We performed a comparison between IBM FileNet and SharePoint based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out what your peers are saying about Microsoft, Box, Kiteworks and others in Enterprise Content Management."The most valuable features of IBM File Manager are workflow, content, and process capabilities."
"Ability to store files of any type."
"The most valuable feature is the ability to easily build intranet sites for communicating within teams, storing documentation, product information, pricing policies, updates on product infrastructure, and other related news."
"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."
"I do like the collaboration around documents. The versioning history has proven useful in some instances as well."
"We can now share to team members by MS Teams and assign planners to follow and update statuses in a single platform."
"What I like about SharePoint is that they keep up with a lot of updates, and they bring out new features. I also like that the system is integrated with the Microsoft 365 suite of apps."
"The most valuable features of SharePoint Online are content management, document management, and approval processes. Additionally, there are a number of features that provide integration with multiple Office services and external services."
"SharePoint has an option where you can open files on the browser, whereby more than five people can make amendments to one Excel online file."
"The most valuable features of IBM File Manager are workflow, content, and process capabilities."
"The solution lacks collaboration features."
"SharePoint’s scalability could be improved."
"Document management and the ability to easily integrate single sign-on (SSO) are areas for improvement in SharePoint."
"We do sell Hyland OnBase, which is probably a competitor to SharePoint and does a lot more. In our own organization, we haven't had a need for it, but certainly, for our customers, we are finding that to be a better fit. In terms of the technical reasons for that, I'm not involved much on that side, so I can't give specifics, but there is certainly room for them to improve or add on certain features that clearly are not available in SharePoint, but they are available in Hyland OnBase."
"Integration needs to be more straightforward, particularly with Azure. SharePoint also needs a more comprehensive introductory course for users."
"SharePoint Online could improve the user interface and when modifying any of the user interfaces can be challenging. Additionally, there are challenges with the detail in the analytics user interface and the overall customization could improve."
"We'd like to be able to upload from MS Excel to deploy tasks and use drop-down lists to collect further information."
"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."
IBM FileNet is ranked 4th in Enterprise Content Management with 1 review while SharePoint is ranked 1st in Enterprise Content Management with 13 reviews. IBM FileNet is rated 7.0, while SharePoint is rated 8.4. The top reviewer of IBM FileNet writes "Useful workflow, beneficial content, but setup could improve". On the other hand, the top reviewer of SharePoint writes "Offers great OCR capabilities, metadata storage and proficient archiving ". IBM FileNet is most compared with OpenText Documentum, OpenText Extended ECM, IBM ECM, Alfresco and Box, whereas SharePoint is most compared with Citrix ShareFile, Microsoft OneDrive, Dropbox, Box and Microsoft Teams.
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.
