We performed a comparison between IBM FileNet and OpenText Content Manager 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."It has a robust API. We are able to have systems communicate with each other, and do business process automation."
"The ability to manage the content well."
"I would say the workflow is pretty good. Also, the flexibility of being able to create custom objects with a lot of domain-specific attributes that we follow."
"It has a very broad market share and a lot of people know about it."
"There are a lot of valuable features, but the biggest advantage is that this system is stable; it's always online, it always works... once it's configured and running, we don't need to touch it and constantly make changes to it. It's a low-maintenance platform."
"If we run into problems, which is inevitable (and we run into problems all the time), we get quick responses and good solutions back from the technical support."
"Stability is really good. We fairly recently upgraded a version of it and have not been having any problems. The resources seem to be really good with this version; it is a little easier to troubleshoot issues."
"It has improved my organization by how we release documents, claims, and policies."
"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."
"An advantage is integration with your IP directory."
"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 did not face issues with the product's scalability...The solution's technical support is good."
"The initial setup is complex. It is complex because there are several pieces of software that have to be installed in the right order to make it work alright."
"If I had a concern, it would be that we are sometimes not getting to the root cause of the issues from a technical standpoint as quickly as we should. For the most part, it's good. However, when things get a bit dicey with more involved issues, we have had some delays in getting feedback. If I had a concern, it's around the technical support and their responses in regards to things like root cause analysis."
"There is room for improvement in the file management. It's very complex."
"The most valuable features of IBM File Manager are workflow, content, and process capabilities."
"The analytics in FileNet are too complicated and they consume too much infrastructure, memory, and CPU. They're too expensive to work with."
"IBM doesn't offer new technologies every year, they offer new technologies after five years, for each release of the product."
"I would like to see in FileNet integrated with Watson, which can read something and send it without any human contact or interaction."
"A little better control into the ACLs of FileNet and databases."
"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."
"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."
"The stability of the solution is an area of concern where improvements can be made."
"The ease of use should be addressed."
IBM FileNet is ranked 6th in Enterprise Content Management with 94 reviews while OpenText Content Manager is ranked 10th in Enterprise Content Management with 21 reviews. IBM FileNet is rated 8.2, while OpenText Content Manager is rated 7.6. The top reviewer of IBM FileNet writes "A document management system that helps in document digitalization and workflow management". On the other hand, the top reviewer of OpenText Content Manager writes "A document management system that integrates well with SAP, Salesforce and Oracle ". IBM FileNet is most compared with SharePoint, OpenText Documentum, OpenText Extended ECM, IBM ECM and Newgen OmniDocs, whereas OpenText Content Manager is most compared with SharePoint, OpenText Extended ECM, OpenText Documentum, Microsoft Purview Records Management and Objective ECM. See our IBM FileNet vs. OpenText Content Manager 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.