We performed a comparison between OpenText 360 for SharePoint and OpenText ProVision based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Business Process Management (BPM) solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."OpenText 360's best features are platform independence and its performance when searching large numbers of documents."
"It's all now on cloud subscription, so you can use all the features without worrying about making the system updates patches."
"The collaborative environment for long-term archival or record management is great."
"The fact that you can see and create something that fits your business is the most valuable thing in this platform. It is a customizable product, so it fits your needs."
"The most valuable features are collaboration, traceability, retention of documents, and search."
"This solution has good connection and we do not need to migrate everything in order to protect the repository."
"We have manual processes, so the workflow enables us to automate a number of these processes."
"The fact that it allows for the internal sharing of information is very good."
"All the features come as part of a standard license."
"OpenText ProVision's best feature is the capability to attach a variety of attributes and extract and analyze that information."
"The stability of the product is very good."
"Integration is an area where the solution lacks."
"An area for improvement would be how the platform handles large volumes of documents. It also doesn't provide a very good, robust backup and restore capacity. In the next release, I would like the search technology to be improved."
"They are not going for any add-ons right now. It's the same version we are still using and there is no plan of upgrading and/or creating any add-ons at all."
"The platform's workflows could be more intuitive and easier to use."
"OpenText 360 is generally stable, though there are sometimes issues with document size or format."
"If I have to really create an internal knowledge management portal, if I have to compare SharePoint and WordPress, WordPress is far, far better in regard to the SharePoint option."
"They need to come with more out of the box solutions, rather than depending on customers to develop them."
"Its licensing needs to be simplified. Currently, its licensing is very complex. It contains a number of pieces, and you have to be an expert in reading all the conditions in the license. They should simplify the licensing and make it easier to understand. It would make a customer's life easier."
"Integrating with or interfacing with other tools like data management tools would be very helpful."
"Lacks the ability to have your own in-house developments."
"OpenText ProVision's collaboration management is quite complicated and difficult to use."
OpenText 360 for SharePoint is ranked 15th in Business Process Management (BPM) with 12 reviews while OpenText ProVision is ranked 35th in Business Process Management (BPM) with 3 reviews. OpenText 360 for SharePoint is rated 8.4, while OpenText ProVision is rated 6.4. The top reviewer of OpenText 360 for SharePoint writes "A great, collaborative environment with scalability for many products". On the other hand, the top reviewer of OpenText ProVision writes "Good attribute attachment but problems with collaboration". OpenText 360 for SharePoint is most compared with Apache Airflow, IBM BPM, Bizagi, Adobe Experience Manager (AEM) Forms and Camunda, whereas OpenText ProVision is most compared with Visio, ARIS BPA, SAP Signavio Process Manager and Sparx Systems Enterprise Architect. See our OpenText 360 for SharePoint vs. OpenText ProVision report.
See our list of best Business Process Management (BPM) vendors.
We monitor all Business Process Management (BPM) 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.
