We performed a comparison between Alfresco and IBM FileNet based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out what your peers are saying about Microsoft, OpenText, Box and others in Enterprise Content Management."I like the ease of use, sections, and calendar."
"The product allows engineering teams and developers to introduce new things in a seamless and easy way."
"Document repository."
"The most valuable feature is the flexibility of the searching elements of the metadata."
"The standout feature for us is undoubtedly the Google-like search functionality, which allows us to search for documents within the system effortlessly. Instead of just querying the document database, this feature retrieves all relevant documents, akin to searching on the internet. It is very easy to use."
"The features that I have found most valuable include the Data Capture and Case Manager features."
"It is very user-friendly for business users. They can create their own searches. They are not dependent on administrators to create searches for them. It is self-service for them."
"We have probably cut out at least 40 percent of what the work process was by easing out that whole distribution of paper."
"The natural interpolatability with IBM Datacap, that is a key component of our solution, as well as with BPM, and WebSphere Portal. That's why we prefer FileNet instead of some other, less world-class solution."
"Streamlined our business processes."
"The usability is really good. Our business users are pleased with it. They seem to get what they are looking for, and it's very efficient."
"The most valuable feature for me is the possibility to share and to collaborate, the possibility to connect FileNet with many other IBM products as well. It helps avoid the possibility of creating "island applications." We have an ecosystem where everything can be interconnected."
"I would like them to consider document capture functionality."
"Metadata, auto class, disposition log, and legal hold."
"Alfresco has a very steep learning curve, and unfortunately, during the learning process, it's very easy to make errors, which often are unforgiving."
"I think the presentation layer could be improved - currently, it's too complex, and there are too many features cluttered all over the screen."
"It needs better collaboration between the IBM teams on the FileNet and CCM sides."
"In terms of functionality, what customers might be looking for is a little more in terms of native-records retention. Records Management is an add-on product. If there were just a little more of that built into the core functionality, that would be helpful."
"It may be a little complex to implement and take some effort."
"Simplifying both training and maintenance would be an improvement."
"I know it took them seven months to convert, so the initial setup was, probably to some degree, complex."
"The FileNet API seems like it is very difficult and not transparent."
"We would like to see, in FileNet, the ability to manage video and audio."
"To start with there are too many add-ons, which makes it hard for us. If they simplified the add-ons and plugins to be added to our existing systems, it would definitely help us in the future."
Alfresco is ranked 9th in Enterprise Content Management with 10 reviews while IBM FileNet is ranked 5th in Enterprise Content Management with 94 reviews. Alfresco is rated 8.0, while IBM FileNet is rated 8.2. The top reviewer of Alfresco writes "Flexible and customizable but lacking integration with Microsoft". On the other hand, the top reviewer of IBM FileNet writes "A document management system that helps in document digitalization and workflow management". Alfresco is most compared with SharePoint, Hyland OnBase, OpenText Documentum, OpenText Extended ECM and Nuxeo, whereas IBM FileNet is most compared with SharePoint, OpenText Documentum, OpenText Extended ECM, IBM ECM and Hyland OnBase.
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.
