Content Manager OnDemand for z/OS ingests stuff from the JES spool automatically, quickly and easily. All you do is put the output where you want it and code what you need. We use the destination for our report name, and it goes in, stored automatically.
Improvements to My Organization:
It's an archive for reports. We can access our reports immediately after they're run. We went paperless; you don't have to print then, but you can print a page or pages as needed.
Room for Improvement:
We’d like for it to be able to ingest reports that were created on the distributed side and get them into the same repository, where you have one repository for all reports. We run CMOD on Z and that might already be there; it's just not a feature that we have used. We don't have that right now. One part of that is, these new distributed applications often come with their own archival type system. It would be nice to be consolidated.
Use of Solution:
We've used CMOD or its predecessor for 25 years. We've been a CMOD customer for a long time, 10 years or more, since CMOD became CMOD. We were an old RDARS customer before that. We've had it for a long time. We do provide our statements to customers by CMOD.
We've used CMOD or its predecessor for 25 years, so that's pretty stable. You can't get more stable than that. We do not experience down time or anything.
It’s on Z, so it's scalable by design.
Technical support is very good. It's not a widely used project, the CMOD on Z, so whenever we call, we usually get the same guy.
It a natural progression from RDARS to Content Manager OnDemand, which was running on Z on CICS. It was just a natural progression.
We ended up using IBM services to migrate from the old on-demand version two, which was strictly mainframe CICS based, to the Content Manager on Demand, which had the web front end interfaces. It took several months, but it went well.
Cost and Licensing Advice:
Pricing is not a problem for CMOD; it's pretty reasonable.
Other Solutions Considered:
We did not consider anyone else at that time; just an upgrade. We did not consider building a solution ourselves, in house.
Any advice I might give depends on where your reports come from.
I'm sure there's always room for improvement in things, but we've used it for so long and are so comfortable with it, we're happy. I would give it a perfect rating if it had a little more ease of use with getting the distributed combined into one repository.
The most important criteria for me when selecting a vendor to work with are good support; a strong vendor that's been around a while, that's steady; and, in this world, cost has to be a factor.
As far as how our internal or external customer experiences have changed after implementing CMOD, in the beginning of our first instance of internet banking, we just had a text-based statement, the data that our service provider gave to the customer. We sent them a file and they provided it when the customer asked. Now, we send them a link, they pick the date, they come back and get the statement; it looks just like what would be mailed.
Usability is very good. We've been using it for a long time and it works.
We are not yet considering employing IBM on cloud, hybrid or Box solutions. We are still in the discovery phases. I attended a session at a recent conference about movement to the cloud. I said, with being a bank, we are not quite there. We do not have a good cloud strategy, yet. We are not looking to move anything to the cloud. That would be an advantage to have the same product on multiple platforms.
There aren’t any new analytics or content management services that we're now able to provide for your organization, yet, but we are looking at analytics on CMOD.
We do not have any plans to include mobile at this time.
Disclosure: I am a real user, and this review is based on my own experience and opinions.