IBM FileNet Reviews

Our primary use case for this solution is document storage and retrieval - Workflow.

IBM FileNet has given us a much better platform than our previous ECM platform. It's more stable, more flexible and more powerful. The only downside is that it takes a dedicated staff to maintain it and the learning curve is pretty steep.

The features that I have found most valuable include the Data Capture and Case Manager features.

Simplifying both training and maintenance would be an improvement.

We did not have any stability issues.

It's very scalable.

IBM technical support is pretty good.

We were previously using a different solution but the previous platform was obsolete.

The initial setup was fairly complex. You will need help from IBM or a third party.

We implemented through a vendor team. We did not have a great vendor experience initially based on not having a clear set of deliverables.  

Hard to calculate since the old system was so bad.  A couple of improvements were noted immediately:  

1.  Training time was cut for the new system by 80%, 

2.  The business unit was able to absorb a 30% increase in workload with adding staff or overtime, and

3. Processing errors dropped by 40%.

1. It will be more expensive than estimated to setup.  
2. You will need to double the staff while you are running the old system and installing the new system.
3. Depending on the number of documents to be migrated, make sure you understand the potentially massive amount of time and effort required to migrate the existing content to the new platform.

We looked at multiple vendors: Perceptive, Hyland, and Dell EMC.

Do not underestimate the staffing component or you will fail.

On a scale of one to ten, with ten being the best I would give IBM FileNet an 8 out of 10.

We use it for content management and to manage documents. It has performed well.

It allows for multiple people to access content at the same time.

It is very flexible.

It is stable as long as you create the right environment. We have had issues at times, but just because of configuration issues.

It is very scalable.

Document storage and workflow.

It improves the usability throughout the enterprise. We are able to find the proper documents which are needed for business processes.

• The scanning automation piece.
• Being able to capture documents for retrieval.

There is always room for improvement.

The pieces that I have been looking for are becoming available. I am learning they are either on the roadmap or already been released. I am just not in a version of software that is capable of using it yet.

It is very stable and reliable.

I was a consultant for 15 years and had several customers, who I thought were large at the time, until my current employment which by far dwarfs it. So, the capability and the size are definitely scalable. I have seen from tiny installations to my current library, which is 1.5 billion documents and petabytes of data.

The technical support at IBM is knowledgeable and responsive.

The initial setup is complex. Though, it is straightforward for me since I have done it for so many years. It is complex because there are several pieces of software that have to be installed in the right order to make it work alright.

We are using it as a repository. We have multiple input sources where we receive files and, as of now, we are using it as a kind of a "dumping yard." We are not using it for end-to-end workflows and processes as well. We are just using it to get the files and keep them.

It's deployed on-prem only.

When it comes to automation, it has been really helpful for us. We used to do multiple things manually, like storing files store on our local PCs. Now, everything is stored inside of FileNet. It has really helped to smooth our business processes.

In terms of work effort, it has certainly reduced the amount of manual work by 40 to 50 percent. Some of the end-to-end, SLA processes used to take somewhere around two to three days and now they have been reduced to about an hour.

Compliance comes by default with product itself. Everything is captured in the product. Any kind of context, accessibility — everything is captured there. It has really smoothed out our audit process.

FileNet is very user-friendly. I went to Middle East about a year ago and one of the sales guys there gave me a demo with the latest version of the UI. I would love to get into it. If I had to rate the usability on a scale of one to ten I would rate it as a seven or eight for sure. We have business users using and it is quite friendly for them. From a usability perspective, we haven't had any kind of negative feedback. That's quite positive.

It is a very full-fledged ECM product. Starting from data security, workflow management, etc. It has everything, but we are using it just for content management.

Technically, the product is pretty good. In the area of AI and whatever new technologies are coming, I would like to see it able to capture NLP in an advanced search. It would also be good if it could capture images and segregate them in categories within a span of seconds.

The stability of the product is quite good. This is the only product I can think of which is very stable.

In terms of scalability they are modeling it in such a way that, at any point in time, if you are thinking of increasing the user base or increasing the load, it comes in packages. That can be really helpful in an organization like a bank where the user base fluctuates quite a bit. We don't have many problems when scaling it up.

Whenever we have any kind of technical problem or glitch, we use a PMR (problem management report) and it goes to IBM support. They are quite helpful and they are meeting their SLAs. I wouldn't say it has been excellent, but I would rate support at seven out of ten.

I have used multiple ECM products such as Documentum, OpenText Content Suite, Newgen's OmniDocs, Alfresco, and Laserfiche as well. Among those, I have the most experience with Documentum. I started my career in ECM using it and then, being part of the ECM team in multiple companies, I had to look into other products as well.

Both FileNet and Documentum are very good. It all depends on your requirements. For ECM, IBM has multiple products. Based on your requirements they can suggest which layer you should buy. IBM has Content Manager, Case Manager, and FileNet. For example, if you're in insurance or a bank, it would be more case-based. In that case, you could customize FileNet to make it case-centric, but you could use it out-of-the-box as well.

We went with FileNet because of the customization. We can do whatever we need to on to FileNet. It's very easy to customize. You can mold it based on your requirements. Whoever is a good developer can mold it to meet the requirements instead of going with how it comes out-of-the-box.

As compared to other products, the setup is a little time-consuming, maybe because of the weight of the product, of the deployable components. For someone with experience in the field, they should find it very easy because everything is inside the product. While it did not happen in my project, in someone else's, while deploying, they found some glitches here and there and some services that would not come up. That made it a little complicated for them. But my experience is that it's pretty straightforward.

For us, it took somewhere between 15 to 30 minutes. It depends on how customized it is.

If you want to integrate it with multiple other solutions you can do it quite easily. It exposes its services and it exposes APIs so you can integrate it with other applications have on the floor. These days, whatever products we have, we can do multiple things on the platform itself with some simple configuration.

We are still thinking about merging IBM BPM with FileNet. In terms of automation, we have two BPM products. We capture the file transfers, outbound and inbound. We capture forms with pharmacy data from customers, the pharmacy branches. They collect it and scan it and then it is processed under BPM. We keep a version of the document in FileNet. So far, there has been a very small ROI with the project. There is ROI but if the project can be explored further, it will have better ROI.

In terms of market capture, FileNet is significant in North America. It is coming along in the Middle East, but in North America, I would say it is the leader.

Overall, I would rate it eight out of ten. It's a flexible, very much scalable product and it's very user-friendly.

It was used in a customer environment. 

IBM FileNet was used for combining incoming paper documents, as well as electronic documents. The environment consisted of FileNet, Documentum, and SharePoint. Each product was first tested, then used for different business processes.

My experience with FileNet leads me to rate it as a six out of 10. It needs a lot of development effort. Programmers have to translate user needs into IBM FileNet, which causes misinterpretations.

We use it mostly as our content management system. It is our system of records, so it is where we store all our engineering, HR, admin documents, etc.

Instead storing our documents offsite (physical documents), we are storing all of our documents electronically. Therefore, we do not have an outside storage fee.

• Document storage
• The ability to search
• Check in/check out

I would like to see expanded search features, like content search. The search needs to be improved. 

Stability is perfect.

It is very scalable.

Technical support is very good.

We previously had an in-house solution.

The initial setup is a little complex. The installation and configuration to start up needs expert level knowledge.

There are lots of components to the product. Make sure before you invest that you know which components you need.

It is a very stable, scalable system, but it needs a little improvement. 

Most important criteria when selecting a vendor:

• Price
• Name
• Expertise
• Reference.

Reference is very important for us, because we are a government agency and prefer to have a government agency reference.

Our primary use for this solution is implementing business automation from document collection, capture, and indexing through management and workflow up to document analytics.

This solution has improved our organization in terms of automation, business process management, and document control.

The most valuable features for us are Wex (Watson) for search, Datacap for OCR/ICR, and Automation Anywhere for RPA.

This solution could be improved with the ability to present the file system from FileNet.

The thing I want most in my environment is to be able to work with a stable module like FileNet.

The important features to me are that it is stable, scalable, and the integration between this platform and other platforms is very good.

Also, FileNet is now introducing a newer client called IBM Content Integrator, so I think it's flexible.

Also migration. For example, if I want to move from my building to a new building, I have to move the physical server and everything would need to be changed, like network settings, etc. I think FileNet can handle this.

Many customers leave FileNet because of the licensing cost.

No, for the last 20 years I haven't faced any big stability issue.

I think FileNet can integrate with SharePoint, with Microsoft Office, with OpenText, so it can work with any other system.

When I face a big issue, I call IBM support and they are really helpful and their documentation over the internet can show you what you need, very well.

No, I didn't use anything before FileNet.

I would rate the installation process at about seven out of 10. It can be very complicated, and you need to to have an experienced resource.

The biggest issue is the cost of the FileNet, because the license cost is very high. If a customer doesn't have good technical guides that are aware of the license calculation, they will pay too much. FileNet's license calculation depends on the processor and number of users. So my advice to a new customer is to be very careful with your calculations before purchasing FileNet.

If you check the industry rankings, you can see that FileNet was the leader in the ACM category for four years in a row. Only in 2017 do you see that Microsoft SharePoint was the leader. I think that's because IBM doesn't offer new technologies every year, they offer new technologies after five years, for each release of the product.

It's not an open source product, and IBM support is very good.