Try our new research platform with insights from 80,000+ expert users

IBM Case Foundation vs OpenText MBPM comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive SummaryUpdated on Dec 18, 2024

Review summaries and opinions

We asked business professionals to review the solutions they use. Here are some excerpts of what they said:
 

Categories and Ranking

IBM Case Foundation
Ranking in Business Process Management (BPM)
32nd
Average Rating
7.8
Reviews Sentiment
6.2
Number of Reviews
14
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
OpenText MBPM
Ranking in Business Process Management (BPM)
38th
Average Rating
7.0
Reviews Sentiment
7.3
Number of Reviews
2
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
 

Mindshare comparison

As of August 2025, in the Business Process Management (BPM) category, the mindshare of IBM Case Foundation is 0.5%, up from 0.3% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of OpenText MBPM is 0.4%, up from 0.3% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Business Process Management (BPM)
 

Featured Reviews

Nouman Nawaz - PeerSpot reviewer
Mature product in terms of security and stable product
The architecture is a bit difficult, but in BAW, they introduced the Business Automation Workflow. It's a bit easier compared to Case Manager. Currently, we use Case Manager, so it's a bit difficult to upgrade and handle, but BAW is comparatively much better and easier to handle. The limitation is only for customization because IBM doesn't support it. In some scenarios, if you want some business processes to be customized, we have already spoken two or three times with IBM representatives that we have to customize some of the features in this business process. They would say that if you want to do this automation at your own end, then okay, fine, go ahead, but we are not supporting all this customization. The only thing is the customization because it's a complete standard application.
Jaideep MS - PeerSpot reviewer
A solution offering good automation capabilities while needing to improve its support and documentation
I think the solution's support could do a better job. I rate the support somewhere around four and five out of ten. There is a hoard of people that they get in touch with while contacting them. So we've done some work with them in the past. I mean, we've been a support partner for a while. But apart from that, in terms of understanding the issues for a particular technology, I think there is a lack of people at their end. So they don't really have many people with them. And by the time we could get hold of the right person, especially for production issues, it's a little too late.

Quotes from Members

We asked business professionals to review the solutions they use. Here are some excerpts of what they said:
 

Pros

"Flexible and the ability to divide search screens, and to search for documents. The ECM feature inside the system is great."
"The most valuable feature is the content manager part of the file as it is very stable, robust, and reliable."
"The most valuable features are those involving decision making, analysis, and anything related to event documents because those processes are related to content as well."
"The solution is scalable."
"The content management is great."
"The only thing is that we can easily track where the application is in the process, from manual to automation."
"A valuable feature includes seamless integration with the document management system, along with robust capabilities in analytics and reporting."
"The most valuable feature is its stability, which is why we are using it."
"Not just the solution's automation capabilities, but we like everything about it since we are more of a system integrator."
 

Cons

"The cloud version could use more stability."
"We are now using microservices but there are some areas where the coordination with FileNet is problematic."
"The solution can be quite expensive."
"The service as it currently stands is out-of-date and lacks flexibility."
"Once a workflow is launched then it stays static forever, which is a problem because if there is a change in the business then you cannot change the workflow."
"There are some features that could be enhanced like the document viewer"
"There is a need for more open and flexible integration capabilities, allowing seamless collaboration with a broader spectrum of business process management solutions, beyond the confines of IBM's document management offerings."
"The limitation is only for customization because IBM doesn't support it."
"There are shortcomings in the solution's support and documentation part."
"The user interface could be better in OpenText MBPM."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"This is not an expensive solution and we are using the standard license."
"Pricing is in the mid-range, it is not cheap, but it's not expensive."
"IBM Case Foundation is a little expensive."
"The price falls in the middle range—not overly expensive but not extremely affordable either."
"There is an annual license to use OpenText MBPM."
"On a scale of one to ten, where one is cost-efficient, and ten is expensive, I rate the pricing somewhere between nine and ten since it is a costly solution."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Business Process Management (BPM) solutions are best for your needs.
864,574 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
No data available
 

Questions from the Community

What do you like most about IBM Case Foundation?
A valuable feature includes seamless integration with the document management system, along with robust capabilities in analytics and reporting.
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for IBM Case Foundation?
The tool is expensive for my customers; it is very expensive, more than other solutions. Some customers say it is more expensive. The license cost for Cloud Pak is per user and increases with the n...
What needs improvement with IBM Case Foundation?
We face some challenges with IBM Case Foundation from our customers, particularly with administration and configuration. We face many issues and open tickets with IBM regarding that, especially som...
Ask a question
Earn 20 points
 

Also Known As

Case Foundation, FileNet Business Process Manager
Metastorm BPM
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Suncorp Group Limited
Kommunales Rechenzentrum Minden-Ravensburg/Lippe (KRZ), Hawksford Group, Gauteng Provincial Government Department of Economic Development, Deutsche Post DHL, Sumitomo Mitsui Banking Corporation, London Underground, Great Clips, Fiat, Rompetrol, Gaston Memorial Hospital, Karolinska Institute, Bachmann, Alliance Healthcare
Find out what your peers are saying about IBM Case Foundation vs. OpenText MBPM and other solutions. Updated: July 2025.
864,574 professionals have used our research since 2012.