how information is stored and used, instead of letting SharePoint take control."
"No good process to import emails from several users into a single comprehensive SP repository."
"The workflow engine cannot support the business needs."
"SharePoint’s scalability could be improved."
"Replication needs improvement."
"Needs improvement on the user interface."
"Allow more functionalities for the on-premise version. Do not force the move of content to a non-private cloud."
"It has worked very well for me. It seems like they've improved everything. I don't have any cons about it as such, but I don't think they have a talk-to-text, speech-to-text, or speech-to-type. That would be cool for accessibility."
OpenText Content Manager is ranked 10th in Enterprise Content Management with 21 reviews while SharePoint is ranked 1st in Enterprise Content Management with 150 reviews. OpenText Content Manager is rated 7.6, while SharePoint is rated 7.8. The top reviewer of OpenText Content Manager writes "A document management system that integrates well with SAP, Salesforce and Oracle ". On the other hand, the top reviewer of SharePoint writes "Good integrations, helps with collaboration, and increases visibility". OpenText Content Manager is most compared with OpenText Extended ECM, OpenText Documentum, IBM FileNet, Microsoft Purview Records Management and Box, whereas SharePoint is most compared with Citrix ShareFile, Microsoft OneDrive, Dropbox and WordPress. See our OpenText Content Manager vs. SharePoint report.
See our list of best Enterprise Content Management vendors.
We monitor all Enterprise Content Management reviews to prevent fraudulent reviews and keep review quality high. We do not post reviews by company employees or direct competitors. We validate each review for authenticity via cross-reference with LinkedIn, and personal follow-up with the reviewer when necessary.
What are the records management requirements that you are using to vet and determine the best capability?
Should there be requirements to maintain temporary and/or permanent records?
Not if you are managing physical records in CM. You would need an add-in for M365 such as AvePoint Cloud Records or RecordPoint Records365.
Both help another important issue - M365 Compliance and SharePoint Online are complex user interfaces.
In a lot of organizations, records management staff don't have direct access to RM functions, with IT doing the administration based on service requests from IM. Both add-ins hand usability and RM functions back to the IM team.