We performed a comparison between IBM FileNet and OpenText Content Manager 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."It has the ability to mix document management and process automation."
"The application, in terms of durability, has been able to withstand the usage, given that it was installed in 2003 and it's still working."
"It puts governance in place around the content and processes. Access levels can be set to certain parts of the document based on role level."
"Centralized our business documents."
"The document collaboration is very good. There is something called Pink Note where departments can collaborate within the document. It has a built-in viewer to see any type of document."
"The most useful feature is its persistent storage. Also, the full-text search and attribute searching are valuable."
"We use IBM Datacap's capabilities to capture data and then we use FileNet's capabilities for filing, to create an archive of documents... We [also] use FileNet's ability to expose information via APIs and interoperate with other systems."
"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 product can be integrated with different solutions."
"We like how the solution allows us to have retention of records and workflows, as well as its fire plan."
"An advantage is integration with your IP directory."
"I did not face issues with the product's scalability...The solution's technical support is good."
"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."
"It has a robust search but has often been difficult for people to learn."
"Programmers have to translate user needs into IBM FileNet, which causes misinterpretations."
"There is some confusion with FileNet workflow. It's not really going into the next level. They are probably replacing it with BPM's workflow. So there's an issue of clarity, the vision for going forward."
"The analytics in FileNet are too complicated and they consume too much infrastructure, memory, and CPU. They're too expensive to work with."
"It would be nice to have additional integration features, which could be integration with IoOT-based products and solutions that also have automation requirements on the IOT side. Anything can be integrated from a Gateway or API perspective would be a plus."
"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."
"I would like to have easier steps for setting up the application. They should have an easy one step process for the whole installation. Right now, you have to know the application well to set it up and have IT expertise."
"There is room for improvement in the scanning solution, Datacap. It's improving all the time. But since it's more an end-user software, the end-users are constantly improving their processes, and I believe that sometimes we're not catching up with their requirements."
"I think some of the technical pieces, when implementing it ourselves, were something of a roadblock until we discovered the Concierge. Those are some things they have to work on."
"OpenText Content Manager needs to improve its user interface. Its installation process is difficult and can be made easier."
"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 stability of the solution is an area of concern where improvements can be made."
"Due to very limited use in the industry, vendor and contract support are hard to find."
"The ease of use should be addressed."
"The product could improve its scalability."
IBM FileNet is ranked 5th in Enterprise Content Management with 94 reviews while OpenText Content Manager is ranked 10th in Enterprise Content Management with 21 reviews. IBM FileNet is rated 8.2, while OpenText Content Manager is rated 7.6. The top reviewer of IBM FileNet writes "A document management system that helps in document digitalization and workflow management". On the other hand, the top reviewer of OpenText Content Manager writes "A document management system that integrates well with SAP, Salesforce and Oracle ". IBM FileNet is most compared with SharePoint, OpenText Documentum, OpenText Extended ECM, IBM ECM and Newgen OmniDocs, whereas OpenText Content Manager is most compared with SharePoint, OpenText Extended ECM, OpenText Documentum, Microsoft Purview Records Management and Objective ECM. See our IBM FileNet vs. OpenText Content Manager 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.
