Compare Adobe Experience Manager vs. IBM FileNet

Cancel
You must select at least 2 products to compare!
Most Helpful Review
Find out what your peers are saying about IBM, Microsoft, Box and others in Enterprise Content Management. Updated: June 2021.
512,711 professionals have used our research since 2012.
Quotes From Members

We asked business professionals to review the solutions they use. Here are some excerpts of what they said:

Pros
"Easy to work with the solution."

More Adobe Experience Manager Pros »

"We have made our service routes more efficient, as far as moving work through the system and being able to react to customer situations and needs better by improving things, such as, address and beneficiary changes. I know that we have definitely made improvements in the process.""We have probably cut out at least 40 percent of what the work process was by easing out that whole distribution of paper.""It is really usable. There is a lot of support for it. You have the online components to trawl through the storage. I have a lot of fun with it.""The most valuable features of FileNet are its comprehensive ability to store content, to get insights from the content, and to use that content for making decisions routed through workflow.""The most useful feature is its persistent storage. Also, the full-text search and attribute searching are valuable.""One of our clients, a customer of IBM, rolled out and replaced their existing ECM system with FileNet. Their productivity has increased pretty dramatically.""It has a very broad market share and a lot of people know about it.""The product has helped with compliance and governance issues. There are some archiving policies which a financial organization has to keep. Our organization can keep up with them because of the IBM product."

More IBM FileNet Pros »

Cons
"Programming model could be improved, it's a monolithic solution."

More Adobe Experience Manager Cons »

"If I had a concern, it would be that we are sometimes not getting to the root cause of the issues from a technical standpoint as quickly as we should. For the most part, it's good. However, when things get a bit dicey with more involved issues, we have had some delays in getting feedback. If I had a concern, it's around the technical support and their responses in regards to things like root cause analysis.""I know it took them seven months to convert, so the initial setup was, probably to some degree, complex.""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.""For end-users there is a lack of administrative features. The interface of basic FileNet is not very good.""The usability is fair. It could be a bit better. It could be better designed. They could put more effort into the user experience and do a better job of integrating other components, like Datacap, to be a bit more seamless.""The initial setup was pretty complex. There are too many options, and it can get a bit confusing.""In Content Navigator we want to see the ability to view different types of video... We are using HTML 5 but it's very limited... We definitely want to see support for most types of video formats in the market.""I would like to have an offline DR deployment. If that is doable, then it would be a big win."

More IBM FileNet Cons »

Pricing and Cost Advice
Information Not Available
"Talking about the cost is difficult because IBM has offers that combine different products, and each of these offers has different types of licensing. IBM also has a policy that the actual price for a given customer may be very different from the stated book price. It's hard to say whether it's expensive or not.""My customers have seen ROI. There have been productivity gains, time savings gains, and things that they have been doing much more efficiently in a more modern way than they were before.""It has reduced operating costs by reducing the amount of manual work needed.""We use extraction. Therefore, we can see 80 to 85 percent accuracy on data extraction. This reduces the manual indexing part, which is definitely a gain on performance efficiency.""The solution saves time and money. It helps us to be able to accomplish the goals of our business, as opposed to being tangled in the weeds of what we could do.""Yearly, we pay for the maintenance, which is $20,000.""When it comes to pricing, IBM needs to make an effort to improve the cost. That's the main issue regarding use of FinalNet in Columbia.""The licensing cost of FileNet is comparable."

More IBM FileNet Pricing and Cost Advice »

report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Enterprise Content Management solutions are best for your needs.
512,711 professionals have used our research since 2012.
Questions from the Community
Top Answer: Easy to work with the solution.
Top Answer: The programming model could be improved, it's a monolithic solution and that's what we don't like. Some features are badly defined in the solution. It's difficult integrating so we're forced to… more »
Top Answer: In general, we work a lot with software requests by our customers, mainly enterprise companies. Typically, our clients are in supplies and they require a complex web portal. They are demanding in… more »
Ask a question

Earn 20 points

Ranking
Views
1,940
Comparisons
1,308
Reviews
1
Average Words per Review
517
Rating
8.0
Views
11,433
Comparisons
5,463
Reviews
29
Average Words per Review
809
Rating
8.3
Popular Comparisons
Also Known As
Adobe Day CQ5
Learn More
Overview

Adobe Communique 5 (Adobe CQ5), currently manifested as Adobe Experience Manager (AEM), is a web-based content management system which is developed to help businesses in offering high-end digital experience to their customers. 

IBM FileNet is a leading IBM enterprise content management product family. IBM FileNet is one of the ECM solutions that can change the way a company does business by enabling users to capture, activate, socialize, analyze, and govern content throughout its lifecycle.

There are many IBM FileNet products available, all of which are integrated and based on the FileNet P8 Platform.

Offer
Learn more about Adobe Experience Manager
Learn more about IBM FileNet
Sample Customers
Metra
Suncorp Group Limited, St. Vincent Health, Citigroup, SRCSD, and UK Dept for Work and Pensions.
Top Industries
VISITORS READING REVIEWS
Computer Software Company38%
Comms Service Provider15%
Financial Services Firm11%
Energy/Utilities Company5%
REVIEWERS
Financial Services Firm33%
Insurance Company17%
Healthcare Company11%
Comms Service Provider8%
VISITORS READING REVIEWS
Computer Software Company32%
Comms Service Provider16%
Financial Services Firm9%
Insurance Company8%
Company Size
REVIEWERS
Small Business25%
Midsize Enterprise13%
Large Enterprise63%
REVIEWERS
Small Business23%
Midsize Enterprise12%
Large Enterprise65%
Find out what your peers are saying about IBM, Microsoft, Box and others in Enterprise Content Management. Updated: June 2021.
512,711 professionals have used our research since 2012.

Adobe Experience Manager is ranked 9th in Enterprise Content Management with 1 review while IBM FileNet is ranked 1st in Enterprise Content Management with 26 reviews. Adobe Experience Manager is rated 8.0, while IBM FileNet is rated 8.2. The top reviewer of Adobe Experience Manager writes "Easy to use content management platform for anyone requiring a complex web portal ". On the other hand, the top reviewer of IBM FileNet writes "Easy to integrate, and enables our clients to guarantee compliance". Adobe Experience Manager is most compared with Liferay Digital Experience Platform, Oracle Content and Experience Cloud, Drupal, Atlassian Confluence and CoreMedia, whereas IBM FileNet is most compared with SharePoint, OpenText Content Suite Platform, IBM ECM, OpenText Documentum and Laserfiche Rio.

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.