We performed a comparison between OpenText Content Manager 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."We like how the solution allows us to have retention of records and workflows, as well as its fire plan."
"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."
"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."
"Information is much more readily available."
"SharePoint has made things easier with the increased functionality for building the portals, microsites, and total integration with Microsoft categories."
"Removed the need of paper storage and people flow into the office."
"The ability to have version control and co-editing is vital to our workflows."
"Its most valuable feature is the document library."
"It keeps our company organized and everything is in one place."
"The product provides flexibility in collaboration."
"It has helped us with storing all the documents, which means that people are not going to intervene. There is a way of extracting knowledge within documentation and tracking it. There are knowledge assets for where documentation is stored, indexed and searchable through SharePoint."
"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."
"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 product could improve its scalability."
"Due to very limited use in the industry, vendor and contract support are hard to find."
"Flexibility and extensibility, above everything, could be improved."
"This solution would benefit from the implementation of enhanced online forms and template development capabilities."
"It should have more user-friendly customization, as it still requires developers to get engaged and build sites."
"You still need a bit of expertise to add branding."
"The initial setup is complex and has room for improvement."
"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."
"The way to change the version of the files in SharePoint should be improved. The method of synchronizing files from local to the cloud can also use 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."
OpenText Content Manager is ranked 10th in Enterprise Content Management with 21 reviews while SharePoint is ranked 1st in Enterprise Content Management with 146 reviews. OpenText Content Manager is rated 7.6, while SharePoint is rated 7.8. The top reviewer of OpenText Content Manager writes "A document management system that integrates well with SAP, Salesforce and Oracle ". On the other hand, the top reviewer of SharePoint writes "Good integrations, helps with collaboration, and increases visibility". OpenText Content Manager is most compared with OpenText Extended ECM, OpenText Documentum, IBM FileNet, Microsoft Purview Records Management and Objective ECM, whereas SharePoint is most compared with Citrix ShareFile, Microsoft OneDrive, Dropbox, Box and Amazon WorkDocs. See our OpenText Content Manager 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.
What are the records management requirements that you are using to vet and determine the best capability?
Should there be requirements to maintain temporary and/or permanent records?
Not if you are managing physical records in CM. You would need an add-in for M365 such as AvePoint Cloud Records or RecordPoint Records365.
Both help another important issue - M365 Compliance and SharePoint Online are complex user interfaces.
In a lot of organizations, records management staff don't have direct access to RM functions, with IT doing the administration based on service requests from IM. Both add-ins hand usability and RM functions back to the IM team.