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."We like how the solution allows us to have retention of records and workflows, as well as its fire plan."
"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."
"It has a robust search but has often been difficult for people to learn."
"I did not face issues with the product's scalability...The solution's technical support is good."
"The product provides flexibility in collaboration."
"SharePoint enabled the staff to share documents and work on a document simultaneously."
"The initial setup is easy."
"The most valuable features of SharePoint Online are content management, document management, and approval processes. Additionally, there are a number of features that provide integration with multiple Office services and external services."
"Information is much more readily available."
"Combined reports and data with timeline tracking."
"Quantity and variety of partners with solution development ability on the platform."
"It's stable. It's very widely used by companies. Also, the knowledge of the product has improved over the years, and by other companies that support it or are Microsoft SharePoint partners. So if there are problems, there's always a user or company that knows the information or can help you; even with very uncommon problems."
"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 product could improve its scalability."
"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."
"It has worked very well for me. It seems like they've improved everything. I don't have any cons about it as such, but I don't think they have a talk-to-text, speech-to-text, or speech-to-type. That would be cool for accessibility."
"The initial setup process is not intuitive."
"We would like more security features, like automating."
"The initial setup is complex and has room for improvement."
"The initial setup was very complex."
"The limitations and boundaries must be extended."
"It should have a Google-caliber search ability and a model-based GUI."
"Processing data from multiple site collections is not easy as they reside in different databases."
OpenText Content Manager is ranked 10th in Enterprise Content Management with 5 reviews while SharePoint is ranked 1st in Enterprise Content Management with 17 reviews. OpenText Content Manager is rated 7.6, while SharePoint is rated 7.8. The top reviewer of OpenText Content Manager writes " A scalable ECM solution to store documents that offer functions that make it money's worth". On the other hand, the top reviewer of SharePoint writes "Stable and scalable collaboration system; good for document and file sharing, and offers fast issue resolution from its support team". 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.