IBM FileNet Reviews

IBM FileNet is used for data management as well as process management, and it is being used for pre-underwriting. This is one purpose, and the other purpose is to store the data for other applications that do not use IBM FileNet process management, but only use data storage with IBM FileNet. There are two types: one is to use the entire IBM FileNet function, the other is just to use the storage function.

The business process manipulation in IBM FileNet is very effective for implementing business processes. IBM FileNet has content management, and these two features are very good. Compared with Kamunda business process management, Kamunda is easier for implementation than IBM FileNet.

There is a significant ROI from IBM FileNet because before its introduction, the company needed to do all the work manually. This significant ROI has been evident since IBM FileNet was first introduced ten years ago. While there might be documentation prepared by the company, it is not currently available.

We are a systems integrator, and we deployed FileNet for a big insurance company in Pakistan. We implemented FileNet in seven departments, using the case manager and capture for content management. We served them for about eight or nine years before they became capable of handling the product themselves.

FileNet was scalable and could be implemented into big multinational organizations. However, it has become very expensive recently. Compared to low-code solutions such as Appian and outsystems, FileNet has gaps, mainly because it requires coding, which is not preferred by clients due to pricing concerns in Pakistan. We transitioned clients to cloud solutions, although FileNet has been strongly integrated with on-prem deployments.

I am in the presales part of a big seller, and I am an IBM partner. I wanted to compare IBM FileNet with OpenText as there are not many tools at this level of enterprise content management that can meet our needs. The competition at this level is limited, which is why OpenText was interesting to me.

In my experience, larger enterprise tools like IBM FileNet help manage billions of documents and support thousands of users, which smaller tools cannot handle effectively.

We are using IBM FileNet for our new business process workflow. This is the main purpose, alongside some integrations with other applications.

IBM FileNet supports our document management and compliance processes. It aids integration with other business systems by utilizing FileMaker API for document retrieval and database interactions.

IBM FileNet was supposed to be the organizational system for all our content. A lot of departments used it for their files. We were trying to do records management, but people did not really want to put in the effort to do the RM part. They used the solution as a shared drive. We also used it for simultaneous edits, just like SharePoint.

IBM FileNet was more scalable. We were not limited, and we could have one repository as opposed to all of the chaotic websites we have with SharePoint. As records management administrators, we could have a broader overview of the organizational content. However, it's all over the place now. I feel we had better control with IBM FileNet. It was more controlled because of how we had set it up, and we had it in-house.

We knew how much we were using in terms of storage, and we didn't have to panic whenever there was a price increase. We could also control the changes whenever the vendor put in new rules. We could do the upgrades, test them in DEV and UAT, and ensure that when we release something, it is tested and communicated. Now, it happens, and we know only when users start complaining.

We are resellers of IBM FileNet, and I have been reselling this tool. The primary use case is for enterprise content management, possibly extending to various document handling purposes.

The best part of FileNet includes its advantages and most valuable features, which are its scalability and stability. Moreover, it stands out for its integration capabilities, making it a practical choice for our needs in managing content and related tasks.

We use the product for document digitalization and workflow management. It is our document management system. 

We chose IBM FileNet primarily for its scalability and interoperability. Additionally, we appreciate the mobile app, which allows us to access documents using smartphones from anywhere. We also utilize various other IBM products for security purposes, creating a cohesive environment that works well together. The transition from a paper-based to a digital environment has significantly impacted our workflow systems and document management practices.

The standout feature for us is undoubtedly the Google-like search functionality, which allows us to search for documents within the system effortlessly. Instead of just querying the document database, this feature retrieves all relevant documents, akin to searching on the internet. It is very easy to use. 

Implementing the product has brought about significant positive changes within our company, especially in how we archive and access documents. The availability of documents on the go via the mobile app has brought positive impact. As a result, adoption rates have been very high. 

We have created document types for various types of documents, such as invoices (both incoming and outgoing), and normal posts in German. This involves automatic content detection, where the content itself goes via scanner to the content store. Links are then sent to the user, where they can find the documents.

IBM FileNet as a solution is very good for midsized companies and offers a compact solution where content can be stored in an IBM DB2 database. It requires minimal management effort, provides alerts when the database exceeds a certain capacity, and offers a control center over the ECM system.