OpenText Extended ECM Reviews

I work with the business users who are using it. I work at a Utility Gas company. We have a storage team set up for post-project document storage, and now we are setting up the transmission pipeline team with both mid-project and post-project document storage.

By implementing Extended ECM, we were trying to address the challenge of retention management. The biggest challenge with our previous solution was retention management. We are working on implementing a pretty complicated schedule of retention for different documents connected to assets. Extended ECM has a lot of capacity for this kind of work.

It has been a rallying point for us for document management. Previously, we had solutions very siloed in different parts of the company, and we are now starting to bring a lot more groups together under the same platform. That is pretty huge.

We have been working on tying it to SAP and a bunch of workflow management solutions that we already had in place. We are trying to bring the underlying document management layer into the same home. That has been going really well, and then we have some great ties into some data sources that we use to validate metadata. We get a bunch of information from the GIS system. These are still early days, but the hope for the future is that we can eliminate a lot of duplication of documents and we are able to do proper retention. We are able to get rid of documents when we are ready to, but we are also making sure that we have them, and we can find them.

The integrated capabilities of Extended ECM have been good so far, but we struggled with figuring out how to relate integrations from cloud storage to on-prem systems and what security issues are involved. It took a while, but it is mostly solved now. It has been good, but I remember that was a thing that we were struggling with for a while.

Extended ECM has helped connect our content to our business processes. We have been building either new workflow systems or rebuilding old ones onto new platforms, either the ECM itself or AppWorks sitting on top of it. We have been doing very well in terms of getting people off terrible email-based processes and onto managed systems.

Extended ECM has helped to increase productivity in our organization. We have been seeing a lot of reduction in downtime due to issues with not having everything in a well-regulated system, which led to things getting lost or forgotten. We are eliminating those hiccups and increasing efficiency.

Retention is useful. I have been pleased with the search functionality and the extensibility for tying it into integrations with other systems and building workflows on top of it.

I have not used it enough to start running into issues. Some of my technical guys could name a couple of things, but in terms of support, we did have challenges getting good responses from them.

I have been using OpenText Extended ECM for a year.

It does not go down. There are occasional issues with a new release that have to be worked through, but nothing crazy.

Scalability is why we chose it. So far, it has not proven to be a terrible idea.

We have been working with some vendors. A part of the reason why we have been working with vendors is that we did have some challenges with their solution group, which is like a part of their tech support team. We did have challenges getting good responses from them. They have gotten better by going through an intermediary vendor that is experienced and can already answer a lot of the issues that we have been having. Based on my second-hand knowledge, I would rate them a seven out of ten.

Neutral

We were working with a smaller company called Syntax. We were using their document management and workflow management solutions. They were good, but we needed something that would scale up better and also had better documentation retention capabilities than what that had.

I was initially involved in the very first parts of deployment, but then I got out and was focused on the legacy solution. Now that we are more ready to move the legacy solution into the new solution, I am coming back to the project. So, I was not super involved, and even if I was, I do business systems analysts work. I am not involved at a technical level except for a single question or two here and there.

I have not done the numbers, but I can see where it would be.

It is a little more expensive than our previous solution, but because of the fact that it has become a rallying point for different groups to come under, it might end up paying off better in the long run by not having seven siloed solutions. Even though this one solution is a little pricey, it might eliminate other ones.

Overall, I would rate OpenText Extended ECM a nine out of ten.

We use it to manage our engineering documents. We use it for the drawings and our asset documents.

The challenge that we have is that some users are reluctant to use the system, so we still need to come up with a way to motivate company-wide acceptance.

The search capability is great, and it is far better than File Explorer, which is what we had before. That was a network drive. When it is indexed and it is OCR, it is easy to find things.

We are working to integrate with SAP completely, and we are hoping that would help to eliminate content silos in our organization.

The range of Extended ECM's integrated capabilities for addressing complex use cases is pretty good.

Extended ECM has helped connect our content to our business processes. People are able to find what they are looking for quickly.

Extended ECM has helped to increase productivity in our organization.

We use Core Share to share documents with external auditors or with vendors, and that prevents them from being able to get into the whole system. It is useful.

In terms of features, problems are mostly internal. We are still struggling with fixing our taxonomy and how we want our browsing to work. That is what we struggle with the most. There are no additional features that I would like to see. I am pretty happy with it, but their support could be a bit better.

We have been using OpenText Extended ECM for about six years.

We do go down sometimes. I would rate it an eight out of ten in terms of stability.

Its scalability is good.

Sometimes it takes a while, but things do get resolved. I would rate them a seven out of ten.

Neutral

We were not using any other solution previously. We were using network shares.

It was complex in terms of understanding the users and their processes at that moment. We are doing interviews and trying to understand why that even was the way it was. That part is always complex. We are now going to translate them.

In terms of implementation strategy, we have multiple sites in our organization, and one site at a time was rolled out.

We have seen an ROI.

I was not involved in the decision-making process, but other solutions were evaluated.

To a colleague at another company who says they do not need Extended ECM because they are invested in Microsoft solutions, I would say that they just have to look at each product and see what would help them the most.

Overall, I would rate Extended ECM an eight out of ten.

We use OpenText Extended ECM to build a connector to view documents on ServiceNow. It also helps to create a custom search for archived documents. 

OpenText Extended ECM has improved our exposure since our product is available in the market. It helps us get more business. 

We can configure the solution with any industry's products per customer requirements. 

The tool's documentation is not proper and has missing information like steps. 

I have been using OpenText Extended ECM for three years. 

OpenText Extended ECM's stability is good. It keeps improving with newer versions. 

The solution is scalable. 

We contact the support to resolve documentation challenges. The tool's support is good. 

Positive

A few things are complex in the tool's deployment due to the missing information in the documentation. We first build a development environment on our on-premise server for our implementation strategy. We test it out and report to the support if we find any bugs. 

We can address a lot of problems using OpenText Extended ECM. You can build different connectors to the configuration. 

The product has helped us boost productivity by 30-40 percent. 

Microsoft doesn't have as many features as OpenText Extended ECM. You get more features in the solution compared to any other product. 

I rate it an eight out of ten. 

We build products that add value on the OpenText Extended ECM.

Our products run on OpenText software.

OpenText Extended ECM's most valuable features are document storage, security, and compliance.

The solution should work better with partners and be more developer-friendly.

I have been using the solution for 20 years.

OpenText Extended ECM is pretty stable. I rate it an eight out of ten.

I rate the tool's on-premise scalability a six and cloud scalability a nine.

For support, when we open a ticket, we get assigned logs. We need to wait a week or two for a response.

Neutral

The solution's deployment is straightforward. Our implementation strategy involved the deployment of SAP systems with the product.

The tool offers value for money.

The solution is expensive.

The tool's integration with Microsoft and Salesforce has eliminated content silos in our organization.

OpenText Extended ECM makes things simple for business users.

The tool has helped our customers connect business processes.

OpenText Extended ECM has boosted productivity by 75 percent.

Anyone who says they don't need the product should give it a try and understand its value-adding capabilities.

I rate the product an eight out of ten.

The integration of a document management platform with many other applications, e.g. SAP, SuccessFactors, Salesforce, SharePoint, etc. There is a large amount of documentation available, along with solution accelerators to speed up and facilitate the initial setup and integration.

Initially there can be stability issues due to unknown factors such as usage of the system, quantity of documents ingested, load during peak hours. Over time, these stability issues can be solved by tweaking the system and scaling according to the volumes and requests done to the system.

Over two years.

No, Content Server is highly scalable, both horizontally and vertically. Additional servers can easily be added to the cluster. At the back-end, additional resources can be added to increase performance of the agents, indexing, and searching capabilities. The front-end can also be scaled horizontally or vertically to improve performance when dealing with a large number of simultaneous users.

High. When contacting OpenText support we always get an answer within a few hours. The technical support is also very knowledgeable on most of their products, and provides frequent updates when working on a ticket.

The initial setup was, and still is, complex because there are many components interacting with each other. There are multiple settings to check and configure. A vast knowledge of infrastructure, networking, security, software tools, and more are required to install a performant solution.

Get in touch with experts, either directly from the vendor or consult with an external party that has deep expertise in implementing a similar solution.

Building an ECM repository for a leading high street bank in Scotland and integration with internet banking applications.

It is a very stable system, and we are using it to store billions of customer documents which are readily available for search and browsing. It is very easy to integrate all ECM features with other enterprise applications that are helping the bank with easy modernization. 

• Content server
• Archive server
• Search and indexing
• Enterprise integration
• Records management
• Patching
• Web reports
• Scaling and auditing.

• Compatibility with external source code management tools like RTC is missing. This would help in the automation of deployment activities for enterprise applications. 
• Improvement in analytics and machine learning would help in getting a more holistic view of content.

We verify complex solutions and we implement it on the business process management system. 

ECM has extra value for us. We focus on both solutions and they are a little different. 

One is only ECM and the second is as a VPN, with ECM as well.

It's a very good solution.

Pricing could be improved and the stability or the performance needs improvement, which is very important.

I was using this solution for a year as a developer and for more than three years as a user.

It's stable, although it could be better.

Open Text ECM is scalable. We have over 200 users, but the organization is now bigger.

We use a component to connect ECM to IBM file share by other systems. I am not sure how many users we have who are using it but it may be over 1,000.

The technical support was okay. 

We haven't had many issues and everything was resolved through our service agreement.

When I was an architect, on one of our organizations we used IBM Finance in one part of our business. We decided that it was a good solution.

For OpenText, it was a decision which related to using a business process managed system as well.

I was not a part of the initial setup. We have a team in place that handles the setup and deployment.

Both OpenText ECM and IBM FileNet share are expensive.

From my perspective, we are working with two solutions. For both IBM FileNet and OpenText ECM, I was the accountant manager and a place where you can store electronic documentation. 

The extra value for both solutions is adding workflow managers, similar to business process management systems. You can verify flows and sign off documents.

I am not sure if I will continue to use this solution in the future. It depends on the business requirements.

If somebody were to ask me which product is better, I think that both are okay and they should verify the business needs then decide which model of pricing or which performance is better for the company.

I would recommend this solution, and if I am considering an enterprise solution, both Open Text ECM and IBM are the same, it depends on what the customer's needs are.

I would rate Open Text ECM a nine out of ten.

We are selling this solution to our clients and we have an implementation team that takes care of the delivery.

Most of the customers use it for information governance, records management, workflow capabilities, and basic document and version control.

Some of our clients also use the AppWorks technology for local app development solutions.

Most of our customers are very fond of the upgraded smart user interface. It was lacking in previous versions.

The overall architecture is still a bit cumbersome. The architecture needs improvement, as it's complex.

I have been dealing with OpenText ECM since 2011.

Our customers are quite impressed with the stability. There are no issues.

We have not contacted technical support.

The initial setup is very straightforward and the configuration is quite easy.

Depending on the use case of the customer, a project can take between three months and maybe 12 months to deploy. It depends on how complex the requirements are of the use case.

If there is an integration that needs to be done, then it can take up to about 12 months.

We have a support team that looks after any issues.

I would definitely recommend OpenText ECM. Where we are with GDPR and POPI at the moment, I will definitely recommend this solution.

I would rate this solution an eight out of ten.