We performed a comparison between IBM ECM, IBM FileNet, and OpenText Content Manager based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out what your peers are saying about Microsoft, OpenText, Box and others in Enterprise Content Management."The scalability is a valuable feature, that we're able to display our documents to so many people."
"The tool is a very stable solution with high availability and no information leakage. It has built-in API integration on-site. You can integrate with other components and applications like SAP, Microsoft, Oracle, etc."
"The vertical scalability, as we can use it across some of our applications."
"The content management is all about you as you can make the same content for minimal purpose solutions applications."
"It has a straightforward approach to the install."
"It has an excellent document storage repository, which is good at what it does."
"We have made our service routes more efficient, as far as moving work through the system and being able to react to customer situations and needs better by improving things, such as, address and beneficiary changes. I know that we have definitely made improvements in the process."
"The key way that this product has improved the way that that our business functions is by its stability. Its ability to remain up despite other pressures, its consistency, and lack of downtime are really the greatest things that it brings."
"One of the most valuable features is FileNet's ability to capture things from the stack, from e-mail, to scanning of Excel and Word. FileNet can also convert many types of files to PDFs very easily."
"The most valuable features of FileNet are its comprehensive ability to store content, to get insights from the content, and to use that content for making decisions routed through workflow."
"It puts governance in place around the content and processes. Access levels can be set to certain parts of the document based on role level."
"Streamlined our business processes."
"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 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."
"We like how the solution allows us to have retention of records and workflows, as well as its fire plan."
"The product can be integrated with different solutions."
"I think it's already getting away from Java applets. A lot of our users struggle with keeping up to date with Java versioning, so a lot of the functions they're doing, like printing, emailing, and even some of the viewing, they're struggling with."
"The development platform is not local. For example, you need 100 days in IBM, whereas other platforms, like ServiceNow, need only 20 days."
"I would like to see seamless application integration."
"I would recommend not going with ECM 8 and going with FileNet instead. It seems like that is the future of the lower-volume repository. It seems like they are moving away from ECM 8.5 so I think we're going to have some challenges coming up, getting off of that technology."
"Programmers have to translate user needs into IBM FileNet, which causes misinterpretations."
"I would like IBM to improve with each release, continue moving towards a continual, tighter integration, and build solutions that take advantage of all the different modules the platform has from one place."
"We know that they're looking at documents, but we don't know what documents they're actually going and finding the most, or where the bottlenecks might be. It would be nice if there was some interconnectivity back into Bluemix to say, "Ok, you've got a workflow problem here." That would be a neat feature moving forward because we've got a lot of users that would just say, "The system is not working." We had a few threads would get hung up because they were just constantly banging on these few documents. If that were the case, if we knew that ahead of time, then we could fix that, change the search sequences to make it more efficient. But we were blind to that until the users said it's not working."
"The usability is fair. It could be a bit better. It could be better designed. They could put more effort into the user experience and do a better job of integrating other components, like Datacap, to be a bit more seamless."
"There is room for improvement in the file management. It's very complex."
"I would like to have more governance features with more supervisory layers."
"The initial setup was pretty complex. There are too many options, and it can get a bit confusing."
"During the initial setup, all the details and different technical things that we were trying to figure out became complex."
"The product could improve its scalability."
"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."
"The ease of use should be addressed."
"The stability of the solution is an area of concern where improvements can be made."
"Due to very limited use in the industry, vendor and contract support are hard to find."
"OpenText Content Manager needs to improve its user interface. Its installation process is difficult and can be made easier."
