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."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."
"The product can be integrated with different solutions."
"An advantage is integration with your IP directory."
"We like how the solution allows us to have retention of records and workflows, as well as its fire plan."
"I did not face issues with the product's scalability...The solution's technical support is good."
"It has a robust search but has often been difficult for people to learn."
"Its functionality is enormous."
"It improved transparency around work products."
"The access control is definitely a good feature. We also appreciate the improvements they've made to the online applications, where multiple users can work on the same documents simultaneously. Everything syncs automatically."
"No code and low code, scalable, and stable collaboration platform. Straightforward to set up. Its support system is good and offers fast issue resolution."
"The initial setup is easy."
"It has good integration with other MS products."
"We can arrange all our documents on one platform and see the document's changes and edits."
"Quantity and variety of partners with solution development ability on the platform."
"Due to very limited use in the industry, vendor and contract support are hard to find."
"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 product could improve its scalability."
"The stability of the solution is an area of concern where improvements can be made."
"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."
"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."
"SharePoint designer workflows can be buggy sometimes without any apparent reason."
"Improve the user-friendliness."
"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."
"It is too heavy. MS should not have paid foreign coders dollars per each row of code. They wasted the stability and reliability in the end."
"The solution lacks collaboration features."
"SharePoint’s scalability could be improved."
"The company also needs to make sure that their policies are dictating how information is stored and used, instead of letting SharePoint take control."
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 M-Files. 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.