We performed a comparison between IBM FileNet and SharePoint 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."Centralized our business documents."
"I have found that it scales well."
"We shred all our paper and no longer need the cabinet space. We used to have about six to 12 inches of cabinet space per customer, which is now gone."
"It saves our customers time by 30 to 40 percent by eliminating the time to process paper."
"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."
"The product is very stable."
"The most useful feature is its persistent storage. Also, the full-text search and attribute searching are valuable."
"FileNet has the capabilities to meet compliance and regulatory requirements. It is very secure."
"It is well supported by Microsoft."
"This solution has helped us with the categorization, organization, management, discovery, and delivery of program and project related information."
"It is very stable."
"Document flows, storage, and numbering take off the actions for checking and assigning the numbering and running around with approvals and pre-approvals."
"SharePoint enabled the staff to share documents and work on a document simultaneously."
"The ability to quickly and easily create team sites has been great."
"It has an easy to distribute administration capability, and can also scale to meet a large number of future needs."
"Staff training is reduced because learning basic SharePoint is not as complicated as an EDRMS."
"The analytics in FileNet are too complicated and they consume too much infrastructure, memory, and CPU. They're too expensive to work with."
"I think it's to the point where there are probably too many features. Every software, as it matures and graduates, grows the list of features. What many of our customers express is that it's just too complicated. They're using maybe five or ten percent of the features but they're having to pay for 100 percent. There is room for improvement in terms of simplifying it."
"We would like to have more automation of rollout solutions."
"Our client feels FileNet does not provide them with content searchability. They feel it's cumbersome. They're only using Metadata. If the Metadata is not well-populated, it becomes a problem to retrieve a document."
"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."
"During the initial setup, all the details and different technical things that we were trying to figure out became complex."
"I would like to see it able to capture NLP in an advanced search. It would also be good if it could capture images and segregate them in categories within a span of seconds."
"What I would like to see is more integration."
"Replication needs improvement."
"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."
"The initial setup process is not intuitive."
"The limitations and boundaries must be extended."
"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."
"Using SharePoint is difficult."
"We would like more security features, like automating."
"Search can be improved a lot because we are always trying to compare it with Google Search. Beyond that, it would be helpful to tag the documents."
IBM FileNet is ranked 5th in Enterprise Content Management with 94 reviews while SharePoint is ranked 1st in Enterprise Content Management with 146 reviews. IBM FileNet is rated 8.2, while SharePoint is rated 7.8. 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 SharePoint writes "Good integrations, helps with collaboration, and increases visibility". IBM FileNet is most compared with OpenText Documentum, OpenText Extended ECM, IBM ECM, Alfresco and Hyland OnBase, whereas SharePoint is most compared with Citrix ShareFile, Microsoft OneDrive, Dropbox, Box and Alfresco. See our IBM FileNet vs. SharePoint 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.
