We just raised a $30M Series A: Read our story

IBM FileNet OverviewUNIXBusinessApplication

IBM FileNet is the #5 ranked solution in our list of top Enterprise Content Management tools. It is most often compared to SharePoint: IBM FileNet vs SharePoint

What is IBM FileNet?

IBM FileNet is a leading IBM enterprise content management product family. IBM FileNet is one of the ECM solutions that can change the way a company does business by enabling users to capture, activate, socialize, analyze, and govern content throughout its lifecycle.

There are many IBM FileNet products available, all of which are integrated and based on the FileNet P8 Platform.

Buyer's Guide

Download the Enterprise Content Management Buyer's Guide including reviews and more. Updated: September 2021

IBM FileNet Customers

Suncorp Group Limited, St. Vincent Health, Citigroup, SRCSD, and UK Dept for Work and Pensions.

IBM FileNet Video

Archived IBM FileNet Reviews (more than two years old)

Filter by:
Filter Reviews
Industry
Loading...
Filter Unavailable
Company Size
Loading...
Filter Unavailable
Job Level
Loading...
Filter Unavailable
Rating
Loading...
Filter Unavailable
Considered
Loading...
Filter Unavailable
Order by:
Loading...
  • Date
  • Highest Rating
  • Lowest Rating
  • Review Length
Search:
Showingreviews based on the current filters. Reset all filters
SaidGaga
Founder/ECM BPM Senior Consultant - Project Manager at gacosi
Consultant
A scalable and stable solution for enterprise content management

What needs improvement?

There are many aspects that can be improved in this product. We're doing a lot of projects with customers. It would help if there was a summary of the products. They should be able to do more upgrades of the product or offer new versions. They could also improve the user experience.

They have to think about how to make the environment over. Make it in some containers, for example. The complexity of installation can also be improved. They should re-imagine the way that they install products. 

For how long have I used the solution?

I've been using the solution for 18 years.

What do I think about the stability of the solution?

The solution is very stable.

What do I think about the scalability of the solution?

The solution is very scalable.

Which solution did I use previously and why did I switch?

We use various solutions that aren't really similar, but are in the same field. There are lots of products that pretend to do enterprise content management. I have sample projects with SharePoint, and Microsoft Checkpoint among others.

How was the initial setup?

In terms of the initial setup, you have to have some requirements. I am technical specialist in finance, so I can do installation as well, but it's not easy for everyone to handle. 

You have to know it takes time, you have to be very careful and know exactly what you are going to do. You need a good knowledge of the production system, middleware, application services, servers databases, etc. It's not as easy as other products.

How long it takes to deploy the solution depends of the requirements. It can take from six months to two years. It depends on a lot of factors including the modules, because you want a summary, and which remodels are the customer needs. The solution is modular, so you may have lots of modules. 

What other advice do I have?

We use the on-premises deployment model.

I'd rate the solution eight out of ten.

Disclosure: I am a real user, and this review is based on my own experience and opinions.
BolarinwaOyerinde
Managing Partner at Inception Business Concepts
Real User
A very robust solution for my client after more than 15 years

Pros and Cons

  • "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."
  • "Our client feels FileNet does not provide them with content searchability. They feel it's cumbersome. They're only using Metadata. If the Metadata is not well-populated, it becomes a problem to retrieve a document."

What is our primary use case?

Our client is using it for search and retrieval and for archiving. From the very onset, it was deployed for archiving of their legacy records. We did not implement any workflow for them. We use the FileNet Content Engine Web Services to retrieve documents. We use high-end production scanners to scan the records. After that, users can use FileNet to search for these records.

There is automation involved in the process. At the point of scanning, the scanner dispatches the records to a particular folder. In each folder, there is an application that has been designed by us, which files the records in FileNet. We are not using any FileNet application to do the filing. We have an application which renames the XML to FileNet to do that.

We mainly use it for inactive documents. These are records they don't need to edit any longer. They are still necessary for their day-to-day operations; they provide evidence about their operations so they cannot be deleted.

 Our client is using version 4.2 on-prem.

How has it helped my organization?

We implemented it, per our client's request, as an archival solution. FileNet has given us what we needed.

FileNet has helped our client implement a retention policy for their inactive records.

What is most valuable?

We mainly use the Metadata, we don't use content, as such, for the retrieval. It has been robust because that's how we designed it. 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. The version installed back then was 3.6. In about 2009, it was upgraded to 4.2.

For us, the back-end has been good. The system is so robust that we've never had problems, in terms of system administration. We've never had any challenges.

What needs improvement?

Our client feels FileNet does not provide them with content searchability. They feel it's cumbersome. They're only using Metadata. If the Metadata is not well-populated, it becomes a problem to retrieve a document.

Aside from that, they feel the interface — when they look at modern interfaces — is not robust enough for them. However, they're on an old version and I wouldn't know what the current interface looks like.

For non-technical users, with what we currently have on the ground, which is the web services, the only challenge we have is that content searchability is not available, because it is an old installation.

For how long have I used the solution?

I've been using FileNet since back in 2003.

What do I think about the stability of the solution?

From a technical point of view, FileNet is very stable.

How are customer service and technical support?

We have never had to contact FileNet support.

How was the initial setup?

I was part of the team that set up the FileNet installation we are currently using. I don't remember how long it took to implement, as that goes back to 2003.

What was our ROI?

The installation has been going on for a long time. I believe they have seen value for their money. They've been using this application for over 15 years and it's still delivering.

What's my experience with pricing, setup cost, and licensing?

FileNet is quite expensive, although Documentum is expensive too. There are several other content service platforms with a very low price, and they deliver as much as FileNet and Documentum do.

Which other solutions did I evaluate?

Our client is trying to move away from the FileNet to Documentum and that has been difficult. The migration from FileNet to Documentum was started sometime in 2013 but, unfortunately, they have not been successful with it. I believe the vendor they used did not have enough knowledge to be able to deploy it, so they're having challenges with it.

They decided to move away from FileNet back because there was no clear direction as to where FileNet was going. They wanted to do content, and there was an option to go with FileNet P8, but they got direction from industry reviews and decided to go with Documentum because of the content functionality. Aside from that, ideally, they need to bring in workflow, as well as content searchability — full-text search. Those are some of the things they desire.

When they began with FileNet it was started as an archiving solution. That is what it was conceived for initially. But the need arose to get into content and workflow and they felt they needed a new platform.

I do believe FileNet has such capabilities. We are trying to propose to them to go for FileNet P8. Unfortunately for them, they have spent so much time trying to implement Documentum and have not made headway. They have yet to look at P8. We are the ones supporting FileNet for them. We have told them that the functionality they're looking for is available in FileNet P8. I would love to use FileNet P8 to see what it can deliver. However, whether they want to implement FileNet P8 or Documentum, the procedure is cumbersome.

I'm very familiar with Documentum. I've gone for Documentum training in Germany. But I would still go with FileNet because it delivered for me. It has been stable for many years. That is a strong point for me.

What other advice do I have?

My advice would be, before you go for any DMS, don't get stuck on looking for solutions that rate highly in industry reviews. For some of my clients, that is important, but others aren't concerned about that. They say, "Does the solution address my problem? Is it cost-effective? Can I scale up? If yes, good." Those are all things my clients are looking for.

Disclosure: IT Central Station contacted the reviewer to collect the review and to validate authenticity. The reviewer was referred by the vendor, but the review is not subject to editing or approval by the vendor. The reviewer's company has a business relationship with this vendor other than being a customer: Partner.
Find out what your peers are saying about IBM, Microsoft, OpenText and others in Enterprise Content Management. Updated: September 2021.
540,984 professionals have used our research since 2012.
VeyselOzdemir
Managing Director at Ictnet
Real User
Content Engine compresses files, reducing the storage profile

Pros and Cons

  • "One of the most valuable features is FileNet's ability to capture things from the stack, from e-mail, to scanning of Excel and Word. FileNet can also convert many types of files to PDFs very easily."
  • "However, the configuration does take a long time. Every company needs its own configuration design. It depends on how many applications are connecting to FileNet. It can take a long time, depending on the application count."

What is our primary use case?

One of the primary use cases is for documentation processing, including image processing and all the content. It is also used for archiving and document management.

For example, in the mobile telecom or financial industries, there are requirements to retain a customer's documents, depending on regulations, for five and sometimes ten years. In this instance, FileNet is used for archiving all of the documentation.

We are using it for documentation automation projects, especially for content management such as customer contract management and some vendor contract management.

How has it helped my organization?

It has reduced operating costs, especially postage and courier costs and the cost of printing hard copies.

It has also helped with compliance issues. Instead of archiving hard copies, where there are regulations regarding the conditions in which they are stored, which means there are energy costs for climate control, FileNet saves on those energy costs. There are also savings on the cost of renting warehouses for the hard copies. Keeping everything digital means there are a lot of savings.

What is most valuable?

One of the most valuable features is FileNet's ability to capture things from the stack, from e-mail, to scanning of Excel and Word. FileNet can also convert many types of files to PDFs very easily.

Also, when the Content Engine processes files, it can reduce the size by up to ten times by compressing them. It has a very low storage profile. This is very important because storage is something that adds to the cost. In this way, it can reduce costs.

It is also possible to search any customer's documentation. If you want to find historical documents, you can find them very easily.

With the application layer you can install it with Windows Application Server to create web logic. 

You can also use clusters.

When requests come from users, you can extend it horizontally or vertically. You can put a lot of application servers in a vertical arrangement, so it's very flexible.

It's very simple to integrate it with other solutions. The business process management layer makes it very easy.

It's really user-friendly. Everything can be managed via a web application, a web console. And for non-technical users, it's mostly web-based now, so it's not so hard for them to use. Especially in the mobile industry, most workers are not technical. They are sales-based and are not familiar with a lot of technical features. But they find it very easy to use.

Finally, behind FileNet is IBM, which is a big company.

For how long have I used the solution?

I have been using FileNet for 12 or 13 years.

What do I think about the stability of the solution?

It is very stable because FileNet is mostly compatible with Unix, Solaris, and also IBM Unix (AIX). It's also compatible with Windows but the Unix system is really robust. When I was working with FileNet for a telecom company, it never went down. The uptime was five-nines.

What do I think about the scalability of the solution?

Scaling is easy. You can scale vertically because in front of the application server there is load balancing. You can put a lot of application servers behind the load balancing. It's very easy. We were using Oracle Database and we could scale the database very easily as well. You can upgrade and scale up without any downtime. That is very important.

How was the initial setup?

The initial setup is very easy. You first implement the database and after that the application. You can even install it on a remote site. It's that easy.

However, the configuration does take a long time. Every company needs its own configuration design. It depends on how many applications are connecting to FileNet. It can take a long time, depending on the application count.

The installation itself only takes one or two days, but the configuration can take a long time. The first time we configured it, it took over 20 days.

What was our ROI?

First of all, the automation means there is no more dependency on hard copies. Storing those documents was dependent on the environmental conditions, and if they weren't right, the documents could break down. And they had to be sent via post or courier.

By using FileNet, especially with bigger contracts, it doesn't take ten days or two weeks to receive and store the documents. Instead, when the documents are emailed it takes under one second and it arrives to customer service. Once they open the email, they can activate the customer's product immediately. The customer doesn't have to wait two weeks and it means the company can earn money for the product sooner. It helps with time to market.

Overall, ROI depends on the particular project. Every project is different.

What's my experience with pricing, setup cost, and licensing?

Licensing costs depend on the size of the storage.

Which other solutions did I evaluate?

I also know SharePoint and Documentum. When I looked into them, Documentum was harder to use than FileNet and more expensive. Implementing and integrating Documentum was much harder than with FileNet. I'm not sure how it stacks up now. SharePoint was not robust or sustainable, in my opinion. FileNet is much better than SharePoint in those areas. 

What other advice do I have?

In terms of the biggest lessons I've learned from using the product, when we installed the first time, I didn't know anything about document management. But with time, I learned that the most important thing is choosing the best infrastructure.

My advice would be to use a specialist in documentation management to implement the solution. That's not just true for FileNet, it's true for other solutions as well.

I would rate FileNet at eight out of ten. No product is perfect. You will always find some bugs.

Disclosure: IT Central Station contacted the reviewer to collect the review and to validate authenticity. The reviewer was referred by the vendor, but the review is not subject to editing or approval by the vendor.
GV
Senior Architect at Tecnics
Real User
Automation and workflow save our clients significant time every day

Pros and Cons

  • "FileNet has the capabilities to meet compliance and regulatory requirements. It is very secure."
  • "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."

What is our primary use case?

We used it to develop document-management solutions for various public sectors, in India. We also use IBM BPM on top of it, which is primarily used for Workflow, with FileNet as the repository in the backend for document storage. Our solutions manage the entire lifecycle of content, right from creation to disposal.

For example, when organizations receive invoices or proposals, using FileNet we have a solution which allows users to create the content, upload the content, manage the content, and it moves through the workflow.

Our solution is called E-Office is, which handles the entire file movement, correspondence, file creation, committee meetings, etc. Wherever content is involved, the solution is involved. All day-to-day, paper-based activities have been automated using the help of BPM and FileNet.

It's deployed as a hybrid. It's mostly on-premise but some of our customers have part of it on cloud.

How has it helped my organization?

It's not only about productivity but utilizing resources effectively. Because of the automation, they use a lot less paper for printing. And on top of the resource benefits, there are also a lot of cost-savings as a result.

In addition, because offices are located in different locations, they now work together virtually. It is very difficult to transfer this kind of data through emails. Our solution has really helped with that. Productivity is a primary focus for every automation we implement. And our client companies have seen that as a result.

Our clients are saving a minimum of two hours a day in work time. They no longer depend on couriers or whatever they were using to dispatch and move files. Everything happens in the solution.

What is most valuable?

The most valuable feature is the suite of IBM products. It's a packaged solution. We have IBM Datacap which is used for the OCR capabilities. FileNet is the repository for document management. BPM is primarily used for workflow. Then we have Red Hat Linux or AIX, which is an OS from IBM. There is also Db2 which is a database, again from IBM. We get all these products straight from IBM. We don't have to rely on different vendors or products when there is an integration issue.

The FileNet Navigator, which came out four or five years ago, was really a major upgrade from IBM in terms of the UI. Users are happy with that.

FileNet has the capabilities to meet compliance and regulatory requirements. It is very secure. That is also one of the key requirements of any automation that we do.

What needs improvement?

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. There are a lot of tools and a lot of features, but which one is really going to stay and which one is going away. When they make that vision public it will be good.

For how long have I used the solution?

I have been using this solution for about 12 years.

What do I think about the stability of the solution?

FileNet is stable. A lot of our customers are actually on older versions, so we've been upgrading their systems recently. The current version is really stable because it has been rewritten. Since IBM acquired this product — FileNet is not an original IBM product — they have rewritten certain engines in it. The more they release new versions, the more the product is stable, especially in the "five-dot" series. They are really stable. We are encouraging customers to upgrade to the latest version. That is what is happening now.

I don't remember any stability issues recently. Maybe a long time ago, with certain limitations, there were a couple of issues. But we don't have them now. There is a resolution for everything in the current versions.

Which solution did I use previously and why did I switch?

We were using products like Documentum and OpenText, and we used to rely on different vendors for the database, etc., and we had certain challenges. But the IBM products come as an entire package for us, which is really helping.

How was the initial setup?

The setup is going to be complex but we put the right people on the job. In the older versions, it was much more complex. Slowly it is improving. They started releasing container stuff, recently, which we like. 

I would say it is not too complex or too easy. It's somewhere in the middle. Hopefully, the coming versions will simplify the FileNet setup to help it go more quickly. Currently, it takes at least a day to set up a basic environment.

What was our ROI?

Our clients have definitely benefitted from FileNet but they don't disclose the numbers.

What's my experience with pricing, setup cost, and licensing?

Some people say it is costly, but when they negotiate with IBM it is sold for somewhat less. IBM gives discounts depending on the customer base. We don't have complaints about it from customers.

What other advice do I have?

FileNet is at the top of our list of referred content management solutions. It ranks well in industry reviews. FileNet has a customer base in different domains and different business areas. If somebody wants to implement it, they should look at the case studies and see how it is being implemented and what the benefits are.

In terms of its usability, we mostly use the out-of-the-box capabilities of FileNet, such as the Content Navigator. BPM has built-in capabilities to communicate with FileNet and we also develop certain Java-based GUIs.

With the new version, the UI has been improved as has the performance. There is also a distributed enrollment that FileNet allows. There is something Cache Service Manager so you can have this service set up and distributed so that people can access it locally.

I would rate FileNet at nine out of ten. IBM needs to clarify the vision, the roadmap of what is expected for it. How they want to take this product to the next level, that is what is missing.

Disclosure: My company has a business relationship with this vendor other than being a customer: Partner.
GupteshwarPrasad
AVP Technology at a financial services firm with 501-1,000 employees
Real User
Top 20
Reduced manual work significantly, from days to an hour for some tasks

Pros and Cons

  • "FileNet is very user-friendly... We have business users using and it is quite friendly for them."
  • "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."

What is our primary use case?

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.

How has it helped my organization?

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.

What is most valuable?

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.

What needs improvement?

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.

For how long have I used the solution?

It has been almost five years since I started using FileNet.

What do I think about the stability of the solution?

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

What do I think about the scalability of the solution?

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.

How are customer service and technical support?

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.

Which solution did I use previously and why did I switch?

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.

How was the initial setup?

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.

What other advice do I have?

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.

Disclosure: I am a real user, and this review is based on my own experience and opinions.
YJ
Administration Division Support and IT Services at a manufacturing company with 1,001-5,000 employees
Real User
High resource-consumption and difficult to use API are drawbacks of this solution

Pros and Cons

  • "The most valuable feature is access control."
  • "The FileNet API seems like it is very difficult and not transparent."

What is our primary use case?

We use it as a business documents repository for documents such as invoices, packing lists, POs, etc.

How has it helped my organization?

One way the solution has helped our organization is that HR uses FileNet to keep personnel documents instead of keeping photocopies.

What is most valuable?

The most valuable feature is access control.

What needs improvement?

We do not know how to use the FileNet API. It seems like it is very difficult and not transparent. They could also improve on the solution's resource consumption and cost.

For how long have I used the solution?

I've been using FileNet for two years.

What do I think about the stability of the solution?

The stability of the solution is good.

What do I think about the scalability of the solution?

My impression of the scalability of the solution is that it is not really good since FileNet is a high resource-consuming solution.

How are customer service and technical support?

The knowledge of their tech support staff is perfect but, even with that kind of support, we still need internal staff who have a notable level of knowledge of the solution.

Which solution did I use previously and why did I switch?

We switched from an AS/400-based, on-demand solution because the company decided to abolish the IBM AS/400.

How was the initial setup?

The initial setup was complex. Access control setup took a long time and it was difficult to upload documents from other systems.

What about the implementation team?

We worked with Starting Point and RSTN.

What's my experience with pricing, setup cost, and licensing?

The cost is about $40,000, plus yearly maintenance.

Which other solutions did I evaluate?

We looked at Ricoh and ParaDM. We chose IBM FileNet because of the brand name.

What other advice do I have?

The biggest lesson I have used from using this solution is that, if it were up to me, I would choose a solution with a very easy upload method and an easy-to-use API.

My advice would be to understand the company deeply before making a decision.

We're not using much automation related to FileNet. We will introduce BAW soon, with a goal of introducing time savings. In terms of expanding our use of automation in our organization, we may convert some of our approval processes from paper to digitalized documents.

Disclosure: IT Central Station contacted the reviewer to collect the review and to validate authenticity. The reviewer was referred by the vendor, but the review is not subject to editing or approval by the vendor.
WolfgangPichler
Senior Consultant at pITsolutions
Consultant
Easy to integrate, and enables our clients to guarantee compliance

Pros and Cons

  • "It also helps with compliance and governance issues because it's a datastore that is not modifiable, and you can guarantee that. You cannot guarantee that with a folder-based file structure, where multiple people have access."
  • "The area of migrations to new versions must be made easier. It's quite good that they have now begun to improve the API area, to modernize the interfaces, but there's always a very big investment involved in migrating from one version to another. That prohibits rolling out new functionalities to customers. It's not so easy.... In that area, they really must improve."

What is our primary use case?

There are two use cases. One is as an extended datastore for IBM Connections, but we don't have many Connections customers. We have actually lost two such customers in the recent years because IBM didn't do anything for that product. 

The more common use case is as a general filestore for documents, with interfaces to the Web, etc. It is used to store incoming invoices and documents and to classify them. It's also used to automate the process of document storage, when documents come in. We have a mechanism to automatically categorize a document based on content. Based on that, we are able to create attributes for the content management system. Then we store the document in FileNet to enable retrieving it. We have PIDs, a universal access code, for each document and via that we are able to retrieve documents, even via applications.

We have created some interfaces. We have a central solution to make it easy for customers to plug in their application systems in an easy, customizable way, without having to program it. We also work in the area of analytics where we use Cognos. We have customers who retrieve information about incoming invoices. They can click on a link and retrieve it automatically out of FileNet or Content Manager.

How has it helped my organization?

FileNet helps increase productivity. For example, in reporting for a construction company, when they look at the costs, they can see the incoming and outgoing invoices. By clicking, they pull that document from the content store. The productivity comes from not having to go to a folder and look for a document. It's the integration which makes it productive, day-to-day.

You can only see how much the solution saves when you did not have a content system before. We have customers, for instance, who stored their documents in PDF format in folder structures. They had structures based on year and customer number. To find and use a document would take three to four times more effort than to have access via automated interfaces. The next gain is when you plug in mobile. Then you need something like FileNet, an intelligent content store.

It also helps with compliance and governance issues because it's a datastore that is not modifiable, and you can guarantee that. You cannot guarantee that with a folder-based file structure, where multiple people have access. In that scenario, you cannot guarantee that a document hasn't been changed.

What is most valuable?

The most valuable features of FileNet are the 

  • storage mechanism
  • search mechanism 
  • interface through Content Navigator and 
  • mobile interfaces. 

What needs improvement?

The area of migrations to new versions must be made easier. It's quite good that they have now begun to improve the API area, to modernize the interfaces, but there's always a very big investment involved in migrating from one version to another. That prohibits rolling out new functionalities to customers. It's not so easy. You can't release a new version every three months to bring in new capabilities. That is the old-fashioned, the way it worked ten or 20 years ago. That is bad. In that area, they really must improve.

We have FileNet, Content Manager, and TSM in our own installation. We migrated that installation three years ago to version 5.12. Now we have to migrate to 5.25 to bring in new facilities, and it's a big task. We have to do it in addition to our other tasks where we support customers. We need a parallel machine and to set it up there and to migrate step-by-step, then test it and roll it out. It's not so easy. That is a big area where there is much to be done to satisfy the needs of customers.

For how long have I used the solution?

I've been using it a long time. We have been an IBM Business Partner for more than 20 years. We have been using FileNet since IBM bought it, I believe about eight years ago. We have been in the content management area since 2002. We started in the area of content systems with IBM Content Manager and then we added our support for File Net.

What do I think about the stability of the solution?

I have never really heard of problems with the stability because the database. IBM Db2 is never a problem. I cannot say anything about Oracle or other databases. We have avoided implementing with a non-IBM database where we can. When we do, there is no problem with stability.

In the larger installations, we use primarily TSM as the object store, and therefore we do not have problems with overrunning file space and those kinds of issues. The only thing we have seen is that when a customer's system administrator installs a new Java version on the server where FileNet is running, sometimes it can cause a big mess. FileNet doesn't come up.

What do I think about the scalability of the solution?

We have customers with a very small user base, 50 users or so, and we have some who have a really big user base. But the scalability is primarily dependent on how long you are storing documents. The time over which documents are stored now has been extended far beyond seven years. In the past, often this was a financial necessity. But now, even though we do not have insurance companies as clients, we have customers where the stored documents are more than ten or 15 years old. The scalability is also more dependent on the count of documents than on the user-base interaction.

From my point of view, it's scalable enough. Today there are machines which are scalable, where you can put in additional processors and memory. In today's scenarios, scalability is not really an issue. FileNet can take advantage of today's technology for scaling. There are other products which cannot because the database prohibits it. When they use MS SQL Server Express, for example, there are limitations. And when you have windream and such solutions in the German market, which are also in the Austrian customer area, they show wonderful functionality and a wonderful GUI, but when it comes to the extensibility and scalability, they reach their limits relatively early.

How are customer service and technical support?

We have not had to use technical support very often. We get technical support from Germany. There is a good support center where the response time is quite good.

How was the initial setup?

When you use IBM Content Foundation as the entry point for installation, it's quite well-documented. If you have know-how in the IBM area, including the area of WebSphere Application Server, then it's not too hard to install. It's up to your partner to download the right versions which fit together, the right way, and then it's not really a big deal. In those circumstances, you can install FileNet within two or three days and have a running version.

What was our ROI?

Process automation is the main reason we created our own server: To make the interfaces easy and to automate the process of storing and adding the right attributes, and to make sure you're able to search and find the document again.

It's very hard to say what the ROI is on that automation. The goal was to make a solution for the customer where he can solve his problems. For us, the greatest part is the services part. We set it up as a vehicle through which customers are able to implement automation, and to make it easy for them to apply it to their applications.

For FileNet in general, the return in investment happens over two to three years when you take into account the license costs, the maintenance costs, and the implementation. I think that is a reasonable ROI. I have heard of products that have much longer ROI.

What's my experience with pricing, setup cost, and licensing?

The licensing cost of FileNet is comparable. It costs more if you use Case Foundation or the like — if you extended it. But that is not the scale of our customers. They are too small for that.

We do the scanning part, at the moment, with other products, not the IBM scanning engine, because it's a price-sensitive area.

Which other solutions did I evaluate?

The problem is that the competitors' products have, in most areas, a contract with an ERP system. We now have three customers who are migrating to new ERP systems and they all have contracts with a document management solution. They bring it in with a fixed price and give them a whole document integration path.

We have one customer who, for many years, used IBM Content Manager, and now he's migrating to a new ERP system and he's throwing out the old solution because, with the new ERP system, he has document management out-of-the-box with the licensing cost. This customer has no experience with the new document management system. Nothing. The ERP seller sold him the D3 DMS system and now we have lost that content management installation.

In terms of decision-making, the problem is that most customers have IT people making the decision about which product to use and they do not have really the experience. When customers come to us, they often come in with a prepared offer from someone else with a vested interest.

This is happening more or more and it is not good. In the past, it was up to the market to have a good but independent product with interfaces to all application areas. With this new scenario, it's the IT managers, who do not have much experience — they come from university from which they only have technical knowledge — and they say: "Okay, I have one supplier who is providing me one solution. I have an all-in service contract and I don't need to take care of the solution on a technical level." That is bad for independent solutions like FileNet.

What other advice do I have?

It's a stable solution. It's proven. It provides guaranteed compliance; neither the attributes nor the content itself can be modified. You can guarantee and report that. The implementation time is no more than for other products. And the product is scalable.

In creating our tools we have integrated a lot with FileNet. It's very easy to integrate because the only thing you need is a mechanism to store, a way to add and change attributes, and to retrieve. You also have to be sure that you have a good search engine when you do not have direct attributes, a full content search.

In the first years, we were not happy with the usability of the content management products. Content Manager had no value for end-user interfaces. We passed on the strong demand for that. In the last few years, with the new versions of Content Navigator, it has been much better. We have a good interface also in Notes, in the right sidebar. It's a solution from IBM, Germany, where you can drag and drop documents. The Content Navigator now also has mobile support with a good interface. It's much more useful than it was before.

The internal features haven't changed and are enough to fulfill the requirements of customers. But customers always want a beautiful GUI. It's much more necessary to sell it with a beautiful GUI than with the functionality they really need. When we sell it, the end-user interface carries a much greater weight in customer decision-making than the technical part. On the technical side, there is nothing that FileNet is missing. There are three ways things can be stored: in the database, in the filestore, or in TSM. Our larger customers have TSM as object storage for FileNet and that is a very good solution.

We have not implemented the IBM Automation Platform for Digital Business. We have looked at it. We thought that in the last two or three years it was too big, too heavy, and too expensive for our customers. We are rethinking that at the moment, looking again to see if it can help and if it makes sense. We are not sure in the moment if this automation package is really a helpful and an effective investment.

Overall I would rate FileNet at nine out of ten. What it's missing to make it to a ten is the possibility of implementing new versions and new functions easily, in smaller time intervals, without a big investment on the customer's side. That is a barrier to new functionalities. In addition, IBM doesn't market well. You do not hear anything about FileNet in the market — nothing. Nobody has promoted it over the last three years. You hear much more about all other DMS systems compared to FileNet. You hear about new facilities, about mobility, and the integration of scanning and scanning-automation processes. You don't hear anything about FileNet. And that doesn't make it easy.

Disclosure: IT Central Station contacted the reviewer to collect the review and to validate authenticity. The reviewer was referred by the vendor, but the review is not subject to editing or approval by the vendor. The reviewer's company has a business relationship with this vendor other than being a customer: Partner.
Muhammad Kamran
Project Manager at Ora-Tech Systems
Real User
Reduced the time involved in our client's document processing from days to hours

Pros and Cons

  • "[The most valuable features are] scalability and ease of use. These features are important because the customer where we have deployed it has millions of documents... And over the last five years, the volume of the documents has been increasing. It's handling all of them and without any errors."
  • "There is room for improvement in the file management. It's very complex."

What is our primary use case?

We have implemented it in a real estate environment. They receive many applications on the front-end and, before our implementation, they were processing them manually. When we implemented it, they moved to a completely paperless system.

For example, a customer walks in at the front desk, the reception, and they ask that the company process a transfer or a no-demand certificate, which is a form used in real estate to clear charges against your property. The person at the front desk creates a case in Case Manager. It's processed by the Case Manager in two different departments, and it's completely paperless.

The customer can view the status from their homes. We have created a very scalable application using FileNet and Case Manager.

Our clients use it for office automation systems to have a paperless environment. Most customers are using it for paperless because Case Manager has more capability than any other product within case management and process flows.

How has it helped my organization?

Before the implementation of the software, there were about 30 people who were processing things. One person would take anywhere from one to four days to process something. Now, it takes them two hours. They are processing things within multiple departments within two hours. 

The solution has increased their productivity, saving them time and cost. When it takes a person longer to get something done, there are more operational costs. If we shave the time from days to hours, there is definitely an opportunity for them to save on operational costs.

In government departments and the public sector, they have to follow regulations regarding land issues. The products are already certified by the regulatory parties, such as OSHA and ISO. During implementation we take care of these rules.

What is most valuable?

  • Scalability
  • Ease of use

These features are important because the customer where we have deployed it has millions of documents, millions of block files, and inside one block file there are hundreds of documents. And over the last five years, the volume of the documents has been increasing. It's handling all of them and without any errors.

Also, we see business users using IBM automation and they think that the interface is very easy to use. They can find the options and links they need. It's not difficult to find what they want or to do what they need to do. In the scope of projects where we use it, we have been able to provide them with the user interface they require. After that, they are very comfortable with it. It is already a very simple interface.

What needs improvement?

We have been working with it from version 4.0 and now it is at 5.3. They have improved a lot already.

However, there is room for improvement in the file management. It's very complex. 

In addition, they should have a built-in application for directly capturing documents from the scanners. Currently, they have that, but it is a separate product. They should have a built-in solution for that functionality.

For how long have I used the solution?

We have used it and implemented it for the last five to six years.

What do I think about the stability of the solution?

These solutions are very good in terms of stability.

What do I think about the scalability of the solution?

Most of our customers want to expand their automation processes. They initially implement it in four to five departments and then they expand it to the rest of the departments.

How are customer service and technical support?

Technical support from IBM is very good. There is level-one, level-two, level-three, and lab services. We have dealt with all these support levels during our implementation. When we have asked for support with technical issues, they have resolved them.

Which solution did I use previously and why did I switch?

In the private sector our customers involve us in the decision-making process, but in the public sector they don't.

Some of our customers were using the Microsoft document management system, the SharePoint portal. They were not happy with that and some of them moved from SharePoint to FileNet. They switched because FileNet has more features and it's easy for the users. They find it a complete enterprise content-management system. They have told us that a SharePoint portal is only a document management system. They cannot use it in the broader context of enterprise content management.

How was the initial setup?

The setup is very straightforward.

What was our ROI?

When it comes to automation processes, so far it has not added up to the mark versus what our customers were expecting, but there is definitely some return on investment due to having an automated system and through savings on the printing costs.

Which other solutions did I evaluate?

There are multiple vendors like OpenText, M-Files, and SharePoint. Our clients have found that FileNet is, overall, a better solution.

What other advice do I have?

I would definitely advise going with FileNet. It is better when it comes to scalability.

We have integrated it with multiple systems. We have integrated it with customized customer applications built in-house and with Oracle ERP. It's also integrated with a customer's website. The solution provides a built-in API and by using the APIs we are integrating it easily with other systems.

Disclosure: My company has a business relationship with this vendor other than being a customer: Partner.
DO
SAE - Services Account Executive at RICOH
Real User
Check-in and check-out capabilities enable document security, but pre-configured use cases would be helpful

Pros and Cons

  • "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."
  • "IBM has a lot of documentation but the kind of information in a lot of the documents can be confusing to our clients. It would be easier if they used video tutorials. Right now, the information is too hard to understand, and there is a lot of it. If they used videos I think FinalNet would be easy to use for an end-user."

What is our primary use case?

We have some projects now with a university in Bogota, here in Colombia. We developed a correspondence process and some administration processes with invoices. We also have a government project where the main process is around the lifecycle of documents. We use FileNet to automate correspondence processes when our clients receive documents.

There a lot of legal requirements in Colombia and companies need to automate their processes around these requirements. We incorporate FileNet in the middle of the process and we collaborate to make our clients' processes more efficient.

We offer FileNet to our clients with IBM's RPA capabilities and help to automate processes.

What is most valuable?

The most valuable feature is when we combine FileNet with Datacap. We have a lot of client data here. 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 the check-in and check-out capabilities a lot to enable correct document security for users. 

In addition, we use a lot of workflow for document processing for our clients.

Finally, we use FileNet's ability to expose information via APIs and interoperate with other systems.

What needs improvement?

IBM has a lot of documentation but the kind of information in a lot of the documents can be confusing to our clients. It would be easier if they used video tutorials. Right now, the information is too hard to understand, and there is a lot of it. If they used videos I think FinalNet would be easy to use for an end-user.

The technical information is hard to understand at times, especially on the installation of the product. And that's particularly true when you have to install FileNet with high-availability.

In addition, there are a lot of use cases for FileNet as a platform. There are other tools on the market with demos or models, ready-to-use use cases that can be configured. With FileNet, all projects we have to be developed step-by-step. IBM should develop some use cases or pre-configured models, across use cases. That would help us speed up implementation a lot.

For how long have I used the solution?

I've been using FileNet for about five years.

What do I think about the stability of the solution?

FileNet is stable because the web application server is a very powerful tool. The problem is that people don't always correctly configure this tool. If the people doing the configuration are not the right people, the client has problems. But the web application server is very stable when configured correctly.

What do I think about the scalability of the solution?

Scalability is good. IBM is one of the platforms that we can upgrade. They have different versions and new versions and upgrades happen without a lot of issues. As a developer or partner, we can take advantage of the flexibility of the scalability.

How are customer service and technical support?

There are three levels of support. The first one is local support which relies on our experience as a partner. At the second level, we use IBM support for our clients. Sometimes, an issue we have is when our client has an older version for a given component. IBM has told us that some of these versions are no longer supported and an upgrade is required. After that, they can give support. But if we are on the correct version or release, the support is good.

What was our ROI?

In terms of ROI on the automation processes, FileNet is so expensive in Colombia. So return on investment takes time.

What's my experience with pricing, setup cost, and licensing?

A lot of companies here need solutions like FinalNet. Its capabilities are very good. However, when it comes to pricing, IBM needs to make an effort to improve the cost. That's the main issue regarding use of FinalNet in Columbia.

Which other solutions did I evaluate?

In our company, we have three different tools for documents services. One of them is FileNet, another is Laserfiche, and there is a third one. But our company has an agreement with IBM where there is flexibility on pricing.

One of the main differences between IBM and its competitors is the pricing. In this market, IBM is the most expensive platform. But IBM has a lot of components in one package. We can use this advantage to offer just one package with all these components. With the competitors, we may need to combine technologies. Sometimes customers feel that having a lot of different vendors for one solution makes things hard to maintain. With IBM, we have just one platform with multiple components, making it a very good solution in terms of maintenance.

Support is also important after the initial implementation. That's one of the differences between IBM and its competitors

What other advice do I have?

You need to be patient when you first use FileNet because the information is hard to understand. People often learn a lot when they go over the licensing agreement because it gives them all the possibilities of the platform. You also need technical expertise to use the platform. In addition, it's important to use support after implementation. Keep updated on the versions of the product and try to use all its capabilities. Don't try to customize the product code because that may lead you into difficulties.

I would rate FileNet, overall, at seven out of ten. It's not just about the platform. It's also the skills of the people around the platform. That is the most important thing you have. The platform is good but it's the people who know the platform who can be hard to find.

Disclosure: My company has a business relationship with this vendor other than being a customer: Partner.
Moshe Elbaz
IT Manager & FileNet Specialist at a tech vendor with 201-500 employees
Real User
Provides a robust, stable, and easily scalable solution for our clients

Pros and Cons

  • "For a large company, for the robustness, stability, performance, and the growth — that you can grow it within seconds — I would advise using FileNet, without any doubt."
  • "The analytics in FileNet are too complicated and they consume too much infrastructure, memory, and CPU. They're too expensive to work with."

What is our primary use case?

We usually use it for document management in insurance or finance companies. Some of our clients are using the workflow for insurance cases. In these companies, FileNet is ingesting a lot of documents and a lot of insurance claims.

In terms of automation, we're using IBM Content Collector and we have started using RPA a bit. We're using ICC for some of our customers to ingest and automate the upload of multiple documents in bulk. We've just started using automation with RPA but not with the P8 system; rather for other functionality that customers need.

Ninety percent of our customers in the insurance industry, here in Israel, are working with FileNet.

Most of our customers use FileNet on-prem.

How has it helped my organization?

Filenet saves time in terms of clearance of insurance claims. Building a claim, from the customer side, is often easier as well. Not everything is perfect but it's good enough to work in most of the big insurance companies here in Israel.

What is most valuable?

Most of our customers are not using some of the most valuable features, like analytics, text search, or case or workflow features. They are generally not used by our customers because they're using other programs that are built-in to their networks. So if a customer has a workflow system already, he won't use the workflow system that is built-in to FileNet, although it's available.

It's the same with the content analytics. If the client has Kibana and Elasticsearch for searching text, they won't use that feature that comes with the FileNet P8 because it's only for the P8 system and not for the whole network.

What needs improvement?

The analytics in FileNet are too complicated and they consume too much infrastructure, memory, and CPU. They're too expensive to work with.

The usability, with the addition of Content Navigator, is not good enough. We're building our own interface, doing a facelift of the product, to satisfy our customers. People here in Israel are generally more Microsoft-oriented. They're used to the SharePoint look and feel, the Outlook look and feel. When they see Content Navigator and its features, it's a bit different for them. It's hard for them to get used to it.

Most of our customers and users are asking for features with a file-system-type look and feel. For example, when they open a folder in their file system they want to see the hierarchy of the folders. If IBM built something like other products, like M-Files for example, with a file-browsing feature, into P8, it would be a very good feature. Most customers around the world would use it.

That is what we're trying to build on our own. It would be easier for the customer to work with, in the same way IBM did with the Content Navigator Office Integration. There, you can browse through Office, the folders, and find things. You can drag and drop documents from Word, from Outlook, straight into the file folder in FileNet. If they would bring these kinds of features into the file system itself, without Office, it would be a killer feature.

For how long have I used the solution?

I have been using FileNet for 20 years.

What do I think about the stability of the solution?

We have been working with it for a long time. It's one of the older versions. Both it and the new version are probably very stable.

We generally don't have any issues with the stability of the system. That could be because we are too small. In Israel we have small companies and they don't have very complicated systems, like in the United States or Europe. We have medium-size customers, compared to companies around the world. We don't have 500 users at a customer's site so these are not huge systems. And they're usually in the same geographical area. It's not like there is a site in New York and another one in Chicago or Philadelphia.

What do I think about the scalability of the solution?

There are no issues with scaling. It's based on WebSphere Application Server so it's very easy to scale up.

How are customer service and technical support?

I've contacted tech support many times. I don't have very much good to say about it. The people in support are changing often so most of the people there aren't familiar with the product. They are always asking for the basic information about the system, even though we've worked with finance customers for many years and we know the product. We try to provide the actual error to customer support and to get an answer about it. But until they forward it to first-level support or engineering, we lose time. We are not usually satisfied with customer support.

Which solution did I use previously and why did I switch?

We used to use M-Files and we are a little familiar with Alfresco and Documentum. Generally, the biggest difference between those solutions and FileNet is the price. The others are much cheaper but most of them are less robust and less stable than FileNet. Programming and manipulating other programs to work with FileNet is easier than in Documentum, as far as I know. Each one has its own best features. It depends on the use case.

How was the initial setup?

The initial setup depends. If we're talking about a Windows-based installation, it's very easy. For other operating systems, like Linux, it's a bit complex. If we're talking about the whole P8 suite, it's very complicated. Documentation on how-to, screenshots, or step-by-step instructions are missing in all of IBM's P8 finance products.

Unlike Apple or with other vendors, where you've got to book, you can install it without any understanding of the underlying system. In finance, with P8, if you are not familiar with bits and bytes you won't end up completing the installation.

In terms of how long it takes, if we're talking about only Content Navigator and FileNet P8, a basic system, just the installation could take three to five days. And that's not talking about the implementation. It depends on the customer's site, on the operating system, on the database vendor. Sometimes the version doesn't support it. It also depends on the network. It depends on a lot of things that are not straightforward.

We have a standard implementation strategy that we use for our customers. We're usually asking for Microsoft Windows operating system and either a SQL or Oracle Database, and we are not doing any other complex installation configurations like a very sophisticated single sign-on. That's because it doesn't work very smoothly.

What was our ROI?

The ROI on the automation aspect of FileNet is a big question. I don't have specific numbers. We're dealing with between 30 and 40 customers here in Israel, and every customer is different.

Within the IBM DBA (Digital Business Automation) portfolio we use Datacap and we do see a return on investment from that. The automated document scanning and email scanning show a very good return on investment.

What other advice do I have?

If you are a small or medium-sized company, I would advise working with other programs before you put money into FileNet, even though I've worked with it for a long time. If we're talking about a large company, for the robustness, stability, performance, and the growth — that you can grow it within seconds — I would advise using FileNet, without any doubt.

The performance is dependent on the database. Issues with performance are usually associated with databases issues. And, as I mentioned, the GUI of IBM Content Navigator caused a lot of issues with performance, but it's working well with our GUI.

I would rate FileNet at eight out of ten. It's not a ten because of issues like the flexibility of the system, the ease of working with or manipulating or programming and enlarging it. It needs to be more flexible to work with, not hard-coded and not closed like it is now.

Disclosure: IT Central Station contacted the reviewer to collect the review and to validate authenticity. The reviewer was referred by the vendor, but the review is not subject to editing or approval by the vendor. The reviewer's company has a business relationship with this vendor other than being a customer: Partner.
AD
Sr. Systems Engineer at a tech services company with 51-200 employees
Real User
Provides our clients with easy-to-configure and comprehensive compliance and governance

Pros and Cons

  • "There are a lot of valuable features, but the biggest advantage is that this system is stable; it's always online, it always works... once it's configured and running, we don't need to touch it and constantly make changes to it. It's a low-maintenance platform."
  • "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."

What is our primary use case?

All of our customers are using it to ingest, process, and retrieve their documents on a daily basis.

How has it helped my organization?

Automation is definitely the most important thing for large enterprises because they can't process many documents without it. Our clients are definitely planning to expand the use of automation. The more automation they get, the happier they are, because they don't want to spend too much time and have large overhead for processing their documents.

There are different stages of automation. For scanning, our clients use Datacap and, once everything is configured and fits their needs, they scan and process all their documents automatically. They don't need to do a lot of extra steps to get all their documents into the system.

After that, they need to search and retrieve those documents, which is also really nice in the way it is automated. There are different options. They can use Records Manager to create records automatically and keep them for, let's say, seven years or ten years and, after that, they can delete them, but not before that.

We have a customer that was using an obsolete system from 1990-something. They switched gradually, business-unit-by-business-unit, to FileNet P8 and that changed their way of handling everything. It changed the time it takes them to do their jobs and it also completely changed their end-user experience because of all the new technology and all of the automation. It completely changed their business process.

It definitely has reduced our clients' operating costs. It also saves our clients time.

FileNet has also definitely helped them with compliance and/or governance issues. That's another thing that is specific to IBM. They're the best in the business for compliance for all kinds of regulations, laws, state law, etc. They know how all that works. Out-of-the-box, it's really easy to configure according to whatever state they live in and the specific requirements they have. Everything is already in the product. They just need to select and configure it, but doing so is really easy and, once they set it up, they just use it. There are no issues there.

What is most valuable?

There are a lot of valuable features, but the biggest advantage is that this system is stable; it's always online, it always works. In addition, there are not too many changes or updates that cause issues. It's both the system and the environment around it that are stable. For large and enterprise customers, it's the best solution because, once it's configured and running, we don't need to touch it and constantly make changes to it. It's a low-maintenance platform.

While the system is stable, at the same time, the end-user interface, the Content Navigator, gets updated frequently so that it can match the requirements from the end-users. That way it provides new features and makes sure that everybody is happy.

To summarize, the back-end of the system always works and at the front-end you have an application that gives the best user experience. It's a great combination.

What needs improvement?

I would like to see support for different databases, like MySQL. I believe it's a good thing to have options. I don't think that there will be a lot of customers doing that, but nowadays people like to have options.

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.

For how long have I used the solution?

I have been working with the product for seven years.

What do I think about the stability of the solution?

The stability and usability go together. The backend and the front-end are separate but they work together. Still, we can handle them separately, from a technical point of view.

What do I think about the scalability of the solution?

The whole solution is based on IBM WebSphere, which is basically a complicated website. So all the applications are running on that IBM software and you can create a cluster, more than one server which is handling all those requests. So you can scale it up to as many servers as you need, which increases the performance significantly. Also, you have redundancy in this case. If one of the servers doesn't work, the rest of the servers automatically handle the workloads.

How are customer service and technical support?

I use IBM's technical support all the time. They're extremely responsive and very helpful. They always ask all the questions. They give us all the information upfront. If we need them to join in a call, they always do so really fast. That's been my experience for the last seven years. Every time I need help from IBM, I get it immediately.

Which solution did I use previously and why did I switch?

If a customer is using legacy software that they want to move away from, the primary reasons in the decision-making process that they decide to go with FileNet are the stability and, at the same time, a really nice end-user experience. Also, out-of-the-box, they have all the government and state requirements. The whole solution gives them everything they need.

With a lot of other solutions, you get some of the features but not all of them. So you need to compromise and probably build your own end-user experience or add something on top of it. With FileNet, you get everything you need out-of-the-box.

How was the initial setup?

The initial setup is really easy. If you're going to use all the features out-of-the-box, you just install it and it starts working. You don't need to do anything.

We have customers that have their own end-user solutions or very specific needs, and then we have to spend a little bit more time with them, but that's because they have their own software on top of it that they like to use it. That's more an issue of end-user software and not the actual FileNet system.

Our customers integrate it with other solutions. A lot of the time it's their own software that they have developed in-house. They use FileNet to connect to other platforms such as FileNet Image Services, which is the older product. But there are no issues because FileNet has an API and they just connect to the API and use it. It's well-documented, easy to use, and they don't have any issues.

What was our ROI?

I'm more of a systems engineer so I work on the technical side. I don't see the numbers.

What other advice do I have?

The biggest lesson I have learned from using this solution is that every solution is unique. In general, out-of-the-box, it can meet up to 80 or 90 percent of the requirements, but you still need to gear it a little bit differently for different customers. Every business has its own requirements.

My advice would be to make the right choice, which is IBM. It means less trouble for the customer and less trouble for the engineer installing it.

In terms of the usability of the solution, once we configure and set up everything according to the requirements our customers have, they are really happy with what they get. That's why we spend a lot of time working with them every time there is an upgrade or whenever we implement it for the first time within an organization, to make sure that every single business unit gets all it needs. The solution is used by everybody in the company and they find the solution usable.

I would rate FileNet at ten out of ten because it's great for the customers and it's great for all the engineers involved in the process. It's great for everybody.

Disclosure: IT Central Station contacted the reviewer to collect the review and to validate authenticity. The reviewer was referred by the vendor, but the review is not subject to editing or approval by the vendor. The reviewer's company has a business relationship with this vendor other than being a customer: Partner.
SP
Chief Manager at a government with 51-200 employees
Real User
The technology is stable but the unappealing UI makes people reluctant to use it

Pros and Cons

  • "The product is very stable."
  • "The basic and fundamental point about FileNet is that the interface is very bad. It's just not appealing so people are reluctant to use it."

What is our primary use case?

Our primary use case was to have our complete documentation digitized and provide secure access to it for all employees in our organization. Along with that, we were to develop a workflow for check-in and check-out of the documents.

We are currently using FileNet but for a limited purpose. We have just one workflow configured in it. It's only used for document scanning and retrieval.

How has it helped my organization?

FileNet has not improved any of our organization's processes or functions. Our aim in 2013/14 was the same. We wanted to have complete automation, a paperless-office scenario. But that aim has not been fulfilled. 

What needs improvement?

The basic and fundamental point about FileNet is that the interface is very bad. It's just not appealing so people are reluctant to use it. Nowadays, when you go to any web application or mobile application, the interface is very appealing and very intuitive. These aspects are not available in FileNet. People are very reluctant to use that kind of application, one which has a very plain UI.

It should also provide different APIs to interface with multiple applications. There are some connection services for SAP but we have found the extent of such connections is not usable for our needs. We want a side-by-side type of a scenario where we can open an SAP transaction on one half of a screen and on the other half we should get a document from FileNet. That functionality is not in the version we have right now.

In addition, it needs a very smooth storage and retrieval process. 

Along with that, the workflow should be very simple to configure. Currently, we are capturing most of the information in Excel and then interface Excel with FileNet. That should not be how IBM FileNet works. They should improve on how the workflows can be automated with minimum effort on the programming side.

For how long have I used the solution?

FileNet has been deployed in our environment since 2013. We started using it but we faced a lot of a problems and have not upgraded since P8 and onward.

What do I think about the stability of the solution?

The product is very stable. We don't have much of a problem as far as the stability of the technology and the product go.

How was the initial setup?

We awarded the contract to another party and they outsourced it to somebody else. So it wasn't that easy for us to implement FileNet. It took a lot of time for us to implement and install. 

The plan was that once everything would be digitized and we had a paperless-office scenario implemented, we would have high-availability, to have complete redundancy of the applications. Whenever one application would fail, another would take care of it automatically without the end-users knowing about it. But that wasn't set up properly. We then managed with Microsoft Cluster between the two nodes. That also wasn't that successful. So there were issues.

Which other solutions did I evaluate?

We are now looking at another DMS which will have a better look and feel and be easier to operate.

What other advice do I have?

We are an Indian company and the skillset available in India for FileNet is very small. We wanted to to resolve some technical issues and we faced a lot of problems from Indian tech people in supporting us. IBM needs to increase the expertise of FileNet in India wherever possible. They should open training centers or schools in India where people can get exposure to FileNet.

We have SAP ERP for our business applications. We have mail and messaging from Microsoft. We have different productivity applications developed for our own environment, for our own business and business cases. Specifically regarding RPA, we have not developed anything as of yet.

Disclosure: I am a real user, and this review is based on my own experience and opinions.
SolomonChris
Founder at intellicon systems
Real User
The taxonomy feature helps with compliance and ISO

Pros and Cons

  • "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."
  • "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."

What is our primary use case?

Predominantly, we use Case Manager in order to automate technical design review processes. We also use it in collaboration with multitenant. 

How has it helped my organization?

We are using FileNet to increase the efficiency of our collaboration and in our organization overall. It has improved the decision-making efficiency, as managers can have access and do approvals while traveling.

We use the of the lifecycle management of the document's automation features in conjunction with Content Navigator.

The solution has reduced our operating costs.

What is most valuable?

It does a 360 view of IBM and views the taxonomy on any documents. It flattens documents so you can see all the attributes of a document on one screen. The taxonomy feature helps with compliance and ISO.

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 FileNet user interface is not cumbersome and pretty easy to use. It is easy to search for a document and get to the right place.

The Case Manager doesn't have a difficult process to follow.

What needs improvement?

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. 

I would like them to have a document distribution feature, even if it is developed by a third-party, just as long as it has a seamless integration.

For how long have I used the solution?

I have been using it for almost eight years now.

What do I think about the stability of the solution?

The performance is good.

We have one administrator for maintenance. It is relatively low maintenance.

What do I think about the scalability of the solution?

The scalability is pretty good. We can scale horizontally at any one point of time, so we are able to scale pretty easily.

We have about 150 users on it. 

We have around six working machines. It has good capacity, so far.

Our design and technical departments use it for automation projects. The solution is being integrated and scaled into other departments. 

Business users are utilizing it day-to-day usage in the organization.

How are customer service and technical support?

Our organization has administrators who are well trained, so we have experienced people on our team to manage the solution. However, if we have any production issues, we do contact their IT support.

Which solution did I use previously and why did I switch?

We previously used OpenText ECM.

Previously, there was a lot of exchange of documents via email with outside parties and within the organization. This became cumbersome. We looked for a solution that to increase the efficiency of our collaboration, which is why we are using FileNet.

We also liked Case Manager and the overall architecture of FileNet. 

How was the initial setup?

It took a while to get it up and running, but it is not very complicated. It took us about a week to have all the components setup.

What about the implementation team?

There needs to be a coordination between the hardware and software teams.

What was our ROI?

Our leads completion process used to take two to three days. It now takes half a day.

What's my experience with pricing, setup cost, and licensing?

Yearly, we pay for the maintenance, which is $20,000.

What other advice do I have?

The overall package is a good product. It has good usability and scalability.

Using it has to be planned properly. It will take baby steps to roll this product out throughout your organization. Assess your users level of ability with training.

We have integrated the solution with BRP.

At the moment, we are also looking into IBM Business Automation Workflow.

Disclosure: My company has a business relationship with this vendor other than being a customer: Partner.
JP
Senior Consultant at Northern Trust
Consultant
Significantly reduced the time needed to open accounts in our system

Pros and Cons

  • "Gves us the ability to create an end-to-end [document] transaction."
  • "We brought DocuSign into our company's solution three years before. At that time there was no direct integration. We would like to pull documents out from FileNet, push them to DocuSign and, when done, retrieve them and store them back in FileNet. We wrote our own custom solution for that. It would be nice if there was some tool we could have used to do that."

What is our primary use case?

I work in the account-opening process, and we have IBM BPM, Workflow, and FileNet document repository. We use different products to generate documents. Our solution uses IBM BPM Workflow in which people fill out a questionnaire. That gives us a document that we store in FileNet. We deliver those documents either physically or via DocuSign. We get them signed to open the account.

How has it helped my organization?

It has increased productivity. And while I don't know for sure, because I am not from that group, I believe the solution has reduced operating costs. It has saved time as well. I have heard that it has reduced the time needed to open an account from 20 to 25 days down to a day.

What is most valuable?

Because the account-opening process varies on a case-by-case basis, we may have several documents generated for a particular case. We would like to put them in one client section. API-wise, it gives us the ability to create an end-to-end transaction.

What needs improvement?

Before we ask for any documents from customers, we would like to automatically see if any of them are already in our system. Are the documents signed already? We need to know before we have them sign a document that the document has already been signed. That is done manually, it's not automated.

Also, I have heard that there is already an integration with DocuSign. That was one of our needs. We brought DocuSign into our company's solution three years before. At that time there was no direct integration. We wanted to pull documents out from FileNet, push them to DocuSign and, when done, retrieve them and store them back in FileNet. We wrote our own custom solution for that. It would be nice if there was some tool we could have used to do that.

It would be helpful if I could submit a question and get a bunch of documents back. I would like to be able to query the documents that are already in the system and then we wouldn't have to worry about some of them because they're only year-old documents. If there is a document that is three years old we may have to re-ask for it from the customer. Such a rules-engine is not available.

Moreover, the questionnaire we use to generate documents is in XML and then it's coded in a scripting language. If there were rules it would be easy to configure them to pull out a specific document. The business cannot find what documents are in a given area right now.

What do I think about the stability of the solution?

Stability-wise, the solution is good. There is not much downtime. I don't see any issues with it.

What do I think about the scalability of the solution?

In terms of scalability, we started with about 100 relationship partners and now we have around close to 1,000 partners, so it's quite good.

How are customer service and technical support?

Technical support is going well. There are a few issues, but we have set up several monitors for our technical modules.

How was the initial setup?

The initial setup is a bit complex unless you know some scripting languages. It's pretty complex.

Within the solution we have several products like BPM, Oracle Service Bus, as well as a lot of custom applications. The bank has its own deployment procedure that we follow for the specific products. IBM BPM is separate and we have laid out our own process. There are a couple of automated ways of doing it, but we follow the bank procedures.

The products we are using from the IBM portfolio include FileNet, IBM Case Manager, Content Navigator is there, and Datacap. We have integrated FileNet with different bank solutions. The integration process was good.

What other advice do I have?

My advice is to set up rules in an outside programming tool. Put them in a separate configuration tool and make an API call to find a list of the documents which match. It would then show the list of the documents to the partner who is trying to open the account. Currently, sometimes they send a request and they get a bunch of documents and they say, "This isn't what I want, I want something else." Then they change the question and the region of the documents. To preview a list of the documents we have to generate the documents. The reason we cannot preview is because the rules are coded in our system instead of being externalized in a separate configuration.

We are not doing anything around automation at this time. We are just capturing the documents but we are not analyzing them. My team is looking into expanding into automation, as is the architecture team. There have been meetings with IBM recently on that.

The use of the solution within our organization is growing. A lot of business units are onboarding the solution now. We started with one and now we've got four or five business units we are supporting.

We have business users using the solution. For them, the usability is not 100 percent but it gives them some flexibility. They still have a problem: they may open an account for a customer but there are five different types of accounts. They have to ask for specific documents each time but they don't want to send the same document to the customer for five different accounts. There is some intelligence we cannot apply at the moment, such as finding which documents are already in the system and that we don't want to send to the client to fill out again. It is manual work as of now. The relationship manager will look into all the documents and say, "Okay, I already have this document from the client in the past couple of months so I won't send it again." Primarily, when we generate documents we don't apply intelligence to validate which documents we have. We don't analyze the data in the system; we keep generating documents.

I would rate FileNet at nine out of ten. All the capabilities I needed in setting up documents or applying security, using content and filters, met the requirements that we had for the solution.

Disclosure: I am a real user, and this review is based on my own experience and opinions.
Patrick Obrill
System Analyst at AT&T
Real User
We can move things from paper to digital, making things searchable and easy to access

Pros and Cons

  • "The usability is really good. Our business users are pleased with it. They seem to get what they are looking for, and it's very efficient."
  • "During the initial setup, all the details and different technical things that we were trying to figure out became complex."

What is our primary use case?

As a developer, I am usually supporting this solution. I do things to automate it and make it work for our clients.

How has it helped my organization?

We are using automation with cell towers. They are putting all the different information about different cell towers into FileNet, so they can search to know where the different cell towers are. Cell towers are still always evolving, even with 5G. This project has paid for itself, as it would take a lot of manpower in order to find out this information and search for it quickly.

We have increased the productivity of accounts payable. Instead of processing invoices manually, which are coming from vendors, we can now process them digitally. We can index and organize them, then refer to them later, paying things on time.

It does help with compliance and governance issues. We are able to look for things quickly to get back to court cases.

We can often refer to the system to help us to make decisions. We are also able to get the information quickly.

The solution helps improve business process and case management in our organization.

What is most valuable?

We can move things from paper to digital, making things searchable and easy to access.

The usability is really good. Our business users are pleased with it. They seem to get what they are looking for, and it's very efficient.

What needs improvement?

We have had different problems and IBM has resolved those different problems.

What do I think about the stability of the solution?

The stability is getting better. It had a few issues for a while. Our old solution had problems at the beginning and those issues got better, then we move to a new solution. While the new one still has problems, they are getting better.

What do I think about the scalability of the solution?

It's absolutely scalable. It is scalability as far as the servers and systems. The physical systems can scale by being able to attach and hook into different automation that we create and when we link things together.

How are customer service and technical support?

The technical support is very good. IBM has support which goes around the world, which is pretty good. They have a ticketing system that we are able to use to get support from when we need it.

IBM Services is where we get help. We have a good connection with IBM.

Which solution did I use previously and why did I switch?

We switched from FileNet IS to FileNet P8.

We are always continuing to move forward. IBM continually offers new products on their roadmap, then we follow along with that roadmap, what is supported and what won't be supported. 

How was the initial setup?

The initial setup was straightforward as to what we were trying to do. However, all the details and different technical things that we were trying to figure out became complex. 

What about the implementation team?

We deployed it in-house.

What was our ROI?

The solution saves time and money. It helps us to be able to accomplish the goals of our business, as opposed to being tangled in the weeds of what we could do. This solution takes cares of for us.

It reduces operating costs, probably in the millions of dollars.

What other advice do I have?

Try it because it works. There are many alternative solutions, but this one has worked well for us. It has been scalable, and there have been different automation that we have been able to surround it with that have helped us to make it even closer knit to the clients' business needs.

It is very integratable, which is good. We have a lot of different integrations that goes on with it. It allows for a lot of hooks into it, so we can use code. There are also different components which are available with it, even out-of-the-box.

It is advanced and further along than other products.

There are always different ways to do something. Sometimes automation and technology will help resolve these more than we think.

Disclosure: I am a real user, and this review is based on my own experience and opinions.
SS
Software Architect at Deloitte
Consultant
Provides better content management for security content

Pros and Cons

  • "It saves our customers time by 30 to 40 percent by eliminating the time to process paper."
  • "The new software and trends with the cloud solution is a little slow. I would like them to move toward more cloud-based and microservices rather than a SaaS model. This is where the industry is going and what customers are asking for."

What is our primary use case?

Primary usage is storing content for content management.

We are the consultants, who provide the solution to our clients.

We mostly use ECM solutions from IBM, not database.

How has it helped my organization?

While business users are happy with the solution, trends are changing. We need to catch up to them.

The solution helps with governance, especially with PII or PHI, and then with some redaction capabilities.

It has had a positive effect on the decision-making for the business users in our organization.

The solution has improved business process management and case management in our organization.

What is most valuable?

It provides better content management for security content: both storage and archival.

It is pretty robust and user-friendly. 

We have integrated this solution with other solutions, and the integration process is seamless.

What needs improvement?

The new software and trends with the cloud solution is a little slow. I would like them to move toward more cloud-based and microservices rather than a SaaS model. This is where the industry is going and what customers are asking for.

The usability is a lot better than it used to be.

What do I think about the stability of the solution?

It is pretty stable.

What do I think about the scalability of the solution?

It is scalable.

How are customer service and technical support?

The technical support is pretty knowledgeable and good.

Which solution did I use previously and why did I switch?

The industry is changing. Competitors for the clients are growing faster, so they need to catch up with them. We need to deploy processes to make them more efficient, interactive, and faster.

How was the initial setup?

The initial setup is complex in the sense that there are server dependencies, installation issues, and compatibility issues with the existing environment and software. Then, the hardware and software have to be managed.

What about the implementation team?

We are the consultants for the deployment.

What was our ROI?

The solution increases productivity and reduces operating costs. With a few customers, it has reduced costs by 30 percent from the legacy systems to the new system.

It saves our customers time by 30 to 40 percent by eliminating the time to process paper.

Which other solutions did I evaluate?

We work with the competitors, as well. While the solution is good, it needs to catch up to the average.

What other advice do I have?

Depending on the customer's needs (requirement) and how they have they have laid out their environment, I would recommend the product.

The product has improved over time through automation.

We plan to expand automation into machine learning, artificial intelligence, and analytics.

Disclosure: I am a real user, and this review is based on my own experience and opinions.
VC
Senior Software Engineer at a financial services firm with 5,001-10,000 employees
Real User
Allowed us to define a security structure to ensure authorized access to sensitive documents

Pros and Cons

  • "The usability is very good. We like the Content Navigator. It's very easy to use the search and retrieve for documents and has a lot of options for the user to download documents or send an email."
  • "In Content Navigator we want to see the ability to view different types of video... We are using HTML 5 but it's very limited... We definitely want to see support for most types of video formats in the market."

What is our primary use case?

We store policies, documents, and customer data in the FileNet repository.

How has it helped my organization?

The solution has increased productivity. We're a life insurance company. We get claims. It becomes much easier to view documents on the screen and process the work immediately so that the next person can review it and the next business user can view it. It makes the process very easy.

It has also reduced operating costs and saved us time, on the order of days. It used to be that processing applications would take weeks. Because we have different departments, physically moving documents would take a lot of time. Now where everything is online, they can just read the document and pass it to the next person. Things get done within days now, not weeks.

The solution has helped us with compliance. The documents are highly sensitive, they contain PI, so we had to make sure that only authorized people can access them. We have defined the security structure within FileNet. Only the people who have access can read the documents. That's how we ensure compliance and security on them.

In addition, decision-making goes faster. We don't have to wait for physical documents. Users can log in to the application, look up the information, and take the decisions quickly now.

What is most valuable?

The document storage is the most valuable feature. And then, searching those documents by users is helpful.

The usability is very good. We like the Content Navigator. It's very easy to use the search and retrieve for documents and has a lot of options for the user to download documents or send an email.

What needs improvement?

In Content Navigator we want to see the ability to view different types of video. They have come up with video support. We are using HTML 5 but it's very limited. They don't have a lot support for a lot of video formats. We definitely want to see support for most types of video formats in the market. That's the main feature we are looking for.

There is room for improvement when we need a fix to a bug in the application. That has to be a little bit quicker as compared to other solutions. It takes time for them to release any interim fixes. That impacts business on our side. We have had to wait for the solution, and sometimes it takes three weeks, sometimes it takes more than a month.

What do I think about the stability of the solution?

It's very stable. We haven't had any issues as far as stability is concerned. It's highly-available, so it's definitely stable as compared to other products.

What do I think about the scalability of the solution?

It's easily scalable. We have multiple environments for FileNet, millions of documents. It's easy to scale and we don't have to worry about downtime.

How are customer service and technical support?

Technical support is good. When we have any issues, we open a PMR with IBM and we do get the response on time. The only thing is that if there are any bugs, it takes time for them to come up with the fixes. But other than that, the technical support is good from IBM.

Which solution did I use previously and why did I switch?

We did work with Documentum and Alfresco, but we went with FileNet because we had been using it for a long time and we are happy with it. It's more reliable. And support is also very good when compared to others.

How was the initial setup?

If you ask a "fresher," the setup would be a little bit complex for him. But if you ask an experienced person who knows FileNet, it's easy for him. He knows exactly what to do.

In terms of integrating it with other solutions, we use Content Navigator within our in-house applications, and for the document viewing and searching. So we have created plugins and they use those plugins to access those features within Content Navigator.

What about the implementation team?

Everything was done in-house.

What other advice do I have?

The biggest lesson we have learned in using this solution is that nowadays everything is digitized so people want to take decisions faster. If you want to make your business processes faster, you have to think about a product like FileNet, which helps you take the steps.

Go for FileNet. It's good as a document repository. It has a lot of features and supports a lot of document formats. Content Navigator is a very good application. You don't have to write any custom code; you can just install it and start using it. Everything is out-of-the-box. You don't have to worry about writing custom code.

We don't use IBM Case Manager, but we have an in-house case management tool where we hooked up Content Navigator to view documents, so that really helped us.

I would rate the product at eight out of ten. It's very good. It does have a few limitations in the media formats and all but, overall, it's fine.

Disclosure: I am a real user, and this review is based on my own experience and opinions.
WC
System Tech Oracle Database at a comms service provider with 10,001+ employees
Real User
It has increased our productivity

What is our primary use case?

We are using this product in Beijing. It is a good product to use. Our team programmed an automation workflow to use with it.

How has it helped my organization?

Our upper management encourages us to use this solution with automation. It has increased our productivity.

What is most valuable?

It is easy to use. You can put everything in it, such as, documents. It is really easy to access and pretty easy to set up.

What needs improvement?

My colleague and I have a lot questions about the Datacap related stuff.

For how long have I used the solution?

I have been using this solution for 10 years.

What do I think about the stability of the solution?

While the stability is pretty good, there sometimes can be issues with the database connections.…

What is our primary use case?

We are using this product in Beijing. It is a good product to use.

Our team programmed an automation workflow to use with it.

How has it helped my organization?

Our upper management encourages us to use this solution with automation.

It has increased our productivity.

What is most valuable?

It is easy to use. You can put everything in it, such as, documents. It is really easy to access and pretty easy to set up.

What needs improvement?

My colleague and I have a lot questions about the Datacap related stuff.

For how long have I used the solution?

I have been using this solution for 10 years.

What do I think about the stability of the solution?

While the stability is pretty good, there sometimes can be issues with the database connections. FileNet has too many outages because things are broken in the database.

How are customer service and technical support?

There are some issues when contacting technical support. It is not a very satisfying experience.

Which solution did I use previously and why did I switch?

The company had a training session and decided based on that to implement the solution.

What was our ROI?

It has saved time for us.

What other advice do I have?

I attended the tech track at the IBM conference.

We have not integrated this solution with other solutions.

Disclosure: I am a real user, and this review is based on my own experience and opinions.
RM
Engineer at a financial services firm with 10,001+ employees
Real User
Reduced operating costs by reducing the amount of manual work needed

Pros and Cons

  • "It is very user-friendly for business users. They can create their own searches. They are not dependent on administrators to create searches for them. It is self-service for them."
  • "I would like to have an offline DR deployment. If that is doable, then it would be a big win."

What is our primary use case?

We are a ratings company. We store all of our ratings documents in a FileNet Content Manager. We also use the Datacap scanning solution to extract the data, then index it into FileNet. That is our main usage of the FileNet platform.

We store documents on-premise. As a ratings company, we are not storing anything on the cloud at this time.

How has it helped my organization?

The usability is very good. Our customers are happy. The stakeholders allow the interface and platform, which comes with a CMIS. This allows our external applications to talk to FileNet using the CMIS platform. It is a win-win for everybody.

What is most valuable?

  • Stability 
  • Scalability
  • IBM support

The most valuable for us is the ease of operations in Datacap, especially to extract data, along with the robust platform of FileNet, as a content management system. 

It is very user-friendly for business users. They can create their own searches. They are not dependent on administrators to create searches for them. It is self-service for them.

What needs improvement?

I would like to have an offline DR deployment. If that is doable, then it would be a big win.

The installation needs improvement.

A lot of the solution is GUI-based. If that could be automated, that would make the solution better.

What do I think about the stability of the solution?

It is very stable. We hardly have any downtime or any major issues.

What do I think about the scalability of the solution?

The scalability is very nice. It is very scalable. We are in a high availability mode.

How are customer service and technical support?

The technical support is very good. We are very well partnered with IBM support. We have AVP Support, which is very valuable.

Which solution did I use previously and why did I switch?

We did not have a different solution prior to FileNet.

How was the initial setup?

The documentation was very well done. The initial setup was straightforward with our experience and in-house knowledge. We also had the IBM engineers available, as needed.

What about the implementation team?

We deployed it in-house.

What was our ROI?

It has reduced operating costs by reducing the amount of manual work needed.

Datacap has helped to increase our productivity.

We use extraction. Therefore, we can see 80 to 85 percent accuracy on data extraction. This reduces the manual indexing part, which is definitely a gain on performance efficiency.

If we can achieve 80 percent automation with it, then it will save us 80 percent time.

Which other solutions did I evaluate?

I have used other products as well. However, stability-wise, I am more comfortable using this product.

What other advice do I have?

I would definitely recommend the FileNet solution.

The integration process is very smooth because we use CMIS. The other application uses CMIS to talk to FileNet, and this is very smooth.

We are not using the solution for case management nor automation.

Disclosure: I am a real user, and this review is based on my own experience and opinions.
GS
Information Architect at a tech services company with 51-200 employees
Real User
The Enterprise Records plugin helps with compliance, but they could put more effort into the user experience

Pros and Cons

  • "One of our clients, a customer of IBM, rolled out and replaced their existing ECM system with FileNet. Their productivity has increased pretty dramatically."
  • "It has a very broad market share and a lot of people know about it."
  • "The usability is fair. It could be a bit better. It could be better designed. They could put more effort into the user experience and do a better job of integrating other components, like Datacap, to be a bit more seamless."

What is our primary use case?

Digital business automation is the primary use case.

This solution is not used by business users in our organization.

How has it helped my organization?

One of our clients, a customer of IBM, rolled out and replaced their existing ECM system with FileNet. Their productivity has increased pretty dramatically. 

The Enterprise Records plugin helps with compliance and issues around that. Thus, we have clients who are using it specifically for that reason.

What is most valuable?

  • Extensibility
  • Customizability
  • The API
  • It has a very broad market share and a lot of people know about it.

What needs improvement?

The usability is fair. It could be a bit better. It could be better designed. They could put more effort into the user experience and do a better job of integrating other components, like Datacap, to be a bit more seamless.

I would like to see more integrated support for records management functions. I would like to see ICN be more integrated from a desktop standpoint with records management. Especially since, compliance and issues like privacy, which IER is uniquely capable and designed to handle, are becoming more important for users, things like advanced search and the ability to find data with privacy issues. Some work on that type of interface would serve everybody well.

What do I think about the stability of the solution?

It is very stable. The maintenance process has been greatly improved over the past few years. It seems like there is maturity now to the product which didn't exist even four or five years ago.

What do I think about the scalability of the solution?

It is very scalable. You can deploy multiple WebSphere nodes and use clusters to do all sorts of things. It is enhanced now with the support for containerization, like Kubernetes and Docker. It is highly scalable, which is great.

How are customer service and technical support?

The technical support is pretty strong. However, I still have cases of APARs which have been left open from many years. Therefore, the technical support is not excellent, but it's good.

How was the initial setup?

The initial setup is complex. There are many different components to it. There are a lot of decisions which have to be made: architectural decisions, platform decisions, and team personnel decisions. These have to be made before you go ahead and implement something like this. It is a huge undertaking.

It takes a lot of time to roll out.

What about the implementation team?

I am the consultant for deployments.

What was our ROI?

My customers have seen ROI. There have been productivity gains, time savings gains, and things that they have been doing much more efficiently in a more modern way than they were before.

The solution has reduced operating costs for our clients.

What other advice do I have?

The product is worth considering. It has a lot of support with a lot of pedigree. Make sure your ducks are in a row, as far as understanding what your user requirements are and what your processes are around your content management needs. Then, once you have that done, definitely consider this as a very viable option.

Take your time and be careful with your planning phases.

We have integrated the solution with Enterprise Records. We have written our own custom interface that sits on top of Content Navigator. We have also written integrations to databases for lookups.

We are not using the solution for automation projects yet.

I would rate it a seven out of ten for its stability and maturity as a product. However, because it is so big, it is sort of slow to catch up to trends and things like privacy by design.

Disclosure: My company has a business relationship with this vendor other than being a customer: Partner.
MA
VP at a financial services firm with 10,001+ employees
Real User
It makes record archiving very efficient, but there needs to be simplicity in the installation process

Pros and Cons

  • "The product has helped with compliance and governance issues. There are some archiving policies which a financial organization has to keep. Our organization can keep up with them because of the IBM product."
  • "The initial setup was pretty complex. There are too many options, and it can get a bit confusing."

What is our primary use case?

It is our unstructured record archive solution.

It is mainly for internal users. We don't have end users for it, since it is only used internally. It has captures a maximum part of our organization to help with the efficiency in our records.

How has it helped my organization?

It has a process interface for a lot of different aspects of our business, which makes record archiving very efficient.

With our organization being in the financial sector, it has a lot of records: millions to billions. These were very tough to manage overall. A solution like FileNet has definitely improved our business. It keeps legal focused on what is required, and what is not. It has also helped the overall organization to focus on what is really needed, and what is not.

The product has helped with compliance and governance issues. There are some archiving policies which a financial organization has to keep. Our organization can keep up with them because of the IBM product.

It does help the legal team with their decision-making. They can hold and sweep the records based on legal actions required on any particular record. Therefore, it does help on the compliance.

What is most valuable?

It is very user-friendly.

What needs improvement?

In the next release, I would like to see automation and simplicity in the installation.

I feel that there is not enough ease on the initial front part. The ease and flexibility could be improved.

How are customer service and technical support?

The technical support is good and efficient. I would rate it an eight out of ten.

Which solution did I use previously and why did I switch?

In the past, we did have some other custom solutions. We have also tried some other vendors and they did not covering the platform 360 degrees. When we opted for this particular product from IBM, we saw that it has the overall coverage which is not being provided by any other vendor. This has improved our productivity.

How was the initial setup?

The initial setup was pretty complex. There are too many options, and it can get a bit confusing.

What about the implementation team?

We implemented it in-house.

What was our ROI?

It has not done much for operations costs because there are still operations involved in it. However, I still see a percent or two difference.

Which other solutions did I evaluate?

We did a PoC. We tried multiple vendors and compared them on different aspects. Based on the simplicity, ease, convenience, and many aspects of this solution, we made the decision in the past to work with it. We plan on continuing doing so in future.

What other advice do I have?

Do a study and learn about the solution instead of jumping in and finding out about stuff later on. Attend conferences before making decisions and doing things. Then, you can make a smart call.

We haven't used any automation so far. I would like to explore the business partners on automation and find out much more about it.

While it does have business and case management in the tool, we are not really using it.

Disclosure: I am a real user, and this review is based on my own experience and opinions.
DL
User at a healthcare company with 10,001+ employees
Real User
Its taxonomy makes things hierarchical and have properties

Pros and Cons

  • "It is really usable. There is a lot of support for it. You have the online components to trawl through the storage. I have a lot of fun with it."
  • "I know it took them seven months to convert, so the initial setup was, probably to some degree, complex."

What is our primary use case?

We use FileNet to store all the medical records and information for a patient. 

We have business users utilizing it in the whole organization for medical records.

How has it helped my organization?

I work in information systems now. However, regarding the emergency medical records, research, and other parts of the organization, FileNet lets us have all these records maintained smartly and securely. Mostly, we can use this information in the future for research, if we ever want into AI solution or if we wanted to look for new ways to look at cancer, then it is all there.

The solution provides ease of access. It has affected the decision-making in our organization.

FileNet lets us store everything there for compliance. There is something legally about us not being able to delete stuff. 

What is most valuable?

The taxonomy is its most valuable feature. Everything is hierarchical and has properties.

I am doing practical coding. Therefore, I am very happy that they have extensive Redbooks and demos with the FileNet API.

It is really usable. There is a lot of support for it. You have the online components to trawl through the storage. I have a lot of fun with it.

What needs improvement?

I did hear that maybe there are some errors in relationship to another product that they offer, like SmartLock. There is something going on there which is not good.

What do I think about the stability of the solution?

It is stable.

What do I think about the scalability of the solution?

It is scalale.

How are customer service and technical support?

There are a lot of Redbooks, and there is the IBM knowledge that is sent there. There are some more obscure errors that get thrown when I'm coding, because I'm bad. 

All in all, the tech support is really good. They have a lot of support.

Which solution did I use previously and why did I switch?

We were using image services. Now, we are migrating to FileNet. Therefore, we are storing patient records, so they can be used in research.

How was the initial setup?

I know it took them seven months to convert, so the initial setup was, probably to some degree, complex.

What about the implementation team?

We used enChoice for the deployment. Our experience with them was good.

What was our ROI?

It has reduced operating costs. We went from paper to image services to FileNet. We did that because it was cheaper and better.

The solution has saved us time.

What other advice do I have?

I would recommend choosing IBM. Go for it. It is not like there is a better alternative.

The automation that we are doing right now is to check that all our systems are up and working. I wrote a program in C# which touches a whole bunch of boxes and services. It does a whole bunch of actions against FileNet that checks everything is going correctly. It saves us time and effort, and it works.

I know that they're releasing FileNet 5.5.3 at the end of the month, but I don't know what is in it.

Disclosure: I am a real user, and this review is based on my own experience and opinions.
Boris Zhilin
Executive Director at Intelective
Real User
Comprehensive storage enables our clients to pull insights from the content

Pros and Cons

  • "The most valuable features of FileNet are its comprehensive ability to store content, to get insights from the content, and to use that content for making decisions routed through workflow."
  • "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."

What is our primary use case?

We're an IBM business partner. We work with customers who purchase IBM and we help them implement business solutions. Often times, we just influence their decisions. Most of the time FileNet is being used for automation projects.

How has it helped my organization?

An example is one of our customers, an insurance company. They didn't have process-automation before. We helped them implement an IBM product suite with FileNet content management with workflow and analytics. It helped that company reduce processing costs. It helped them unify processes in 21 countries where they have a presence, and they use it as an IT framework that helps them integrate other companies which they acquire. They're big on acquiring smaller organizations to help them grow.

Productivity gains come where workers can focus on more important tasks, higher-value tasks, and where the repetitive tasks are delegated to software.

In the end, almost every solution that we create for our customers helps reduce costs. In most instances the solution has saved time as well. Where we do get statistics from our clients, on average we see 20, 30, or 40 percent gains in terms of turnaround time. You can see that, for example, processing a complicated claim would have taken weeks and with the software solutions built on top of IBM software, sometimes it gets down to days or even hours.

It has improved business processes or case management for our customers. That's the primary purpose, that's the reason why they're investing in the software.

What is most valuable?

The most valuable features of FileNet are its comprehensive ability to store content, to get insights from the content, and to use that content for making decisions routed through workflow.

Nowadays, with the new capabilities, the unattended task processing - so-called robotics or digital employees, digital agents - is where this industry is heading.

What needs improvement?

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. This is a case where sometimes less is more.

Making it easier to deploy, easier to use, easy to integrate are the biggest areas for improvement.

What do I think about the stability of the solution?

Every new software has bugs, but the FileNet software suite has been around for ages, so it's stable, it works.

What do I think about the scalability of the solution?

The scalability is infinite if you know how to use it in your software products.

How are customer service and technical support?

Technical support is very decent. We've never had issues with it.

How was the initial setup?

The integration of this solution with other products is where we come in as consultants. IBM software works great in the silo, the silo being that you have an IBM software suite and everything is working together great. But when you have a customer that has IBM and three or four or five other repositories, a line of business systems that need to be integrated, that's where typically consultants, systems integrators like our company, come in.

But IBM provides a great API and ways to integrate the software.

What was our ROI?

ROI is hard to tell, it varies. Sometimes it's tangible where it can be measured in percentages from 10 to 15 to 20 or even 40 percent. Sometimes it's intangible, where companies can get ahead of the game, get ahead of the competition, and get their products to market faster.

What other advice do I have?

I would advise a typical due-diligence process. Get hands-on with it, try it out. Do the same with competing products and decide what works the best.

Usability of the product is a complicated question. Anyway it is created, software cannot serve everybody's needs. Most of the time we'll work with very large companies and all of them have their unique needs. We oftentimes start with a base and customize it for each customer and their specific use case. You'll find a number of users that can use software out-of-the-box. But we often have to change it, tweak it, tune it, to tailor it to their specific environment.

FileNet is a nine out of ten. It's been around forever, it's stable, it's mature, it works. We know how to use it. We can confidently recommend it to customers without impacting our reputation.

As a systems integrator, for us, every customer is unique. In every environment there are very distinct challenges, so it's hard to take the knowledge from one client and apply it to another. Every time it's a journey. Sometimes there are technical issues we have to overcome. Oftentimes there are challenges, the business challenges that we help our customers overcome. The exciting part is that it's challenging. Challenges are always exciting, and that's what the software helps us with, overcoming challenges.

Disclosure: My company has a business relationship with this vendor other than being a customer: Partner.
Sergey Gorobets
Architect of ECM solutions at a tech vendor with 51-200 employees
Real User
Document previews and small, event-driven automations are among the valuable features

Pros and Cons

  • "The most useful feature is its persistent storage. Also, the full-text search and attribute searching are valuable."
  • "For end-users there is a lack of administrative features. The interface of basic FileNet is not very good."

What is our primary use case?

It's used for content management. It's not for business process automation but for digital, electronic archives: documents, folders, and access to the client's native IBM content. It's an IBM content manager, especially for IBM BPM.

How has it helped my organization?

FileNet has many features which support our clients' compliance and governance requirements.

What is most valuable?

The most useful feature is its persistent storage. Also, the full-text search and attribute searching are valuable. It shows a preview of documents, and makes possible small, event-driven automation: creating documents, editing documents, deleting documents, and others.

What needs improvement?

For end-users there is a lack of administrative features. The interface of basic FileNet is not very good.

IBM is doing a lot of work to combine the abilities of its major products, BPM and FileNet, into one product, either IBM Business Automation Workflow, or Digital Business Automation. These are two major offerings from IBM. These products are very tightly integrated. I'm waiting for the moment when, in one or two years, it will be only one product which will combine the major strengths of these products. This is the right way forward, from my point of view. IBM is moving quickly in this direction.

For how long have I used the solution?

Our company has dealt with FileNet in solutions for our customers for about three or four years.

What do I think about the stability of the solution?

I haven't seen any problems. FileNet is stable software as long as it is installed correctly.

How was the initial setup?

The installation of FileNet is not very easy. It requires a very experienced administrator. But if the program installs correctly, it works. It's stable. It takes two to three days to install FileNet in high-availability mode.

What's my experience with pricing, setup cost, and licensing?

Talking about the cost is difficult because IBM has offers that combine different products, and each of these offers has different types of licensing. IBM also has a policy that the actual price for a given customer may be very different from the stated book price. It's hard to say whether it's expensive or not.

Which other solutions did I evaluate?

I didn't do a deep comparison. Previously, I compared FileNet with some open-source enterprise content systems, especially Alfresco, but I realized that this product is for a different type of customer. FileNet is for enterprise customers, but Alfresco and other open-source BPM products are for small or medium-sized customers.

In terms of a comparison of the features, the open-source solutions are really are missing a lot.

What other advice do I have?

Create a solution combining the strengths of all of IBM's products: IBM BPM, FileNet, or IBM Case Manager, a product which sits on top of IBM FileNet technology.

We have banks as clients with 3,000 to 4,000 employees but the FileNet users number between 100 and 200.

Disclosure: My company has a business relationship with this vendor other than being a customer: Partner.
EC
Corporate Vice Presidents at a insurance company with 10,001+ employees
Real User
It cuts out paper, giving us the ability to distribute and move work through multiple steps in a business process

Pros and Cons

  • "We have made our service routes more efficient, as far as moving work through the system and being able to react to customer situations and needs better by improving things, such as, address and beneficiary changes. I know that we have definitely made improvements in the process."
  • "We have probably cut out at least 40 percent of what the work process was by easing out that whole distribution of paper."
  • "If I had a concern, it would be that we are sometimes not getting to the root cause of the issues from a technical standpoint as quickly as we should. For the most part, it's good. However, when things get a bit dicey with more involved issues, we have had some delays in getting feedback. If I had a concern, it's around the technical support and their responses in regards to things like root cause analysis."

What is our primary use case?

It runs our document management and workflow systems.

How has it helped my organization?

We have been able to grow the product and its use through a large number of business areas.

Overall, it has worked well for our business partners and various user groups. We have done some customization from a customer interface standpoint. Usability-wise, it has worked out well for us.

It is utilized by business users in our organization. We have done a lot of customization. We use the product more probably as a back-end delivery mechanism, but that has worked out well for our business people.

We have made our service routes more efficient, as far as moving work through the system and being able to react to customer situations and needs better by improving things, such as, address and beneficiary changes. I know that we have definitely made improvements in the process.

There are regulations on the amount of time that you have to process certain transactions. We have been able to knock that SLA down significantly with some of the products that we have implemented.

We have stuck with the product and sort of expanded on it. It's firmly entrenched in what we do (with legacy and new work).

What is most valuable?

  • Reliability
  • Speed
  • Extensibility

What needs improvement?

Some of the user interface stuff might be a little more complicated than it needs to be: the native user interface. However, we traditionally develop our own UI.

For how long have I used the solution?

We have had the solution for over 20 years.

What do I think about the stability of the solution?

From a business resiliency standpoint, it has worked out well for us.

We have seen an improvement from some older products to the P8 version now, from a stability standpoint

What do I think about the scalability of the solution?

It has scaled well based off the user community that we have.

How are customer service and technical support?

If I had a concern, it would be that we are sometimes not getting to the root cause of the issues from a technical standpoint as quickly as we should. For the most part, it's good. However, when things get a bit dicey with more involved issues, we have had some delays in getting feedback. If I had a concern, it's around the technical support and their responses in regards to things like root cause analysis.

Which solution did I use previously and why did I switch?

Prior to implementing the first version of FileNet P8, our customer service organization was totally paper-based. They were dropping stacks of service requests on people's desks, and people working directly off of paper. Since implementing FileNet, we have been able to use it as a type of a distribution mechanism. This cuts out the paper process, and we now have the ability to distribute and move work through multiple steps in a business process.

The old process was going around distributing paper, then moving that stack from desk to desk. The advantage of running FileNet is that we've been able to capture the documents at the point of entry. We have been able to distribute work, then based on rules that we have set up in the workflow, route that work to the appropriate people at the appropriate time.

How was the initial setup?

The initial setup was pretty straightforward. As we have grown the environment and done certain things, it has gotten more complex. However, my experience has been okay. With the newer versions, because of our environments have grown, it has become a bit more complex.

What about the implementation team?

We have done some homegrown development. We have used a couple partners to help with some development. We have used IBM resources to help install the original base product. Therefore, we have soft of had a mixed bag in all the deployment experiences. For the most part, they have been pretty good.

What was our ROI?

We have probably cut out at least 40 percent of what the work process was by easing out that whole distribution of paper.

What other advice do I have?

It serves our needs, and it is performing as expected. It does what we expect out of it. Overall, it is a very good product for what we need in the company.

We do some basic integration with Salesforce and maybe some integration with some of our homegrown applications, but nothing that is overly involved. It has worked out, but it was hard work.

We are not right now using this solution for automation projects.

Lessons learned and advice for others:

  • Don't bite off more than you can chew. 
  • Do things in smaller pieces. 
  • Do your homework upfront with prep tests. 
  • Take it slow (implement slowly). 
  • Get your requirements upfront. 
  • Understand the process your users are looking for. 
Disclosure: I am a real user, and this review is based on my own experience and opinions.
IR
CTO at a healthcare company with 1-10 employees
Real User
The physical space that we have gained back pays for the service

Pros and Cons

  • "We shred all our paper and no longer need the cabinet space. We used to have about six to 12 inches of cabinet space per customer, which is now gone."
  • "I would like to have more governance features with more supervisory layers."

What is our primary use case?

Our primary use case is document management for eliminating paper.

How has it helped my organization?

We shred all our paper and no longer need the cabinet space. We used to have about six to 12 inches of cabinet space per customer, which is now gone.

The tool is used by business users in our organization. Productivity has increased because retrieval is easier. Documents don't disappear when someone is retrieving them.

The solution helps us with compliance and governance issues because the documents are all available. 

Having all the documents available has improved our decision-making quality.

What is most valuable?

It gets rid of paper.

It is perfectly usable as a back-end solution without a user interface through the use of APIs.

When information is available (by having your documents available), your case management is better.

What needs improvement?

It is really not useful for us as a front-end tool. If somebody wants to access documents, I would not let them use the FileNet interfaces.

I would like more controlled APIs, tools, exception handling, and ways to globally monitor it. Something that would make it a true back-end system. 

I would like to have more governance features with more supervisory layers.

Access control integration would be nice. You can actually control access, but it's not that easy to integrate. It is all up to our software to make sure that we do the job, and we don't always do. We all screw up.

The API needs improvement.

For how long have I used the solution?

I have been working with FileNet since late 1990s.

What do I think about the stability of the solution?

It is stable, and it works.

What do I think about the scalability of the solution?

It is very scalable, and scalable enough for us.

How are customer service and technical support?

We never used the technical support. We have enough in-house knowledge.

Which solution did I use previously and why did I switch?

I didn't like using paper. It's painful.

How was the initial setup?

The initial setup is straightforward for us. We have so many years of experience with it.

What about the implementation team?

We have in-house people.

What was our ROI?

The physical space that we have gained back pays for the service. Therefore, it has reduced our operating costs overall. We have definitely seen ROI. I would estimate $30,000 a year.

While it does not save on retrieval time, what we do save very significantly on was when person took a document, then misplaced it. Or, somebody else needed it when it is in somebody's hands. At least one document in a thousand was not placed back in the right spot, then you needed to look for it. That was tricky. You hoped it was somewhere in the vicinity, and not on a different floor. Thus, it saves me on decision quality, because if the document is not there, then I am making the decision without it.

Which other solutions did I evaluate?

When we started with FileNet, they were pretty much it. The alternatives were not serious. We looked at using just file systems with PDFs, etc. FileNet was the best solution.

What other advice do I have?

We have integrated FileNet with other solutions, and the integration process works.

The biggest lesson that I learned from using this solution is to slow down. Think five years ahead and don't worry about today.

15 years ago, I would look at my problems of the day and try to solve them, or maybe at my problems of the next year and try to solve them. Today, I look at my problems five to ten years from now, then try to think of them and go towards a solution, as much as possible.

Disclosure: I am a real user, and this review is based on my own experience and opinions.
VH
CEO at a tech services company with 1-10 employees
Real User
Enables customers to quickly access the content that they need in real-time

Pros and Cons

  • "There is a high degree of usability with this solution. It is highly compatible with our clients' and customers' work environments, making it easy to deploy and implement."
  • "The most valuable feature is the way in which it enables clients and customers to quickly access the content and information that they use for everyday functions."
  • "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."

What is our primary use case?

The primary use for this solution is customer and client demos, in order to share it with them, if they have a requirement for this particular type of capability.

We position a product or solution like this to a client where there is a great fit, and it does have a return on investment in terms of efficiencies, cost savings, or job role function acceleration.

How has it helped my organization?

We position the solution for client-facing opportunities. The internal use of it would be in terms of testing and prevalidation. Therefore, the internal use is what would be considered our informal R&D lab situation in partnership with IBM.

It improves out client and customer functions, which is paramount to our business model. It enables customers and clients to quickly and readily access the content that they need in real-time, without any delays.

Indirectly, it does have the potential to provide a high level of audit capabilities, in terms of being able to track the success of a person's job role in a workspace.

What is most valuable?

The most valuable feature is the way in which it enables clients and customers to quickly access the content and information that they use for everyday functions.

There is a high degree of usability with this solution. It is highly compatible with our clients' and customers' work environments, making it easy to deploy and implement.

What needs improvement?

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.

What do I think about the stability of the solution?

It is highly stable.

What do I think about the scalability of the solution?

It is highly scalable.

How are customer service and technical support?

The technical support is very robust.

Which solution did I use previously and why did I switch?

That is our role as an adviser. As a trusted adviser to our clients and customers, we would have discussions with them that would identify this particular type of requirement, then identify it in the client/customer review.

What about the implementation team?

We are the partner who works with either the customer or client for deployment.

My advice would be to have that upfront requirements discussion with your clients and customers early on to ensure that this solution is indeed a fit for them. If so, explore other automation products and solutions which might run sidecar to this one from a more deep dive automation perspective, since clients and customers seem to have an increasing propensity for absorbing automated solutions at this time.

Even a simple, straightforward approach to one-stop solution implementations, like this, one can provide significant gains in terms of accelerated job role functions and efficiencies that clients and customers really like.

What was our ROI?

The solution increase productivity. The working example is that of a client who has been using a different type of product or solution which had roadblocks, issues, or challenges that frustrated them, making it more difficult for them to access the necessary content. Whereas, this solution is able to streamline the process for them, making it easy and still resilient for their business model.

It definitely saves time in terms of enabling the customer and client to access more content, if they want to. The prior content that they were accessing is now accessed in an accelerated fashion, allowing them to get onto other business tasks of greater value.

We have not integrated the solution with other solutions yet.

What other advice do I have?

It has the potential to improve business process or case management.

It can be used in conjunction with automation, but it is not positioned as an independent, standalone automation solution.

I rated it as a nine (out of ten), because of the robust nature of the solution, its stability, and the ease of being able to position it from a requirement's perspective with clients and customers.

Disclosure: My company has a business relationship with this vendor other than being a customer: Partner.
PC
FileNet System Admin at Emug
Real User
It is incredibly usable and rock solid

Pros and Cons

  • "The key way that this product has improved the way that that our business functions is by its stability. Its ability to remain up despite other pressures, its consistency, and lack of downtime are really the greatest things that it brings."
  • "It is ability to display legacy content needs improvement."

What is our primary use case?

We store our medical records.

How has it helped my organization?

The solution is used by business users in our organization. However, in our organization, the business users are connecting into the FileNet system via a set of middle tiers. Their user experience is based on their middle tier application, not my back-end. This middle tier is an integration that we have done on the product.

All ECM systems save time, especially on systems that are well-designed, because the users can retrieve their content in a much quicker and more consistent fashion.

What is most valuable?

  • The uptime
  • Stability
  • The speed of retrieval

We found that it is incredibly usable and rock solid. FileNet P8 is probably the most usable, extendable option out there in the ECM space.

What needs improvement?

I understand that video is becoming more prevalent on some of the content which they are storing. We are very happy with that.

It is ability to display legacy content needs improvement.

What do I think about the stability of the solution?

I've never come across anything better for stability.

The key way that this product has improved the way that that our business functions is by its stability. Its ability to remain up despite other pressures, its consistency, and lack of downtime are really the greatest things that it brings.

There is difficulty in the upgrade path when new versions come due every other quarter.

What do I think about the scalability of the solution?

Absolutely best in market for scalability. You can scale it, and it just keeps on going.

How are customer service and technical support?

I evaluate technical support every time that I make a technical support request, and they do very well. I am very happy with them.

Which solution did I use previously and why did I switch?

My previous system, Image Services, was being sunsetted.

How was the initial setup?

The initial setup is very complex, but we expected that. This should be expected with this product. The setup process was complex because it was a migration from the previous system, which was also a FileNet system, and image services. This was a multiyear effort which involved enormous challenges due to the volume and complexity of the data.

What about the implementation team?

We used a business partner for the deployment, who was 100 percent top-notch.

I would recommend finding a business partner who is skilled, then staying with them.

Which other solutions did I evaluate?

There were no other vendors on my shortlist.

What other advice do I have?

Our primary use case is a medical record, and there isn't an enormous amount of business process management that occurs around that. However, we have seen limited improvement in business process management. 

We expect to be using the solution for automation projects by the end of the year.

Content never dies is the biggest lesson that I have learned from using this solution.

I would rate it a nine (out of ten) because of its scalability, uptime, and support.

Disclosure: I am a real user, and this review is based on my own experience and opinions.
Moshe Yavniel
Deputy CEO at IFN
Real User
Has helped us with automation, BPM, and document control

What is our primary use case?

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

How has it helped my organization?

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

What is most valuable?

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

What needs improvement?

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

For how long have I used the solution?

More than twenty years.

What is our primary use case?

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

How has it helped my organization?

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

What is most valuable?

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

What needs improvement?

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

For how long have I used the solution?

More than twenty years.
Disclosure: My company has a business relationship with this vendor other than being a customer: Business Partner
MP
Director Of Information Technology with 201-500 employees
Real User
Optimal data capture and case manager features

Pros and Cons

  • "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."
  • "The only downside is that it takes a dedicated staff to maintain it and the learning curve is pretty steep."

What is our primary use case?

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

How has it helped my organization?

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.

What is most valuable?

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

What needs improvement?

Simplifying both training and maintenance would be an improvement.

For how long have I used the solution?

One to three years.

What do I think about the stability of the solution?

We did not have any stability issues.

What do I think about the scalability of the solution?

It's very scalable.

How are customer service and technical support?

IBM technical support is pretty good.

Which solution did I use previously and why did I switch?

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

How was the initial setup?

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

What about the implementation team?

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

What was our ROI?

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%.

What's my experience with pricing, setup cost, and licensing?

  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.

Which other solutions did I evaluate?

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

What other advice do I have?

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.

Disclosure: I am a real user, and this review is based on my own experience and opinions.
BH
General Manager at a tech services company with 1,001-5,000 employees
Real User
It puts governance in place around the content and processes

Pros and Cons

  • "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."
  • "It is used by large enterprises. It has to be scalable and robust for them to use. We have seen that on multiple projects over the years."
  • "I would like IBM to improve with each release, continue moving towards a continual, tighter integration, and build solutions that take advantage of all the different modules the platform has from one place."

What is our primary use case?

It is usually the client's system of record for their documents. In addition, it can be used for digital assets, like video and recordings.

How has it helped my organization?

It provides a centralized system of truth around their documents. It also allows them to automate their processes and gain efficiencies in cost reductions. 

It puts governance in place around the content and processes:

  • People can only see what they should be able to see.
  • It is auditable, so you have an audit trail.
  • Access levels can be set to certain parts of the document based on role level.

What is most valuable?

Our most valuable feature is it's highly scalable. There can be up to billions of documents or content items. It can support thousands to tens of thousands of concurrent users. There is also tight integration between the content and process functionality.

What needs improvement?

I would like IBM to improve with each release, continue moving towards a continual, tighter integration, and build solutions that take advantage of all the different modules the platform has from one place.

What do I think about the stability of the solution?

It is stable.

What do I think about the scalability of the solution?

It is used by large enterprises. It has to be scalable and robust for them to use. We have seen that on multiple projects over the years.

How is customer service and technical support?

We work very closely with IBM and their technical service as part of a solution proposal. We also work with them to support and implement our client systems. It's a team effort.

How was the initial setup?

We have been using the platform over the years. They have continued to make the product easier to install. With the new release of container support, it's becoming even easier to install. The trick to it is the design architecture which allows you to scale, and also putting in performance tuning for the scaling to happen.

Which other solutions did I evaluate?

Some of our customers are IBM shops and work with IBM exclusively, but there are also customers who look at other solutions.

What other advice do I have?

Overall, IBM has a great end-to-end solution. I would highly recommend it.

Most important criteria for our customers when selecting a vendor: stable and scalable. Performance is a very big deal for most of our customers, and knowing it's a secure platform as well.

Disclosure: My company has a business relationship with this vendor other than being a customer: Partner.
Matthew Rybak
Operations Specialist at Fairfax Data Systems
Real User
It can connect a lot of third-party people and hold information securely

Pros and Cons

    • "I would like to see in FileNet integrated with Watson, which can read something and send it without any human contact or interaction."

    What is our primary use case?

    A lot of the time Datacap and FileNet work in tandem together. FileNet is like a database repository which can be connected to a bunch of different third-party applications or the Web. It's a very interesting technology in the sense of you can pull in a lot of information through the Datacap network, then connect it to servers on the FileNet side. The servers can communicate and assist in the automated workflow structure. This is especially helpful when it comes to multiple parties who are trying to work together.

    How has it helped my organization?

    A majority of our customers use FileNet. It's a valuable software in what it can do. If you need manual processes automated to the point where you are going to have a lot of information in a repository and it needs to be extraordinarily secure, then you need to work with external forces and it's not going to be an all internal processes. FileNet is a fantastic system and almost all of our clients use it. 

    We work with Georgia, Connecticut, Minnesota, Montana, Rhode Island, and integrating into New York. Many different state organizations use it because it is secure and highly advanced. 

    We were working with the state troopers who needed their FileNet servers implemented with the ability to communicate with a third-party app called a OffenderWatch. OffenderWatch is a database where a lot of the sex offenders are stored. However, with the way that everything works, Datacap and FileNet must stay properly maintained, otherwise there are a lot of issues which might happen. 

    What is most valuable?

    The ability to coordinate with automated workflows is the most valuable feature. You have a lot of external servers, and even internal servers, where all the information needs to be housed somewhere securely. If you're pulling information through Datacap, FileNet needs to be able to store it, then also assist in the automation aspect of it.

    The ability to connect servers is another big feature. It can connect a lot of third-party people and hold information securely. Security is the big thing for FileNet. 

    I would also include the automated word flow structure as a valuable feature.

    What needs improvement?

    I would like to see in FileNet integrated with Watson, which can read something and send it without any human contact or interaction.

    What do I think about the stability of the solution?

    Stability is fantastic. It's probably one of the more highly secure systems out there right now. Though, you have to have the right people to support, implement, integrate, and maintain it. No technology will work completely on its own. Even if it does, one day it might break (and that goes for any tech). 

    What do I think about the scalability of the solution?

    It is very simple to add any users that you need to. Implement it once, and so long as it works, you can add and train more people to use it. Scalability is absolutely there.

    Which solution did I use previously and why did I switch?

    We switched to IBM because it is in high demand in the government market.

    What other advice do I have?

    If you are looking for a stable, highly secure solution which will work with a capture solution or will work with an automated workflow solution that you are implementing, then you should look at FileNet, especially if you have a very large repository or database.

    Going forward, I am interested in knowing:

    • Where is AI going to play a part in FileNet?
    • Does IBM plan on advancing the technology and integrating it with the newer technologies that they are focusing on now?
    • Will FileNet and Datacap one day be replaced by something better?
    Disclosure: My company has a business relationship with this vendor other than being a customer: Partner.
    TJ
    Senior Systems Engineer at a comms service provider with 10,001+ employees
    Real User
    The API's extensibility and new user interface are its most valuable features

    Pros and Cons

    • "The API's extensibility and new user interface are its most valuable features."
    • "The new user interface is not easy to set up, so some improvements along these lines would be good."
    • "We would like to have more automation of rollout solutions."

    What is our primary use case?

    We provide the content management platform for the company for official and unofficial records for all business processes.

    How has it helped my organization?

    We consolidate the content management. We've become a central repository for the company and are able to migrate content from our business units into the central service, especially as we acquire other companies. Thus, we can simplify our technology portfolio.

    What is most valuable?

    The standard spaced interfaces and features that any content management platform would provide, plus the API's extensibility. 

    We are also moving into using the newer user experience provided with the product.

    What needs improvement?

    We would like to have more automation of rollout solutions. We've done some of this on our own. We've created what we call a repository builder that will build out a standardized solution meeting the needs of most of our customers initially. This has saved us a tremendous amount of time. We did this using the APIs the product provides. They just don't always provide those same sorts of tools. 

    The user interface is also extensible through programming. Although, it's not easy to set up, so some improvements along these lines would be good too.

    For how long have I used the solution?

    More than five years.

    What do I think about the stability of the solution?

    At its core, it's stable. In its basic implementation, it's stable.

    What do I think about the scalability of the solution?

    Scalability is where we run into some challenges because we use it to scale where most customers don't. Therefore, we sometimes have unique problems or find some product limitations that other customers don't.

    How is customer service and technical support?

    They're always very responsive. Though, sometimes we have to dig a little to work through the layers of technical support in order to get the people with the right level of expertise.

    How was the initial setup?

    It was a fairly straigtforward implementation. 

    Though it has so many options, we have to be discerning about what we will deploy because each option will require additional support for our customers.

    Which other solutions did I evaluate?

    We have also looked at Documentum, OpenText, and SharePoint.

    What other advice do I have?

    I would recommend the product with the its core and standard interfaces.

    We purchased our product directly through IBM.

    Our company continues to reassess what it's doing with content management. We're involved enough in the sort of richness of the feature set that it would be difficult to replace.

    Disclosure: I am a real user, and this review is based on my own experience and opinions.
    Fred Heilbronner
    Director Network Solution Architect at a tech services company with 11-50 employees
    Real User
    Scales as needed and provides thorough security features for enterprise-class businesses

    Pros and Cons

    • "There aren't very many ECM solutions that scale properly, both up and out. We have customers who hold billions of documents. There aren't very many that can scale that far, and that can also scale out so that they can handle lots of users, lots of documents, and that understand how to handle external users. FileNet is one that can."
    • "Everybody ties into Active Directory and things like that, but on top of that are the extra layers of security for encryption, so they can meet standards required by PCI and by HIPAA: encryption at rest, encryption in flight, encryption in the database, all together. There are really only three products on the market that know how to do that, and FileNet is one of them."
    • "In terms of functionality, what customers might be looking for is a little more in terms of native-records retention. Records Management is an add-on product. If there were just a little more of that built into the core functionality, that would be helpful."

    What is our primary use case?

    We've been in the FileNet business for 25 years and we have found that 80 percent of our customers use FileNet for Accounts Payable processing. That's the single biggest pain point that larger customers are trying to resolve, uniformly, across industries: ingesting invoices, matching them up with purchase orders, doing the three-way match with receivers - if they're a manufacturing or distribution outfit - and then, potentially, if possible, automating the approval and payment of those invoices so nobody has to touch them. Then, they can focus on approvals and touchpoints only when they have to, and escalate when they need to based on grants of authority and delegate if somebody's not there. They can also make sure they get their prompt-payment discounts and the like.

    The other big use-case area is always compliance: Records retention, how do they prove that they're complying with policies and procedures and with regulatory issues - HIPAA, PII, etc.

    How has it helped my organization?

    In terms of how this product improves the functionality of an organization we work with, the Accounts Payable scenario is one. Let's say you're a high-volume purchaser, a retail operation, and imagine that you are getting paper invoices for every case of pineapple and every case of Planters Peanuts that you are getting, and every one of those invoices has to be filed in a filing cabinet. Now instead, we'll scan those in, they get filed automatically, and you trash the paper. And you can find them when you need to find them.

    Probably the best example of efficiencies that we've seen was, we worked with a port authority. They get in several large container ships a day that they have to get unloaded. Their customers are either the consignees or they're the trucking companies that move the containers on and off the dock. Every ship that comes in gets a voyage file. When they billed their customers, if a customer called in with a question, they had to go find that voyage file. If somebody else had that file, the person looking for it couldn't answer the question. They were running a first-call resolution rate of 15 percent or less. When we took all the voyage files and started scanning them, putting them online, they raised their first-call resolution rate to over 80 percent. If you resolve their question faster, they pay you faster, and that's money in the bank.

    What is most valuable?

    The way that FileNet sets itself apart is along a couple of different dimensions. The first is there aren't very many ECM solutions that scale properly, both up and out. We have customers who hold billions of documents. There aren't very many that can scale that far, and that can also scale out so that they can handle lots of users, lots of documents, and that understand how to handle external users.

    Then there are security issues. Everybody ties into Active Directory and things like that, but on top of that are the extra layers of security for encryption, so they can meet standards required by PCI and by HIPAA: encryption at rest, encryption in flight, encryption in the database, all together. There are really only three products on the market that know how to do that, and FileNet is one of them.

    What needs improvement?

    First of all, let's be clear, it's a relatively mature product. It's been around, it's been finely-tuned to handle the vast majority of what customers want it to handle. Most customers probably only utilize 20 to 30 percent of the feature functionality.

    In terms of functionality, what customers might be looking for is a little more in terms of native-records retention. Records Management is an add-on product. If there were just a little more of that built into the core functionality, that would be helpful. Just like when you set up the document type or the document class, it would be good to be able to indicate the retention for this data. By being able to turn that on, customers might more often default to doing record purges rather than keeping everything forever. But that's just a small item.

    How is customer service and technical support?

    We're fully certified to provide first-call technical support to our customers, which we do for the majority of our customers. Our customers like doing that with us because instead of logging into IBM's site and opening a PMR and all that, they call me and say, "Fred, remember that thing we saw two weeks ago, well it happened again. What do we do about it?" And because I have to live with the problem, I don't first have to ask them what version they're running, etc. We can solve it much more quickly.

    On the other hand, IBM's technical support itself is very professional, very capable. You have to learn how to work with them. We know what they want. Before we even open a PMR, we go collect what we know they will want and we send it to them. When they say, "Okay, where's all this information?" we tell them to look at the attachment. They go off and we get a resolution more quickly that way.

    How was the initial setup?

    It's a pretty complex product to set up because it has so many touchpoints. You have to integrate with your Directory Services, you've got a large database component, you've got a large web services component, you've got a large storage component, and you've got a big security component. At the same time, you've got an application server that you have to set up. By nature, it's a fairly complicated setup, it's not for the faint of heart.

    What other advice do I have?

    We've been committed to this product for a long time. We like the product a lot. It's top of the line, it's robust, it's reliable, as long as you implement it the right way, which takes some training and some time. You have to know where the bodies are buried. A lot of people make mistakes when they first do it. We did, we learned, but we did it years ago. It's an industrial-strength, enterprise-class product and they don't come much better.

    Disclosure: I am a real user, and this review is based on my own experience and opinions.
    FC
    Business Solutions Manager at a tech services company with 501-1,000 employees
    Real User
    It designs and builds the process, then adds document facilities for the documentation

    What is our primary use case?

    It is about simplicity. It designs and builds the process, then adds document facilities for the documentation. Therefore, it is easier to model the process and include documents in this process.

    How has it helped my organization?

    It improves processes. For example, it can improve staffing for human resources.

    What is most valuable?

    It has the ability to mix document management and process automation. For our customers, it is very attractive that they have a solution which documents their structure and the structure of their data. It also designs the process to complete the automation.

    What needs improvement?

    Preforms could be useful for specific projects.

    For how long have I used the solution?

    One to three years.

    What do I think about the

    What is our primary use case?

    It is about simplicity. It designs and builds the process, then adds document facilities for the documentation. Therefore, it is easier to model the process and include documents in this process.

    How has it helped my organization?

    It improves processes. For example, it can improve staffing for human resources.

    What is most valuable?

    It has the ability to mix document management and process automation. For our customers, it is very attractive that they have a solution which documents their structure and the structure of their data. It also designs the process to complete the automation.

    What needs improvement?

    Preforms could be useful for specific projects.

    For how long have I used the solution?

    One to three years.

    What do I think about the scalability of the solution?

    It works for all types of enterprise companies. For larger enterprise companies, there might be other solutions. In general, it should work for all enterprises.

    How is customer service and technical support?

    I do not really work with the technical support. The solutions that we are implementing are brand new.

    Usually their support is good, though you would have a support contract. I will mention that I think the support could be better, and it could improve.

    How was the initial setup?

    The initial setup is straightforward. You will need people who know what they are doing, but otherwise it is straightforward.

    What other advice do I have?

    The reporting is good, and customers value that about the product.

    Disclosure: My company has a business relationship with this vendor other than being a customer: Partner.
    GM
    Architect For FileNet ECM at a healthcare company with 1,001-5,000 employees
    Real User
    It allows for multiple people to access content simultaneously

    What is our primary use case?

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

    How has it helped my organization?

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

    What is most valuable?

    It is very flexible.

    What do I think about the stability of the solution?

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

    What do I think about the scalability of the solution?

    It is very scalable.

    What is our primary use case?

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

    How has it helped my organization?

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

    What is most valuable?

    It is very flexible.

    What do I think about the stability of the solution?

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

    What do I think about the scalability of the solution?

    It is very scalable.

    Disclosure: IT Central Station contacted the reviewer to collect the review and to validate authenticity. The reviewer was referred by the vendor, but the review is not subject to editing or approval by the vendor.
    ŞÖ
    Head of Sales Operations and Quality Assurance with 1-10 employees
    Real User
    It can be used for different business processes. Programmers have to translate user needs, which causes misinterpretations.

    What is our primary use case?

    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.

    For how long have I used the solution?

    One to three years.

    What other advice do I have?

    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.

    What is our primary use case?

    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.

    For how long have I used the solution?

    One to three years.

    What other advice do I have?

    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.

    Disclosure: IT Central Station contacted the reviewer to collect the review and to validate authenticity. The reviewer was referred by the vendor, but the review is not subject to editing or approval by the vendor.
    it_user836502
    ‎Senior Development Manager, Business Systems at a financial services firm with 10,001+ employees
    Real User
    We have been unable to determine if solution works on AWS, although current version provides document security

    What is our primary use case?

    It is mainly a document repository for our business.

    How has it helped my organization?

    We are not a first-time user of ECM. Benefits are those typical of an ECM solution and are not specific to FileNet.

    What is most valuable?

    Document security.

    What needs improvement?

    We are looking at FileNet on AWS cloud. To date, even our IBM rep cannot be certain if it will work. Similarly, Amazon did not clearly state that they can work with IBM FileNet.

    For how long have I used the solution?

    One to three years.

    What is our primary use case?

    It is mainly a document repository for our business.

    How has it helped my organization?

    We are not a first-time user of ECM. Benefits are those typical of an ECM solution and are not specific to FileNet.

    What is most valuable?

    Document security.

    What needs improvement?

    We are looking at FileNet on AWS cloud. To date, even our IBM rep cannot be certain if it will work. Similarly, Amazon did not clearly state that they can work with IBM FileNet.

    For how long have I used the solution?

    One to three years.
    Disclosure: I am a real user, and this review is based on my own experience and opinions.
    it_user798636
    Consultor at a tech services company with 11-50 employees
    Real User
    Streamlines file delivery throughout the company

    What is our primary use case?

    The objective for this solution is for secure transfer of accounting information between servers to enable payment of insurance.

    How has it helped my organization?

    Streamlines file delivery throughout the company.

    What is most valuable?

    The most valuable feature is the guarantee of delivery, although in some cases this guarantee of delivery fails. Development in code appeared to solve this lack.

    What needs improvement?

    Accounting Collection Operations

    For how long have I used the solution?

    More than five years.

    What is our primary use case?

    The objective for this solution is for secure transfer of accounting information between servers to enable payment of insurance.

    How has it helped my organization?

    Streamlines file delivery throughout the company.

    What is most valuable?

    The most valuable feature is the guarantee of delivery, although in some cases this guarantee of delivery fails. Development in code appeared to solve this lack.

    What needs improvement?

    • Accounting
    • Collection
    • Operations

    For how long have I used the solution?

    More than five years.
    Disclosure: I am a real user, and this review is based on my own experience and opinions.
    it_user844512
    Project Manager at a government with 11-50 employees
    Real User
    We store all our documents electronically

    Pros and Cons

    • "Instead storing our documents offsite, we are storing all of our documents electronically."
    • "I would like to see expanded search features, like content search."
    • "The installation and configuration to start up needs expert level knowledge."

    What is our primary use case?

    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.

    How has it helped my organization?

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

    What is most valuable?

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

    What needs improvement?

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

    For how long have I used the solution?

    More than five years.

    What do I think about the stability of the solution?

    Stability is perfect.

    What do I think about the scalability of the solution?

    It is very scalable.

    How are customer service and technical support?

    Technical support is very good.

    Which solution did I use previously and why did I switch?

    We previously had an in-house solution.

    How was the initial setup?

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

    What's my experience with pricing, setup cost, and licensing?

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

    What other advice do I have?

    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.

    Disclosure: I am a real user, and this review is based on my own experience and opinions.
    it_user844500
    SME at a energy/utilities company with 1,001-5,000 employees
    Real User
    It has a robust API. We are able to have systems communicate with each other.

    Pros and Cons

    • "It has a robust API. We are able to have systems communicate with each other, and do business process automation."
    • "​I have found that it scales well."
    • "​I would like to see Azure AD added."
    • "​I would rate the technical support as medium. I do not like the login process. It is not great."

    What is our primary use case?

    • Enterprise content
    • Document management
    • Worker's management, which we are currently not leveraging. 

    It is performed fine. It is a robust solution.

    How has it helped my organization?

    From the document management side, it is able to integrate with some of our other systems, such as SAP.

    It has a robust API. We are able to have systems communicate with each other, and do business process automation. Although, there are a lot of opportunities that we have not leveraged yet.

    What is most valuable?

    • The document management elements
    • The worker's management pieces
    • The distributive environment capabilities

    We run a global corporation with locations all around the world, therefore the distributive environment is important.

    What needs improvement?

    I would like to see Azure AD added.

    What do I think about the stability of the solution?

    It is a good, stable system.

    What do I think about the scalability of the solution?

    I have found that it scales well.

    How is customer service and technical support?

    I would rate the technical support as medium. I do not like the login process. It is not great. 

    Getting an ID, and the IDs across the different things. IDs used to solve similar problems.

    How was the initial setup?

    I was not involved in the initial setup.

    Which other solutions did I evaluate?

    If you are planning on managing records, go with a OpenText, FileNet, or Documentum. A lot of times companies go with SharePoint as a default, but there are some pain points around worker's management in SharePoint. 

    What other advice do I have?

    Most important criteria when selecting a vendor: Company's position in the industry within that particular technology field. We want market leaders. A company who can support an 80,000 person company which is global.

    Disclosure: IT Central Station contacted the reviewer to collect the review and to validate authenticity. The reviewer was referred by the vendor, but the review is not subject to editing or approval by the vendor.
    it_user845688
    Software Architect at a non-profit with 1,001-5,000 employees
    Real User
    Gives us flexibility creating custom objects, but has been a challenge implementing the language library

    Pros and Cons

    • "I would say the workflow is pretty good. Also, the flexibility of being able to create custom objects with a lot of domain-specific attributes that we follow."
    • "One of the things I know is a bit of a challenge for them - because I know that it lives on top of FileNet, so it's not necessarily living on top of a relational database, per se - is that we also are using it as our system of record for our language management and our language definitions. I know that that was a little bit of a challenge, just because of the underlying architecture."
    • "We do have some individuals that do need to come up to speed on it technically, and the only onsite training for Case Manager is in Europe, there is not a lot of US-based training. So they have to do all their training online rather than being able to go and have a good bootcamp-style training somewhere nearby."

    What is our primary use case?

    We're in the process of implementing it for what we call a product plan approval process. It's going to be used by project managers to submit their product plans to our department that will then go on and approve them.

    For example, if they want to produce a pamphlet, or a website in support of a particular objective, they will hit our product plan system to input what they want to do, what they want to produce, and then it will go through an approval process. Then they'll be able to produce it in whatever languages they decide that they want to produce it in. It's more an approval workflow that we're using it for.

    We will also use it for integration back to our product lifecycle management system, as well for our materials management division.

    How has it helped my organization?

    It's a lot simpler than us doing in-house development of it and managing it, so that's part of it. But the overall improvement I'd say is through the ease of automation, it takes away a lot of manual processes.

    What is most valuable?

    The workflow. I would say the workflow is pretty good. Also, the flexibility of being able to create custom objects with a lot of domain-specific attributes that we follow.

    What needs improvement?

    One of the things I know is a bit of a challenge for them - because I know that it lives on top of FileNet, so it's not necessarily living on top of a relational database, per se - is that we also are using it as our system of record for our language management and our language definitions. I know that that was a little bit of a challenge, just because of the underlying architecture.

    For how long have I used the solution?

    Still implementing.

    What do I think about the stability of the solution?

    So far, so good, but we're also very new, in this implementation particularly.

    What do I think about the scalability of the solution?

    I still don't know about the scalability yet.

    How is customer service and technical support?

    We've been using an implementation vendor to help us get rolling with it, a company called Vega. They've been very helpful.

    How was the initial setup?

    I was involved in a lot of the planning, and specifically for the technical aspects of it, integration and data migration. It seemed pretty straightforward.

    What other advice do I have?

    When selecting a vendor what's important are the 

    • product
    • service, response
    • name and reputation.

    We definitely look for somebody that we can trust, that understands our vision, that is reliable, that really is going to do their best to kind of help meet our needs without necessarily trying to push us into a corner.

    I would give Case Manager a seven out of 10 at this point, because I think there has been some challenges with trying to get the language library. I know that we do have some individuals that do need to come up to speed on it technically, and the only onsite training for Case Manager is in Europe, there is not a lot of US-based training. So they have to do all their training online rather than being able to go and have a good bootcamp-style training somewhere nearby.

    In terms of advice, I would say use our partner, Vega, because they've done a really good job. It's been, honestly, one of the quicker implementations that I've been part of, overall. They've done a really good job coming in and understanding our business scenario, our business case; the speed of delivery is actually really impressive. We're going to be going live either end of this month or beginning of next month. It's been six months to replace something that has been broken into two different pieces that we're merging into one, but that have been parts of solutions that have taken us much, much longer to put together.

    Disclosure: I am a real user, and this review is based on my own experience and opinions.
    it_user845661
    Software Developer at a insurance company with 1,001-5,000 employees
    Real User
    Users are able to create their own content, manage their own sets of tasks

    Pros and Cons

    • "Users are able to create their own content, and they can manage their own sets of tasks, to work at their own pace and get their jobs done."

      What is our primary use case?

      It is primarily used for storing documents and other content in our repository for underwriting purposes.

      I have been using it for a little over two years now. I think it's been working out great for what our needs are.

      How has it helped my organization?

      Case Manager is a web-based application. The product we were using before Case Manager was a desktop application. We had a lot of issues with that product. Ever since moving over to Case Manager, it's been really easy and simple to use, and it's just perfect for the job.

      What is most valuable?

      I think it's valuable that users are able to create their own content, and they can manage their own sets of tasks, to work at their own pace and get their jobs done.

      What needs improvement?

      In terms of upcoming releases, I was in a couple of sessions on the IBM Case Manager roadmap, here at Think 2018. I think it's really cool that they're now taking the time to listen to their customers, and bring features in that customers have been asking for, for years.

      One of the features that I thought was very cool is that you can edit your documents within your repository straight from your desktop, from your device. You don't have to have a special editor. It will just connect to the native application that the file works with, and you can just check right back into your repository. I thought that was very cool.

      For how long have I used the solution?

      One to three years.

      What do I think about the scalability of the solution?

      In my opinion, it is very scalable. We have couple of smaller solutions that are maybe 20 to 30 users, and then we have bigger solutions - we're talking hundreds of people using it at the same time. I think it's pretty scalable and stable.

      How is customer service and technical support?

      I have been using IBM technical support to work with IBM to hash out their glitches, bugs on the product. I think that IBM has been very helpful. They are very professional when it comes to working with their customers. It's very helpful.

      How was the initial setup?

      I was not involved in the initial setup.

      What other advice do I have?

      The only way to really tell is to try it out, see how it works for you. I think it's a great product.

      Disclosure: I am a real user, and this review is based on my own experience and opinions.
      it_user845700
      Business Development Manager at a tech services company with 51-200 employees
      Real User
      Flexible, helps us track cases across the company

      What is our primary use case?

      We use it for monitoring events, authorization of events, for communication among all teams, all divisions of the company. It is difficult, for example, to manage a case throughout the company. BPM is no good, and Case Manager is so elastic, so flexible.

      How has it helped my organization?

      It helps with tracking cases, tracking problems, it's so good for that.

      What is most valuable?

      The designing. The design of development is so easy. It's a good product for designing flows, BPMs, and configuring roles.

      What needs improvement?

      I would like to see them improve the capabilities in the cloud, and the analytics.

      What do I think about the stability of the solution?

      It's so stable.

      What do I think about the scalability of the solution?

      Scalability is good. I don't know about the cloud version, but it's good.

      How is customer service and technical support?

      Good.

      How was the initial setup?

      It's easy. The most challenging part of implementation with this product is designing the case and the flows.

      What other advice do I have?

      When I select a vendor, the most important thing is the possibility to move to other technologies, connectivity for the digital ecosystem, and sharing; how the product shares sets for other companies.

      I rate it eight out of 10, because it's stable, it's elastic, but difficult for designing the business use case.

      Before implementing the product, try to pilot it, in a small division, work it in a small division and then try to scale.

      Disclosure: I am a real user, and this review is based on my own experience and opinions.
      it_user845697
      CEO at a tech vendor with 1-10 employees
      Real User
      Ease of use speeds along our development, helping us go to market a lot sooner

      Pros and Cons

      • "The most critical benefit has been ease of use. It speeds along our development helping us go to market a lot sooner."
      • "I'd like to see more cognitive. That's obviously where all of our world is going. I think if we can have more of those types of features and functions as a core, out of the box, that would be very helpful for us and our space."
      • "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."

      What is our primary use case?

      We use IBM Case Manager as our platform for deploying our telemedicine solution. The use case is delivering connectivity between patient and doctor without any third parties. The cognitive capabilities of Case Manager and how we're able to create a case, which is a patient, are very valuable for us. Everything that goes into an object is about the patient, versus it being event driven.

      How has it helped my organization?

      The most critical benefit has been ease of use. It speeds along our development, helping us go to market a lot sooner.

      What is most valuable?

      It's cognitive capabilities and scalability. 

      What needs improvement?

      I'd like to see more cognitive. That's obviously where all of our world is going. I think if we can have more of those types of features and functions as a core, out of the box, that would be very helpful for us and our space.

      What do I think about the stability of the solution?

      Excellent. It's probably one of the most mature pieces of technology that IBM offers. 

      What do I think about the scalability of the solution?

      I believe we built it on that platform because of its ability to scale to whatever size we need to go to.

      How are customer service and technical support?

      We're consistently using technical support and they're doing a great job to this point.

      Which solution did I use previously and why did I switch?

      We started with IBM Case Manager after doing our research on some of the other ones, just sampling them. We saw that the other ones didn't have the scalability and were very easily breakable.

      For me, the most important criterion when selecting a vendor is trust.

      How was the initial setup?

      There's a level of complexity, but our exposure, for starters, has been with the IBM Concierge, where the solution is fully loaded already, Case Manager on all of its platforms. But when we try to do it ourselves, that's not as smooth. 

      Which other solutions did I evaluate?

      We started with considering doing a peer, mobile-first type application. Obviously, from a mobility perspective that's great, but you need a lot more heft from data storage and otherwise. 

      What other advice do I have?

      I will rate it at eight out of 10, because 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. We'd like to be a lot more independent for something like that. But outside of that, from what it delivers in terms of functionality, it's great.

      My advice would be, respect the maturity of the solution if you're trying to go to a huge scale. Most new stuff breaks.

      Disclosure: I am a real user, and this review is based on my own experience and opinions.
      it_user543282
      ECM Filenet Architect at a insurance company with 1,001-5,000 employees
      Vendor
      It has improved my organization by how we release documents, claims, and policies

      Pros and Cons

      • "The beauty is the response time. It is very good nowadays within the platform."
      • "It has improved my organization by how we release documents, claims, and policies."
      • "It is a faster, robust solution. The platform compatibility is very good."
      • "It was complex. There were a lot of dependencies depending on the product. It had to be compatible with the Windows matching."
      • "To start with there are too many add-ons, which makes it hard for us. If they simplified the add-ons and plugins to be added to our existing systems, it would definitely help us in the future."

      What is our primary use case?

      In our organization, we have a lot of documents, such as policies. It is very critical for our organization to have safely and securely stored content in our system.

      FileNet is the best tool in the business for our organization to store all our content, policy documents, and claims.

      We have been using FileNet since 2000. Since then, we have been upgrading our file systems with a lot of tools and the latest file systems.

      How has it helped my organization?

      It has improved my organization by how we release documents, claims, and policies. It is very important to quickly review documents to make the customer satisfied. This is solved when we use the product.

      What is most valuable?

      It is a faster, robust solution. The platform compatibility is very good.

      What needs improvement?

      To start with there are too many add-ons, which makes it hard for us. If they simplified the add-ons and plugins to be added to our existing systems, it would definitely help us in the future.

      For how long have I used the solution?

      More than five years.

      What do I think about the stability of the solution?

      Stability is really good. Earlier, we used to have a lot of issues with the stability, especially with the updates for the new products. The new additions made now are so stable. It is a very good for operating systems. They have simplified it using products in different situations.

      What do I think about the scalability of the solution?

      Scalability is really good. Earlier, it used to be a cluster-based solution. Now, with the latest versions over the last five or six years, we have a form architecture, which we produced. We find that it helps for scaling all of our systems to our service.

      How are customer service and technical support?

      We use IBM support quite a lot. We have a license with this product, then whenever there are any issues, we always contact IBM to get them resolved.

      The beauty is the response time. It is very good nowadays within the platform.

      Which solution did I use previously and why did I switch?

      Earlier they used to have a very basic version of FileNet, the content services. That was back in the mid 90s. We also had the product that were being used on the FileNet site and also having too many issues. They came up with the new products like FileNet, which made it easier to store the documents. They added more security on top of the documents. So there's a lot implements that happened over time.

      The main product we use is IBM based products, FileNet, the case manager and that stuff. On top of it we build a lot of APIs and other services and that includes supplemental customer applications. So for that, we mostly work with our participating companies who are rather preferable for our company.

      How was the initial setup?

      It was complex. There were a lot of dependencies depending on the product. It had to be compatible with the Windows matching. All the time it had to be compatible with X and OS, so we did not have dependencies with all the operating system rights. 

      What's my experience with pricing, setup cost, and licensing?

      For the medium scale or large scale, I would recommend FileNet. FileNet is free of licensing expenses, thus good for the money. It is not expensive, but worth for the money, especially for medium scale and large scale industries.

      For small scale industries, they allow different options. They can do open source. It is the complexity of the data security that they should think about before they choose.

      Which other solutions did I evaluate?

      There were a lot of other vendors trying to overtake it, like Hyland, for more than 15 to 20 years. FileNet has had the same platform which is stable, but it is very compatible with our requirements. It supports OS, Linux, Oracle and digital, making it more flexible than most products on the market.

      Disclosure: IT Central Station contacted the reviewer to collect the review and to validate authenticity. The reviewer was referred by the vendor, but the review is not subject to editing or approval by the vendor.
      BT
      Enterprise Architect at a manufacturing company with 10,001+ employees
      Real User
      Keeps our Cognos content store small, reducing the effort required for backups

      Pros and Cons

      • "The key feature for us is that it keeps our content store small. That helps our DBAs when they have to do the backups of our audit system, or of the content store."

        What is our primary use case?

        We use FileNet with our Cognos. We used to store all of our report history within Cognos, inside the content store. We've removed it from the content store and put it inside the FileNet system. Our users can still access their reports, but we don't have to store it in our content store.

        How has it helped my organization?

        Our main benefit is keeping our content store small, where our content store was about 5.5GB. Best practices from IBM is about 3GB, so we were way over that. By moving all the report history out of the content store, we're now down to about 1.5 to to 2GB.

        What is most valuable?

        Keeping our content store small. That helps our DBAs when they have to do the backups of our audit system, or of the content store. It's in SQL Server, and to back up SQL Server of something that size takes a lot of time and a lot of effort. But now that we've shrunk that down, it's a little bit more manageable to handle backups. I know if we do ever have to restore our content store - which we hope we never do - we're able to do it in a more timely fashion because it's smaller in size.

        What needs improvement?

        It does what we need for it to do. As long as it can continue to handle the volume that we're throwing at it, I don't think that it's going to be a problem.

        What do I think about the stability of the solution?

        We've been using it now for about four years. When we first went to it, we were having some issues, communication across the network issues, but we have had very few issues with it. 

        What do I think about the scalability of the solution?

        We add stuff to it all the time, so it's scaling vertically all the time, and we haven't had any issues with it. We started out around 3GB, and we're up to about 5GB, and we expect to be somewhere at around the 10 to 12GB mark by 2020, just because that's the way our business is growing.

        How are customer service and technical support?

        One of our account reps was very instrumental in getting us set up, but we really haven't had, other than network latency issues in the very beginning, a lot of issues where we needed to go to technical support for it.

        Which solution did I use previously and why did I switch?

        We were using the out-of-the-box content store of Cognos, and we were just busting at the seams, so we had to come up with a solution. One of our account reps actually came up with the solution. We looked at a couple other things, but this was a solution we decided to go with.

        The important criterion for us when selecting a vendor is mostly that it's going to handle volume. Our particular company is a distribution system, and so we have tons and tons of data, so we need to be able to handle volume. What we typically run into is, people give us a proof of concept, and it will handle it with a small use case. But when you try and explode that use case into something that we need, at the volume we're working at, many of those solutions just fall flat at that point. This particular solution, that didn't happen. 

        How was the initial setup?

        It was pretty straightforward. Like I said, the biggest issues we had were on our company side, the network latency of moving that much data across our network at one time. Once we opened up a dedicated pipe for that data movement, we haven't seen any issues like that.

        What other advice do I have?

        I'd give it an eight out of 10. Eight's not high, not low, necessarily, but it does everything we need. I'm not going to give anything a 10, but I'm definitely not gonna give it a one.

        I would say you need to take a look at the size of your content. If you're going to use it to replace the content store of Cognos, you need to look at the size and make sure you're within best practices. Cognos is a product that's wishy-washy at times, and most of the issues that we've ever had with Cognos were because our content store was too big. Now that we've shrunk the content store, our Cognos is actually better. If you are looking at that, this would be a solution I would suggest to you, just to keep your content store small.

        Disclosure: I am a real user, and this review is based on my own experience and opinions.
        it_user842877
        Principal It Operations Specialist at a manufacturing company with 1,001-5,000 employees
        Real User
        A good space to manage data, keep track of it, and organize it

        Pros and Cons

        • "The ability to manage the content well."
        • "The ability to tag data, as it seems to be indexed well. It is a good space to manage data, keep track of it, and organize it."
        • "IBM FileNet has improved our organization with its single collaboration space."
        • "A little better control into the ACLs of FileNet and databases."
        • "It needs better collaboration between the IBM teams on the FileNet and CCM sides."
        • "Needs a better administration tool."

        What is our primary use case?

        The primary use case is for collaboration of data files through CCM with IBM Connections. It provides an information sharing space and ability to create folders, thus managing the data. We are a worldwide company with offices all over, and there is a community room setup leveraging CCM with FileNet as the back-end. Therefore, all these users upload their files and collaborate on them in this space.

        Now, it is performing pretty well, since I have upgraded to the 5.5 version. Historically, we have had a lot of problems with it. 

        How has it helped my organization?

        IBM FileNet has improved our organization with its single collaboration space.

        What is most valuable?

        • The ability to manage the content well. 
        • To create folders (unknown: how much is on the FileNet back-end versus CCM front-end).
        • The ability to tag data, as it seems to be indexed well. It is a good space to manage data, keep track of it, and organize it.

        What needs improvement?

        • A little better control into the ACLs of FileNet and databases. 
        • A better administration tool. At the moment, we are using the ACE tool, which is a web-based administration tool whenever we have to deal with the FileNet back-end directly. It is kludgy and slow. They used to have a rich client tool that performed much better, but they discontinued it. I would love to see that tool come back in order be able to do more effective, efficient administration of FileNet on the back-end.  
        • It needs better collaboration between the IBM teams on the FileNet and CCM sides.

        What do I think about the stability of the solution?

        Now, they are pretty good.

        In previous versions of Connections 3.0, 4.5, and 5.0, I had a lot of stability issues. It gets a little muddy, because when I would open PMRs, sometimes they would be on the connections interface on front and sometimes they would be on the back. One of my challenges seemed to be that there seemed to be a lot of disconnect between the two teams. It is empirical evidence, but it seems to me  that the Connections developers leveraged the FileNet capabilities and the right hand did not know what the left hand was doing. There seemed to be a lot of disconnect between the two teams. I would bounce back and forth between the two teams for weeks or months just trying to get support on performance and stability issues. With the most recent upgrade that we did a year ago, these issues pretty much stopped. 

        What do I think about the scalability of the solution?

        Scalability is so far good. We have great adoption with the tool. For the users that we are supporting to date, it seems to be handling the load and performing well. 

        How are customer service and technical support?

        My experience with the technical support is mediocre. Often times, I would open a ticket and the technical support would label it as a FileNet issue, then send it to the FileNet team. The FileNet team would receive it and declare it a Connections issues, thus creating a back-and-forth between teams until I insist on getting both teams on the phone and fight it out. I am the customer in this situation. I just want the issues fixed and resolved.

        It has gotten better. However, I do not have many issues with the system now.

        Which solution did I use previously and why did I switch?

        I do not know about previous solutions, but the business decided that it wanted CCM, which leverages FileNet. Therefore, I installed, configured, and built the infrastructure.

        How was the initial setup?

        The initial setup was straightforward.

        What about the implementation team?

        The Connections teams, as far as the FileNet tool, were able to integrate it with CCM. They made it easy to set up. At the time you install Connections, you point to the FileNet installers and it does all the work for you. There are a few manual steps, but all of that is pretty well documented. It is a lengthy process and straightforward, but it will take a lot longer than five minutes. 

        Which other solutions did I evaluate?

        None that I am aware of.

        What other advice do I have?

        Do your homework. Test it thoroughly (all the standard stuff). Do load testing to make sure it is a stable platform. Look at the life-cycle of the product.

        Most important criteria when selecting a vendor: support. Not just technical support when you have a problem, but how long before you are discontinuing a product. Right now, I am dealing with Connections over an issue with Java going out of date and they are not supporting it very well. Their solution is to force us to upgrade. 

        Look at the support aspects of the product from life-cycle of the product to technical support. Obviously, stability of the product as a whole is important. I do not want to be opening a lot of tickets.

        Disclosure: IT Central Station contacted the reviewer to collect the review and to validate authenticity. The reviewer was referred by the vendor, but the review is not subject to editing or approval by the vendor.
        it_user842895
        Server Manager at a logistics company with 1,001-5,000 employees
        Real User
        Takes the manual work out of our billing process

        Pros and Cons

          • "I would love it if single sign-on was a lot easier to set up. That's the most difficult part of it."
          • "It would be nice if they could make it like containers are working in Kubernetes to auto-scale based on demand."

          What is our primary use case?

          We use FileNet to store all our content. We have a quarter of a billion documents stored and it works great for us.

          How has it helped my organization?

          It has taken the manual work out of our billing process, and automated it.

          What is most valuable?

          We actually use it in conjunction with BPM to auto-bill our customers, based on when the bill gets checked into FileNet.

          What needs improvement?

          I would love it if single sign-on was a lot easier to set up. That's the most difficult part of it.

          What do I think about the stability of the solution?

          We have it load-balanced, so we don't really have outages. With HA it's very stable.

          What do I think about the scalability of the solution?

          It could be easier to scale, but in our implementation we can build up a new server and a whole new environment in about a day and a half.

          It would be nice if they could make it like containers are working in Kubernetes to auto-scale based on demand.

          How are customer service and technical support?

          I've used it quite often. Technical support could be better, more responsive in a timely manner. I've learned to actually open up tickets earlier in the morning because you seem to get better help than if you wait until the afternoon.

          Which solution did I use previously and why did I switch?

          We didn't have a previous solution. We went with FileNet as our content repository from the beginning.

          When selecting a vendor we like to have somebody that can provide good support and a good business relationship; we like to build relationships with our vendors.

          How was the initial setup?

          It's very complex. We have a lot of pieces that tie together with our FileNet, like  domains. So it's complex.

          What other advice do I have?

          I would give it an eight out of 10. What it needs to be a 10 is easier to configure single sign-on.

          I would recommend that when you are doing the initial setup that you use fewer metadata fields. The fewer you use the better off you're going to be in the long run, for performance.

          Disclosure: I am a real user, and this review is based on my own experience and opinions.
          it_user842880
          Supervisor Of Information Security Risk at a energy/utilities company with 1,001-5,000 employees
          Real User
          Helped us take a 45-day application process and reduce it to two days

          Pros and Cons

          • "The most valuable features are the interconnectivity and the collaboration. No longer do I have to wonder what system I need to go to for the data I need. I know it's in FileNet."
          • "If there was more AI capability, into Watson, that would be a benefit."
          • "We know that they're looking at documents, but we don't know what documents they're actually going and finding the most, or where the bottlenecks might be. It would be nice if there was some interconnectivity back into Bluemix to say, "Ok, you've got a workflow problem here." That would be a neat feature moving forward because we've got a lot of users that would just say, "The system is not working." We had a few threads would get hung up because they were just constantly banging on these few documents. If that were the case, if we knew that ahead of time, then we could fix that, change the search sequences to make it more efficient. But we were blind to that until the users said it's not working."

          What is our primary use case?

          We had several use cases. We used it for all of our loan processing and we took a 21-day manual process down to three. We also used it for all of our credit applications, and that took a 45-day process down to two. It housed about 4TB of data.

          Performance was great. It was our system of record.

          How has it helped my organization?

          No one was wondering where a document was. They could all go and find out exactly what they needed, when they needed. It wasn't, "Who's got this and who's got that?"

          What is most valuable?

          The most valuable features are the interconnectivity and the collaboration. No longer do I have to wonder what system I need to go to for the data I need. I know it's in FileNet.

          We wrote several custom applications for the users to dive in and be able to find the data they need. 

          What needs improvement?

          If there was more AI capability, into Watson, that would be a benefit.

          Also, where are the users going to find the documents? Because that's a path we don't see. We know that they're looking at documents, but we don't know what documents they're actually going and finding the most, or where the bottlenecks might be. It would be nice if there was some interconnectivity back into Bluemix to say, "Ok, you've got a workflow problem here." That would be a neat feature moving forward because we've got a lot of users that would just say, "The system is not working." We had a few threads would get hung up because they were just constantly banging on these few documents. If that were the case, if we knew that ahead of time, then we could fix that, change the search sequences to make it more efficient. But we were blind to that until the users said it's not working.

          What do I think about the stability of the solution?

          It's extremely stable. The only time it ever had a problem was if we lost power to the servers. It never really went down.

          What do I think about the scalability of the solution?

          It was very scalable. If we needed to add more processing power we could just add another server, turn it on, and then we had more power. We didn't have any scalability problems.

          How are customer service and technical support?

          We did use technical support for a while. enChoice was one of the partners we used with IBM. They're a great partner. Eventually, I was able to hire enough of our own staff that we did much of our own support.

          My experience with technical support was good. Any time we needed them they were right there for us.

          Which solution did I use previously and why did I switch?

          We were all manual before and we knew we needed something.

          The most important criteria when selecting a vendor are

          • commitment
          • partnership - we're in this together.

          IBM doesn't succeed if I don't succeed, and I can't succeed if the product doesn't work well. If there isn't that mutual give and take, then no one succeeds. It's more about: Any solution can be thought of and fixed and made to work, but you have to be able to work together. If I just sign up and give you a check and then you walk away, that doesn't help me. I need to sign up and then you be there with me, through the process.

          How was the initial setup?

          I was not involved in the initial setup. From what I understand, when they first set it up it was rather complex. They had some hurdles to jump through. It took about two years to really iron out all the kinks. We had a vendor prior to enChoice that we weren't successful with. When we found enChoice, things started to turn around. So it's important to pick the right partner.

          Which other solutions did I evaluate?

          They evaluated Documentum, they evaluated FileNet, they evaluated a few other tools. The company actually bought FileNet before IBM bought FileNet, so we had a contract with FileNet and then IBM came in and bought it. That was a good thing because of the innovation that IBM did bring to the platform. We were also a heavy C|MAN user and the content management on-demand system integrates well with FileNet too. With the new Content Navigator, it allowed for one pane of glass. So what IBM is doing in that area is just going to keep getting better.

          What other advice do I have?

          I would give the solution a nine out of 10. If it were free I would give it a 10.

          Go find an industry that is the same as yours, that is using the tools you want to buy, and find out if they're successful. If they're not, don't go with those tools. For example, I'm in energy now and I'm looking for people who are using Maximo, who are using the other tools from IBM, and I want to talk to them: Are you successful using these tools?

          Don't do it in a vacuum, you've got to talk to people.

          Disclosure: I am a real user, and this review is based on my own experience and opinions.
          it_user841959
          Financial Informatics Analyst at a insurance company with 10,001+ employees
          Real User
          Enables us to index and search images, but needs better analytical capabilities

          What is our primary use case?

          It's an image repository for our medical documents, our claims, etc. They do all kinds of stuff. They put checks there. It's an indexing software.

          How has it helped my organization?

          It has added more indexing capability on images and enabled us to search them. 

          What is most valuable?

          Stores a lot of documents. It's a good repository for that.

          What needs improvement?

          What I would want to see is heavier analytical ability within it, but we've purchased the cognitive piece of it. I haven't seen that implemented yet, but that would be the future; I think it may already be there but I just haven't seen it yet. Something like indexing for unstructured text.

          For how long have I used the solution?

          More than five years.

          What do I think about the stability of the solution?

          At this time, it has improved, but it wasn't that stable not that long ago. 

          What do I think about the scalability of the solution?

          It seems fine, it's dynamic. It works with all the different business needs that we have for it.

          How is customer service and technical support?

          I have not used tech support for this solution.

          What other advice do I have?

          When selecting a vendor the important criteria are 

          • cost
          • ease in getting something accomplished
          • not over-promising 
          • trustworthy.

          I would rate it a seven out of 10. That rating is because of stability problems when I first had it - and then, I'm not entirely sure our company has set it up right. Sometimes things are only as good as the people who run it. It's like going to a restaurant. It's only as good as the chef. So you can go to Burger King and have a pretty good burger or you can go down the road, it just depends on how good the chef is. So I think there's some of that dynamic. I don't know that much because I didn't mess with it like at that level. But it's a fine product. We've used it for a very long time.

          The advice I would to a colleague at another company who's researching this or another similar solution would be to check how data index with one another, and the communication back and forth in being able to find your files, if you have a large data set like we do. 

          Disclosure: I am a real user, and this review is based on my own experience and opinions.
          it_user841941
          Digitalization at a transportation company with 201-500 employees
          Real User
          Helps create an interconnected ecosystem; our users use electronic documents more and more

          Pros and Cons

          • "The most valuable feature for me is the possibility to share and to collaborate, the possibility to connect FileNet with many other IBM products as well. It helps avoid the possibility of creating "island applications." We have an ecosystem where everything can be interconnected."
          • "FileNet can for sure cover the requirements of a medium and a big company, because of the scalability and the possibility to connect with many other IBM products."
          • "What I would like to see is more integration."

          What is our primary use case?

          We use it to manage all the documents, for all the working groups we have, for management meetings, and for all the projects we run. The advantage is to have a unique place where you can store everything and then we connected it with the another IBM product, IBM Connections. So it's a new way to work, to collaborate, and to exchange documents; even on mobile, especially for people traveling a lot, like me.

          It's performing quite well, there is a high level of acceptance by the end-users. Obviously it's all part of the change management that we are running in parallel, and that's so the people can get used to it and discover new features every day. We're quite satisfied, it has performed quite well. 

          How has it helped my organization?

          We have reduced paper, because people, especially at the management level, but not only, use tablets and electronic documents more and more, because they know where things are stored.

          And they can access the documents in different ways, like from IBM Connection, from Lotus notes, and all the documents are in FileNet. That's a big advantage because you can save time and you can easily distribute documents to all the people, for example in a project or after a meeting.

          What is most valuable?

          For me it's the possibility to share and to collaborate, the possibility to connect FileNet with many other IBM products as well. It helps avoid the possibility of creating "island applications." We have an ecosystem where everything can be interconnected. The people are getting used to it.

          What needs improvement?

          In any product, what I would like to see is integration. Because for me, what is important is to be able to give stability in what we provide to the final users. So integration is the keyword for future releases and maybe even new products.

          What do I think about the stability of the solution?

          I think it's quite stable, it's a very robust product and we haven't found any major problems or issues, so far.

          What do I think about the scalability of the solution?

          It seems to be very scalable. We don't have millions and millions of documents, but it seems to be quite scalable and the performance is also quite good.

          How are customer service and technical support?

          We are working with a business partner in Switzerland. We work with them for every new release and for configuration. Our experience with them is quite good. We have been partners for quite a while on many different projects with many IBM products, and we are quite satisfied.

          Which solution did I use previously and why did I switch?

          Previously we were using, as in many other companies, Windows Network Drive. Then, some years ago, before I came to the company, they decided to invest in IBM FileNet because, in our company, we have used IBM for many years and many purposes, and we were quite satisfied. The consultant proposed this solution and we started with FileNet. Later on, we installed IBM Connections and many other products. We are satisfied, as a long-time IBM user.

          For me, the most important criteria when selecting a vendor include that they have to be close to the customer and they need to understand not only the technical point of view, but the business point of view. That is very important. The risk in many projects is well-known, you build a perfect technical solution but maybe it's not covering the requirements, or it's not close enough to business needs, so people don't use it. So the returns are only on paper.

          What other advice do I have?

          I rate FileNet a nine out of 10. It would be a 10 with closer integration.

          In terms of advice, I would say look for something that covers your requirements. From my point of view, FileNet can for sure cover the requirements of a medium and  a big company, because of the scalability and the possibility to connect with many other IBM products.

          Disclosure: I am a real user, and this review is based on my own experience and opinions.
          AS
          Area Manager at a tech services company with 1,001-5,000 employees
          Real User
          Gives us a unified solution for documents and workflow

          Pros and Cons

            • "We'd like to use the docker, to have it containerized."

            What is our primary use case?

            First we used it as a document management system only, now we have some workflows too. It's one of the biggest applications in the government of Switzerland. We are using FileNet to build up these workflows.

            How has it helped my organization?

            It's a single a solution. Before, we had several products but now it's all in one hand.

            What is most valuable?

            Resiliency.

            What needs improvement?

            We'd like to use the docker, to have it containerized, that would be great for us.

            What do I think about the stability of the solution?

            It's very good.

            We did have some issues with Web services. It was a version conflict, because two Web services were deployed, an old version and a new version, and both were accessible. So we had some problems with that but it wasn't a product failure.

            What do I think about the scalability of the solution?

            It's very good. We have millions of documents. We have no problems with scalability. It runs fine.

            How is customer service and technical support?

            We didn't buy the product from IBM itself, it was from a business partner. So, issues first go to the business partner, before they go to the IBM. As soon as it's at IBM, it's very good. Before that, it depends on which person is available.

            What other advice do I have?

            When selecting a vendor we have to do put out tenders which have our criteria. A big issue is the price for licenses.

            Regarding advice, I would say if you're going for FileNet, get FileNet P8 and not FileNet IS. The two products are doing similar things, but in my personal opinion, P8 is more the future.

            I would rate FileNet a nine out of 10, because it's a good product, stable, no worries.

            Disclosure: I am a real user, and this review is based on my own experience and opinions.
            it_user841908
            Project Lead Engineer at a healthcare company with 10,001+ employees
            Real User
            It has an excellent document storage repository, which is good at what it does

            Pros and Cons

            • "If we run into problems, which is inevitable (and we run into problems all the time), we get quick responses and good solutions back from the technical support."
            • "It has an excellent document storage repository, which is good at what it does."
            • "​I would like to see the dashboard be a little bit more robust and a little more user-friendly"

            What is our primary use case?

            We use it to store and transfer large amounts of files between several various locations that we serve. It is an excellent document storage facility. 

            How has it helped my organization?

            The excellent document storage repository: It is good at what it does. 

            What is most valuable?

            The technical support that we get from IBM. 

            What needs improvement?

            I would like to see the dashboard be a little bit more robust and a little more user-friendly. Right now, unless you truly know FileNet, you do not know what you are looking at in the dashboard. From what I understand with the latest release, which is what we are getting ready to go to, a lot of that has already been solved, but I have not seen what it really looks like yet. 

            For how long have I used the solution?

            Three to five years.

            What do I think about the stability of the solution?

            It is an extremely stable platform, if it is built right. 

            What do I think about the scalability of the solution?

            We are looking to expand and scale up quite a bit right now, because our current system is completely overloaded. We are looking at doing an upgrade and an in-place expansion. However, I do not know how the scalability is performing.

            How is customer service and technical support?

            If we run into problems, which is inevitable (and we run into problems all the time), we get quick responses and good solutions back from the technical support. 

            How was the initial setup?

            I was not involved in the initial setup.

            What about the implementation team?

            Due to the way it is designed, we worked with IBM quite extensively to do our original architecture. Going that route, it has been immensely stable. However, we have now gotten to the point where we have outgrown what we originally designed. 

            What's my experience with pricing, setup cost, and licensing?

            Look at what you are looking to get from it. If you are looking for just a small open source, understand that you will get what you pay for. FileNet is not cheap, but you absolutely get what you pay for. 

            Disclosure: I am a real user, and this review is based on my own experience and opinions.
            Gonzalo Varalla
            CIO at a insurance company with 1,001-5,000 employees
            Real User
            Interoperability with IBM Datacap and other products makes this a key component for us

            How has it helped my organization?

            It really has improved our organization, because it's the repository of all our documents, PDF, etc. That's where we are archiving and storing all those documents, so it's critical.

            What is most valuable?

            The natural interoperability with IBM Datacap, that is a key component of our solution, as well as with BPM, and WebSphere Portal. That's why we prefer FileNet instead of some other, less world-class solution.

            How is customer service and technical support?

            Support is good. When they have to escalate internally, in order to get some more expert advice internally, they do so and it's okay.

            How was the initial setup?

            No problem. We've were helped by IBM. That is, you always have problems on a project, but what I ask is whether the solutions…

            How has it helped my organization?

            It really has improved our organization, because it's the repository of all our documents, PDF, etc. That's where we are archiving and storing all those documents, so it's critical.

            What is most valuable?

            The natural interoperability with IBM Datacap, that is a key component of our solution, as well as with BPM, and WebSphere Portal. That's why we prefer FileNet instead of some other, less world-class solution.

            How is customer service and technical support?

            Support is good. When they have to escalate internally, in order to get some more expert advice internally, they do so and it's okay.

            How was the initial setup?

            No problem. We've were helped by IBM. That is, you always have problems on a project, but what I ask is whether the solutions have been solid. Yes, they have.

            Disclosure: I am a real user, and this review is based on my own experience and opinions.
            it_user840900
            Project Lead Systems Engineer at a healthcare company with 1,001-5,000 employees
            Real User
            It has a straightforward approach to the install​

            What is most valuable?

            The straightforward approach to the install.

            What do I think about the stability of the solution?

            Stability is really good. We fairly recently upgraded a version of it and have not been having any problems. The resources seem to be really good with this version; it is a little easier to troubleshoot issues. We do not have many issues with the newer version.

            What do I think about the scalability of the solution?

            With the upgrade, it was a bit more improved.

            How is customer service and technical support?

            I have not personally used IBM's technical support, but there are other members of my team that have used them. I have not heard any negative feedback.

            How was the initial setup?

            While I was not involved in the initial setup, my team was. From my…

            What is most valuable?

            The straightforward approach to the install.

            What do I think about the stability of the solution?

            Stability is really good. We fairly recently upgraded a version of it and have not been having any problems. The resources seem to be really good with this version; it is a little easier to troubleshoot issues. We do not have many issues with the newer version.

            What do I think about the scalability of the solution?

            With the upgrade, it was a bit more improved.

            How is customer service and technical support?

            I have not personally used IBM's technical support, but there are other members of my team that have used them. I have not heard any negative feedback.

            How was the initial setup?

            While I was not involved in the initial setup, my team was. From my understanding, the initial setup was pretty straightforward.

            Which other solutions did I evaluate?

            I was not involved in the decision-making process.

            What other advice do I have?

            This is a straightforward install, and it works well. It has been very hands-off and seamless in terms of supporting it. In terms of researching it, these are really good considerations.

            Disclosure: I am a real user, and this review is based on my own experience and opinions.
            it_user840870
            Director of user services at a manufacturing company with 1,001-5,000 employees
            Real User
            We probably would not have seen adoption so strongly without it

            Pros and Cons

            • "We probably would not have seen adoption so strongly without it."
            • "It has given us a whole new environment to do document management and document storage."
            • "It may be a little complex to implement and take some effort."

            What is our primary use case?

            It is our integrated document repository that we use in conjunction with Connections. It performs extremely well for us and has been very successful.

            How has it helped my organization?

            It has given us a whole new environment to do document management and document storage. Before we used heavily used file servers and file shares, and now we are promoting the use of Connections. This has made Connections more successful for us.

            What is most valuable?

            The integration with Connections, where it is basically transparent for the end users, and very seamless. They can go ahead and store multiple tiered folders of documents in multiple tiered folders without any technical assistance of any kind. It is very user-friendly and easy for them to use.

            What needs improvement?

            Continuous work to continually refine and improve the user interface a bit, but it is basically pretty good. Therefore, I do not have any strong impressions of things that need to be changed.

            A lot of people are familiar with the Microsoft interface and Windows. It becomes more intuitive if it somewhat mirrors Microsoft characteristics, but it is very usable as it is.

            What do I think about the stability of the solution?

            I am not aware of any recent issues. It is very stable for now.

            What do I think about the scalability of the solution?

            Scalability is one of it strengths. It is growing pretty rapidly. 

            We have not seen any interruptions, and I am not aware of any scalability issues right now.

            How are customer service and technical support?

            I have not personally contact them. I am sure there are some other people in the company that have, but I have not personally contacted them.

            Which solution did I use previously and why did I switch?

            We were using the native files capability of Connections, and it was very limited. So, we were informed that this was an option, and it has pretty dramatically changed our use with the original Connections files option. We probably would not have seen adoption so strongly without it.

            How was the initial setup?

            I would advise a little on the product early on, but I did not actually do the setup of the product.

            The initial setup was a bit complex, but it is a very elaborate application. The people that I talked to said it was not extremely difficult. It took some work, but it was worth it.

            Which other solutions did I evaluate?

            I was involved in the decision-making process.

            What other advice do I have?

            It may be a little complex to implement and take some effort, but with the integration the way it is, it is worth the effort. Once it is in place, it is very stable.

            Most important criteria when selecting a vendor: 

            • Stability
            • Credibility.

            We are using a lot of IBM products across our company. For the most part, they have a strong track record with us already.

            Disclosure: I am a real user, and this review is based on my own experience and opinions.
            it_user840834
            Enterprise ECM Program Manager at a tech services company with 201-500 employees
            Real User
            improves the time when providing customer service to our constituents

            Pros and Cons

            • "It improves the time when providing customer service to our constituents."
            • "We would like to see, in FileNet, the ability to manage video and audio.​"

            What is our primary use case?

            We use IBM FileNet to store state government-related documents, and conduct workflow processes to channel information between the knowledge workers.

            We are very happy with the efficiencies that it has gained, and the customer service that we are able to provide back to the citizens.

            How has it helped my organization?

            It provides us with a solid place to store our records in a structure where we will be able to find those records efficiently. It improves the time when providing customer service to our constituents.

            What is most valuable?

            • It is a stable environment.
            • It is feature rich.
            • It' has a good user interface.

            What needs improvement?

            We would like to see, in FileNet, the ability to manage video and audio.

            For how long have I used the solution?

            More than five years.

            What do I think about the stability of the solution?

            For the most part, the solution is very stable. Once it is a fully-baked application, it is stable.

            What do I think about the scalability of the solution?

            It scales very well. We are housing 89 million records and 16 terabytes, and the performance is fine.

            How are customer service and technical support?

            We have not had to use their technical support. We have done a lot of the support ourselves internally. We have not had to use professional services for a very long time.

            Which solution did I use previously and why did I switch?

            We were not using anything in the document management/document capture industry until we purchased FileNet.

            We were running out of physical space to maintain records, and the cost of processing documents manually had gotten to be too high. In an effort to reduce our physical storage space and our costs, we decided that a solution was needed.

            The biggest benefit to purchasing it was prior knowledge. The prior knowledge of the product: It did what it was supposed to do. It provided a stable environment, a good way to put your documents in, and get your documents out.

            How was the initial setup?

            I was not involved in the initial setup.

            Which other solutions did I evaluate?

            I was not part of the evaluation process.

            What other advice do I have?

            We have been running FileNet for 18 years. It has been a very good relationship.

            This product requires that you take a long look at it, because it provides a good solution. It is used across many industries, and it has a solid reputation.

            Most important criteria during the evaluation process: Familiarity with the product. The people who were doing the selection had a prior knowledge of the product from a prior company, and it had a very good reputation at that point, even 20 years ago, and the product has maintained that reputation.

            Disclosure: I am a real user, and this review is based on my own experience and opinions.
            AK
            Solutions Architect at a financial services firm with 5,001-10,000 employees
            Real User
            Provides the ability to find the proper documents which are needed for business processes

            What is our primary use case?

            Document storage and workflow.

            How has it helped my organization?

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

            What is most valuable?

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

            What needs improvement?

            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.

            For how long have I used the solution?

            More than five years.

            What do I think about the stability of the solution?

            It is very stable and reliable.

            What do I think about the

            What is our primary use case?

            Document storage and workflow.

            How has it helped my organization?

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

            What is most valuable?

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

            What needs improvement?

            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.

            For how long have I used the solution?

            More than five years.

            What do I think about the stability of the solution?

            It is very stable and reliable.

            What do I think about the scalability of the solution?

            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.

            How is customer service and technical support?

            The technical support at IBM is knowledgeable and responsive.

            How was the initial setup?

            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.

            Disclosure: I am a real user, and this review is based on my own experience and opinions.
            it_user783108
            Chief Commercial Officer with 51-200 employees
            Real User
            Stability and integration with other platforms provide the environment I need

            Pros and Cons

            • "The important features to me are that it is stable, scalable, and the integration between this platform and the other platforms is very good."
            • "IBM doesn't offer new technologies every year, they offer new technologies after five years, for each release of the product."
            • "I would say the installation process can be very complicated, and you need to to have an experience resource."

            How has it helped my organization?

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

            What is most valuable?

            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.

            What needs improvement?

            Many customers leave FileNet because of the licensing cost.

            For how long have I used the solution?

            More than five years.

            What do I think about the stability of the solution?

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

            What do I think about the scalability of the solution?

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

            How are customer service and technical support?

            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.

            Which solution did I use previously and why did I switch?

            No, I didn't use anything before FileNet.

            How was the initial setup?

            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.

            What's my experience with pricing, setup cost, and licensing?

            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.

            Which other solutions did I evaluate?

            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.

            What other advice do I have?

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

            Disclosure: I am a real user, and this review is based on my own experience and opinions.
            it_user803040
            Content Services, Digital Transformation Thought Leader & Strategist with 10,001+ employees
            User
            Centralized our business documents and streamlined our business processes

            What is our primary use case?

            Document Management Records Management Business process and workflow Digital imaging Document classification Search 

            How has it helped my organization?

            Streamlined our business processes. Centralized our business documents. Provides records management functions.

            What is most valuable?

            Records management to apply document classification for retention and disposition of business records. Email and instant messages are included.

            What needs improvement?

            It is still a leading ECM solution provider, however the cost to implement and maintain are higher than other solutions.

            For how long have I used the solution?

            More than five years.

            What is our primary use case?

            • Document Management
            • Records Management
            • Business process and workflow
            • Digital imaging
            • Document classification
            • Search 

            How has it helped my organization?

            • Streamlined our business processes.
            • Centralized our business documents.
            • Provides records management functions.

            What is most valuable?

            Records management to apply document classification for retention and disposition of business records. Email and instant messages are included.

            What needs improvement?

            It is still a leading ECM solution provider, however the cost to implement and maintain are higher than other solutions.

            For how long have I used the solution?

            More than five years.
            Disclosure: My company has a business relationship with this vendor other than being a customer: Solution Provider.
            ITCS user
            ECM (Filenet) Architect at a tech vendor with 51-200 employees
            Vendor
            It is scalable and the UI is extendable.

            What is most valuable?

            The best-scaling ECM solution now comes with a beautiful, extendable UI. I hope with the latest push on Case Management, IBM does not forget to flaunt the real beast under the hood, the Content Engine.

            How has it helped my organization?

            Archival, records management or workflows all get implemented best with FileNet. Over the years, I am witness to organizations picking a cheaper product with a little better UI, only to upgrade later to FileNet when the original solution did not scale well!

            For how long have I used the solution?

            I have used it for 10 years.

            What was my experience with deployment of the solution?

            We have encountered deployment issues, just like any other product.

            What do I think about the stability of the solution?

            We have not…

            What is most valuable?

            The best-scaling ECM solution now comes with a beautiful, extendable UI. I hope with the latest push on Case Management, IBM does not forget to flaunt the real beast under the hood, the Content Engine.

            How has it helped my organization?

            Archival, records management or workflows all get implemented best with FileNet. Over the years, I am witness to organizations picking a cheaper product with a little better UI, only to upgrade later to FileNet when the original solution did not scale well!

            For how long have I used the solution?

            I have used it for 10 years.

            What was my experience with deployment of the solution?

            We have encountered deployment issues, just like any other product.

            What do I think about the stability of the solution?

            We have not encountered any stability issues.

            What do I think about the scalability of the solution?

            We have not encountered any scalability issues.

            How is customer service and technical support?

            Customer Service:

            Customer service is 4 out of 5.

            Technical Support:

            Technical support is 3.75 out of 5.

            Disclosure: I am a real user, and this review is based on my own experience and opinions.
            it_user631716
            Project manager at a energy/utilities company with 501-1,000 employees
            Vendor
            It is a robust, scalable system.

            What is most valuable?

            It's very robust. We have been using it for the last 15 years and we've never had any opinion to change it or not use it. So far, we have been very happy with it.

            How has it helped my organization?

            Slowly, we are streamlining all our document management systems. We are including all other departments into FileNet who were not using FileNet as a document management system.

            What needs improvement?

            The user interface for FileNet can be improved. It was not very professional, you could say, in the beginning, so we developed a custom user interface. With the new ICN, they have come a long way, but they still need to work on the ease of use for the user/customer. So, the user interface is one thing where they're lacking.

            It's very expensive, so they could make it a little cheaper but still, it's good.

            What do I think about the stability of the solution?

            We never had any stability issues.

            What do I think about the scalability of the solution?

            Scalability-wise and robustness-wise, it's awesome.

            How are customer service and technical support?

            The technical support is very professional and efficient. So far, we have been very happy with it.

            Which solution did I use previously and why did I switch?

            Before we started using FileNet on our own, we were subcontracting with other departments using their FileNet. So, around 2007, we decided to move to our own installation and our own system, rather than using the county's system.

            How was the initial setup?

            I was involved in the initial setup. It's very straightforward, as long as you know what you're doing.

            What's my experience with pricing, setup cost, and licensing?

            It's on the expensive side.

            What other advice do I have?

            If someone is comparing FileNet against other solutions like SharePoint or open-source solutions, I think they should be looking into the scalability, robustness and the whole document lifecycle features.

            When I look to work with a vendor, the most important criteria is their in-house expertise, how competent they are, the resources they have in their organization; and then, price. We always have to look at which vendor is good and cheap.

            For our custom projects, we outsource to a couple of vendors, such as Imagine Solutions. We work with them. They are vendors for FileNet solutions. They don't compete against FileNet. They help us in upgrading FileNet. Those type of projects.

            Disclosure: I am a real user, and this review is based on my own experience and opinions.
            it_user631785
            Vice president at a recruiting/HR firm with 1,001-5,000 employees
            Vendor
            Provides the ability to do version control in the documents and to retrieve the history accordingly.

            What is most valuable?

            The most valuable features of this solution are:

            • The ability to do version control in the documents that are stored within the IBM FileNet solution.
            • To be able to retrieve the history accordingly.
            • To be able to work with those in a microservice environment.

            How has it helped my organization?

            The data can be integrated into a microservice architecture. It has allowed us to more deeply integrate the ECM or the FileNet solution into various aspects of our product, where we may need to provide user access to documents, that might be within FileNet. They don't need to open up a specific page or request mechanism to get to them. They can be embedded directly within the page itself or the app itself or within the context of whatever the user is doing. Thus, this just improves the overall efficiency and productivity of our organization.

            For how long have I used the solution?

            We've actually had this solution since 2008, so we've had it for a long time; it's really not new to us.

            What do I think about the stability of the solution?

            The stability has been good.

            What do I think about the scalability of the solution?

            Scalability is excellent and actually, it has been really great. It scales really well.

            Which solution did I use previously and why did I switch?

            Previously, we were using just a file-based solution. It was not an equivalent solution and that was the reason as to why we moved over to IBM.

            What other advice do I have?

            It really comes down to our ability to work together so as to address the gaps that we may have, i.e., between what FileNet needs to offer and what we need.

            Ensure that the product itself matches the needs in your particular vertical. There are a lot of ECM products in the market space today that actually will vertically integrate into a given space. Whether it's the insurance, banking, manufacturing or whatever vertical that you're talking about, these ECM products will customize into that space so heavily, that it may supersede the existing functionality that you may have today. It's important that you look into what is it that the vendor is trying to resolve. Is it really meeting the gaps that you have? Lastly, does it extend beyond what you need it to do? These are all important factors to consider before selecting a product.

            We always look for the ability in our vendors to provide their products in an integrated manner or that it will be integrated into our product seamlessly. This really comes down to the level of the APIs that they present. 

            We look at various other factors before selecting a vendor, such as, Are the products themselves scalable and have they been tested out? What's the experience of the vendor in the space that we're in, i.e., for our specific vertical? Finally, we also look at the other customer recommendations.

            Disclosure: I am a real user, and this review is based on my own experience and opinions.
            it_user632799
            IT Manager at a wellness & fitness company with 10,001+ employees
            Vendor
            Provides valuable data management and content management features.

            What is most valuable?

            It just allows us to do a lot more data management, just because we have a lot of services, as well as the whole content management we had to do. The whole the FileNet solution that we have integrated allows us to do all of that.

            How has it helped my organization?

            The benefit of this solution is that it provides the whole file services, given that we have a lot of content management. There are not a lot of other technologies available out there for us to efficiently manage the whole FileNet services.

            What needs improvement?

            They should continue having the same stack of stuff. There's nothing new that we are expecting. Given our use cases, this is pretty much what we need at this time.

            What do I think about the stability of the solution?

            Stability is pretty good, because we've evolved over a period of time. Initially, we used to have it at a different data center. Currently, we've evolved into a place where we feel much more comfortable, in regards to the stability of the system.

            What do I think about the scalability of the solution?

            Scalability is also good. Although, I'll have to admit that with our use case right now, we have a very good prediction of the number of customers. So, we've been able to meet our benchmark. But, at the same time, if it has to become much more larger than that, I'm not quite sure about where we would end up.

            How is customer service and technical support?

            Technical support is pretty good, given that we have a very good partnership with IBM.

            What other advice do I have?

            Go for it!

            The most important criteria while selecting a vendor are the initial support, the knowledge they have and then, being able to partner-up from the support perspective, for any future needs. That's the most important thing for us.

            Disclosure: I am a real user, and this review is based on my own experience and opinions.
            it_user631788
            CIO at a comms service provider with 1,001-5,000 employees
            Vendor
            The integration and connection features are valuable.

            What is most valuable?

            The most valuable features are that it is very well integrated and connected. To deploy many new applications and solutions it may sometimes not be very easy, but it is very robust, at the end of the day.

            How has it helped my organization?

            The benefit is a shorter time to market, especially.

            What needs improvement?

            In the next release, I would like to see features for how to move it to the cloud and enhance functionalities as you are developing new products.

            Also, I come from a Spanish-speaking country. Sometimes, you have to work with people that don't speak Spanish and that makes that the overall solution a little trickier to implement, because of the language barrier. So, I think that a strong knowledge of the technical issues by people that also have good knowledge of the mother tongue of the country, that would help a lot.

            What do I think about the stability of the solution?

            Usually, IBM products are stable, although some of them require some changes or some upgrades for minor bugs, but the overall quality of the solutions is OK.

            FileNet has helped us a lot with the customer documentation information and I think the solution is very strong.

            What do I think about the scalability of the solution?

            Actually, right now, we are moving to the new version of FileNet. We are doing all the scalability right now to have more processes involved with the FileNet platform.

            How are customer service and technical support?

            The technical support is good. I think that the guys have provided us with the solutions that we needed.

            Which solution did I use previously and why did I switch?

            We didn't previously use any other solution. We decided to invest in a new solution because we understood that it was a benefit for us and our customers to have the solutions that FileNet, in this case, provided for us.

            How was the initial setup?

            The setup was a little complex. Even though some of the projects or the solutions are not very complex, you have to integrate them with the company's old system. Some of the systems are not complex, so the overall solution sometimes requires effort, that if it's not on the FileNet solution itself, it's in another module that's integrated.

            Which other solutions did I evaluate?

            We were checking out other vendors. We were looking at Oracle, Microsoft and some smaller vendors that were developing some specific things for us.

            When I'm selecting a vendor, I look for a vendor that you can trust, with whom you can have a long-term relationship, and you know that they are also on top of the technological wave. What you are going to implement is going to be constantly changing with new developments in the future.

            What other advice do I have?

            Make a very good design at the beginning, understand what you need and also prepare the different phases of the project to ensure that you finish the projects. Have a clear view. Draw the lines of the software you need.

            Disclosure: I am a real user, and this review is based on my own experience and opinions.
            it_user93264
            Enterprise Architect at a insurance company with 1,001-5,000 employees
            Real User
            Our goal is for members across the country to view their documents seamlessly across various interfaces

            What is most valuable?

            The most valuable feature is seamless storing and retrieval of documents irrespective of the format of the document

            How has it helped my organization?

            Our current document management solution has limited capability in terms of the type of document that can be stored. With Filenet and Datacap we can accept documents in various formats seamlessly without user intervention.

            What do I think about the stability of the solution?

            We are in the early stages of implementation of this solution. We have not encountered any stability issues

            Which solution did I use previously and why did I switch?

            We were looking for a data solution because the other one was sort of cramping our style. It could be accessed only via limited workstations, so we were looking for another data storage solution.

            Which other solutions did I evaluate?

            We evaluated a few other products

            Disclosure: I am a real user, and this review is based on my own experience and opinions.
            it_user632724
            VP Shared Services at a financial services firm with 10,001+ employees
            Vendor
            We digitize our content, place it into the repository, and share it across multiple teams. The problem with the technical support is that it is time zone-based.

            What is most valuable?

            The most valuable features are the flexibility and broad capabilities. It covers anything a small company might need, all the way to what a large enterprise may require; a full feature set.

            How has it helped my organization?

            For us, it manages the transformation from a paper-based organization to a digital-based organization. What we do is, we digitize all our content, place it into the FileNet repository, which allows us to share the content across multiple teams. This is something we could not do when we had a paper-based organization. You can't share a piece of paper unless you ship it around by couriers or something.

            What needs improvement?

            There are no additional features that I would like to see included in the next release. I need to implement the existing features. We are not yet using the solution to its full capabilities.

            What do I think about the stability of the solution?

            It is very stable. It's mission critical. We run it 24/7, 365.

            What do I think about the scalability of the solution?

            It scales very well. We just keep adding on capacity. We have about 750 million documents in it, with no problems.

            How are customer service and technical support?

            Technical support is not bad. But the problem with the technical support is that it is time zone-based. So, if we have an issue that is brought across a number of time zones, this will happen: We'll start working with one technical resource; we'll finally start getting working on it when, all of a sudden that technical resource has to leave, and we have to start with the next technical resource in a different time zone. Then, we have to bring them up to speed with what we're doing, and so we lose a little bit of time. The fact that the same resource isn't on it for the entire problem sometimes is concerning.

            Which solution did I use previously and why did I switch?

            We've always had this. When I came to this organization, we've always had this solution.

            How was the initial setup?

            I was not involved in the initial setup.

            Which other solutions did I evaluate?

            I didn’t look at other vendors, because I was already here. But I would look at FileNet and Documentum. I would look at a wide range of content management solutions, and then we just narrow it down from there.

            We chose IBM because we have a longstanding relationship with them, and we're trying to buy an integrated stack. So, instead of buying just an ECM solution, we're looking at content ingestion, content management, and content generation. The stack, and not just the one off solution.

            When selecting a vendor, my most important criteria are the solution, the technical support, the thought leadership, and cost.

            What other advice do I have?

            Evaluate FileNet. Find out what capabilities you need. You may find that FileNet has way more than you'll require.

            You need a lot of senior technical resources to get the best bang out of the buck for this. They're not easy to find. The solution is highly capable, but it also is highly complex.

            Disclosure: I am a real user, and this review is based on my own experience and opinions.
            it_user543291
            IT System Engineer at a financial services firm with 10,001+ employees
            Vendor
            The APIs IBM provides for FileNet are elastic and powerful.

            What is most valuable?

            FileNet is a really robust and powerful tool for document management environments. It's very well designed, especially on the storage side, and also on the application server side. It's really powerful, robust, and highly available. In our environment, we store more than six billion documents. Some of these documents are more than 1,000 pages.

            We also have other FileNet environments – FileNet Image Services environments – and we have federated these image services to a FileNet P8 environment, first as a federation. Then, we have successfully migrated all our old documents to the FileNet P8 environment without any demolition of the documents. It was a nice project.
            Also, the elasticity of the APIs IBM provides us is powerful. We are also using IBM WebSphere as the application server. We are hosting our FileNet P8 services on top of WebSphere. It serves as a powerful tool.

            Troubleshooting is very proactive. We can easily monitor the system, and we can easily define the problem and take action on it.

            ECM is our heart on branches, for example if you cannot check the id and signature of the customer, you can do nothing. Also it’s very vital for us to predict how long does the the operation take for each customer. These makes stability as one of our major concerns Based on 9 years of experience with IBM ECM solutions; I can say that, the power of IBM products comes from stability predominantly. Both FileNet Image services and FileNet P8 are five-nines percent successful on this manner.

            How has it helped my organization?

            Document management is a new concept for some managers, and some kind of innovative concept, also. When you have content, when you get the documents, then you can fetch the data from that document. You can do analysis, business analysis, predictions with that data, especially in banks, mostly because of regulations.

            We have buildings we use for physical documents. Some of them are photographs, images; some of them are computer output data; some formatted, some non-formatted. With FileNet, especially by creating our services for capturing solutions, we can easily store and analyze these documents through the FileNet environment. It's a huge benefit to us. Our response times are no more than 300 milliseconds. We have so many branches all around Turkey. Some of them are more than 500 kilometers away, and we have this response time also in those locations. It's also very fast, and for customer satisfaction, it's a nice feature for us.

            What needs improvement?

            It's a big tool. It's heavy, really heavy. Because of this, and with it being highly available and robust, it's not so easy to manage. It's not like the new, light technologies. You cannot stop it in seconds, stop and restart it in seconds. That takes minutes. This can be improved, I think.

            For example, WebSphere has a new application server named Liberty, especially in the front-end layer, with so many new technologies. IBM is construing it with Content Navigator, but we might not use it. Both parts have options that can be developed.
            Management is an issue because the tools are so complex.

            For how long have I used the solution?

            We moved to P8 six years ago.

            What do I think about the stability of the solution?

            It's very stable; no downtime, especially in the daytime because there were some. Think about if you are in a branch, you're an officer, and there's a queue; they're waiting; and the system is down. That was happening beforehand, but now, it is available five-nines percentage, almost no downtime. Response times are very fast, and we are keeping track of the number of operations the clients have done, and those numbers have significantly increased.

            What do I think about the scalability of the solution?

            Actually, high availability and scalability are related.

            There is no longer a document limit. We can easily scale both the systems and storage areas, no problem, without any performance degradation, without any high-availability degradation. We can easily scale.

            How are customer service and technical support?

            We have the AVP premium support. They are very fast for first response, and they are very productive providing right solution in the right time.

            Which solution did I use previously and why did I switch?

            We were previously using FileNet Image Services. It was a natural progression to move to FileNet P8. It has direct interaction, with a CFS tool, content federation services tool. We can easily integrate it and migrate our documents without any problem.

            How was the initial setup?

            We did the initial setup because we have experience, but we worked with IBM and our local partner on the design. For a WebSphere-experienced application administrator, initial setup is very straightforward and very fast; we did it without any issues.

            Which other solutions did I evaluate?

            We considered other vendors. There are two factors for us. We have so many documents, billions of documents. Performance is one of the hot topics; fitting into our environment, fitting into our architecture because our architecture is generally based on WebSphere. Also, it was easy to integrate with FileNet Image Services. These were our major concerns. On top of that, high availability is a really important feature for us. These were the reasons we chose FileNet P8.

            The decision-making process took more than 3-4 months because we did all the PoCs. We did a stress test; we set up a small environment. It took more than 3-4 months.

            We also considered building the whole solution in-house, and we are doing it for some type of documents; non-critical, but agile documents. Performance is the first concern for that. We are only using disk storage, and then a single interface before the storage. Without any sub-tiers, we can directly reach the document, but there are some concerns about security, backup, and high availability.

            We are not considering replacing FileNet P8, but using that for different use cases.

            The most important criteria for me when selecting a vendor to work with are adapting new technologies, and being the leader. IBM is the leader in this area.

            What other advice do I have?

            See the product on the road, so to speak. Set it up and do a PoC and see the architecture; see the design.

            My rating for this product is because of the high availability, scalability, robustness, adaptability, being the leader in the sector. These are the major reasons. I have not given it a perfect rating because it is not suitable for smaller environments and it could offer more features for different use cases. Consider, for example, on the database side, there are non-SQL databases and SQL databases. The big one would be providing both SQL and non-SQL together in the same environment. P8 is robust and for the heavy side, that is OK, but for the light side, it is not. Maybe they can add a light environment; work in it can be better.

            We are considering employing IBM in cloud, hybrid, or box solutions, but in Turkey, using cloud, especially if there is customer data in the environment, is restricted by regulations. It's not clear. If this issue is solved, we will seriously consider it, including in the document management environment; not a public cloud, but maybe a private cloud, also. We are waiting for these regulations for it, but we are considering the technology, so that we do not fall behind.

            We have some mobile applications; we are also providing documents to mobile applications. Our clients can also scan and submit some types of documents. They are inserting some type of forms, for example, credit card application forms, through mobile devices, but it's our own solution, not IBM's Content Navigator or other solutions. Nonetheless, in the back end, we are using FileNet. For the front end, our architecture decision is to use our own native applications because it's easy to build and customize. For our needs now, it's the best solution. Maybe in the future, we don't know. Technology is rapidly changing. Maybe we won’t have to create everything ourselves or invent everything from scratch. Maybe a surprise will occur in technology and we can use it, but now, we are using our own solution.

            There are new analytics and content management services that we are able to provide for our organization. We have our own solution on the content analysis side also. Our R&D department have developed a project. They are doing human-made documents. These are unformatted documents and free texts, sometimes handwritten; especially faxes, for example. They are fetching the data, doing ICR on faxes. With an NLP-like algorithm, they are deciding which document it is, which department should be responsible for it, and sending a task to that department. The analytic operation is done in our own environment.

            Since we implemented FileNet, there are services that we're now able to provide better. Before FileNet P8, we had another document management system, FileNet Image Services. It had some pitfalls, including, for example, a number of documents limit. We have overcome this after implementing FileNet P8. Also, the response times severely decreased. There was no high availability; it was an active-passive cluster on Image Services. After FileNet P8, it is an active-active configuration. These are huge benefits in terms of high availability, and customer satisfaction, also.

            The experiences of our internal and or external customers both have changed because we implemented FileNet. External customers generally use internet banking, mobile devices, etc. Before making the document management environment highly available, we couldn't provide, for example, credit card statements as a document to the clients. We were only providing data, and they could see their statements, for example, for only the previous six months, not earlier. They were only seeing the data, not the exact statement I sent them. Now, we are providing exact statements. They see everything in it. They see the benefits we provide with this statement also. Yeah, that's a huge benefit for the clients. Even if it's more than 10 years ago, they can see that statement. For example, sometimes they can need it for legal issues.
            Also, for our internal clients, there is no downtime and fast response.

            As far as the usability of FileNet, our customers don't have any direct interaction with FileNet. We have our own applications. They don't see FileNet; any FileNet screens. They only see the document.

            The people actually using FileNet, they only feel the response time and availability. That's easy and strong for them.

            Disclosure: I am a real user, and this review is based on my own experience and opinions.
            it_user543237
            Delivery Director, Imaging and Workflow at a financial services firm with 1,001-5,000 employees
            Vendor
            Provides worldwide access to authentic business documents.

            What is most valuable?

            The most valuable features of FileNet are the enterprise depth and strength, scalability, integration ability, richness, and functionality; the ability to do a lot of things across the different business units; and integrating with all kinds of solutions. At the same time, I think they did a great job in improving their web clients, such as introducing products like ICN, which is more configurable rather than customizable. The strong foundation behind FileNet in terms of the workflow; the business project management; the content engine; the ability to handle a humongous amount of data in a very high performance mode are what provide a lot of value in this system, in my opinion.

            How has it helped my organization?

            Throughout our journey using FileNet, we were able to significantly improve our business process operations’ efficiency. Think of scenarios where we provide access to the business documents to people who are dispersed across the world; people are working from home or our offshore offices. They don't have to have access to the physical documents. The authenticity of those documents allows our call centers, which are dispersed in different locations in the world, to instantly access the client documents to verify any piece of information.

            Beyond document sharing, access, and high performance, the ability to integrate easily with other solutions, our line of business applications, is fantastic. You have a variety of technical options to do this integration. We have legacy systems, and we have newer, more modern solutions; finally, just being able to deal with all of that.

            What needs improvement?

            The platform is large, is vast. I see a little bit of ambiguity in the area of integration with Box. I hope this will be clarified in the next steps. The IBM Content Navigator is a great product. It was very much needed. It came at the right time to fill a gap in the user interface area. I think this product, because it does integrate with a variety of IBM products, as an end-user application, it's complex and a little bit more difficult to set up. I would like to see a little more simplicity and ease of use in ICN going forward.

            For how long have I used the solution?

            The platform is part of our journey since two decades ago.

            What do I think about the stability of the solution?

            Stability’s been great, knock on wood. It's been very solid. It’s funny; we had an outage the same day I provided this review, but it was not caused by FileNet. It was caused by an infrastructure change over the previous weekend. FileNet has been very, very, very stable.

            What do I think about the scalability of the solution?

            Scalability is fantastic. We did a major replatforming a few years ago. We moved to a newer platform of our AIX, WebSphere, etc.; all virtual. We are able to scale out, scale up. We were able to change the configurations and that has improved the performance of the system by 75%.

            How is customer service and technical support?

            We subscribe to the premium support with additional charges, but it is worth every additional dollar that we spend on that, because we saw a huge jump in the quality, responsiveness, and the attention. When you have a dedicated technical account manager that looks after your technology, PMRs, support requests, etc., that is fantastic. We are able to do things far more things more quickly than before. I would say this is an A.

            What other advice do I have?

            Look at the scale. Look at the enterprise scale. Try to set up the product to leverage it more, maximize the use of the product. FileNet as a stack has massive capabilities. To justify the cost and investment in the product, try to get as many of your business units and business processes to leverage this platform.

            Try to consolidate. This is what we have done. We consolidated our content into FileNet as a mainstream platform for ECM. That has paid dividends. We are able to use it as a shared platform. We set it up as a shared service. We charge back to our clients. With that, we are able to measure the value per business unit, compared to the volume that they are using the system, the number of transactions, number of users, etc. Look at the big picture and try to expand as much as you can.

            I don't think there is anything perfect, per se. We have been very successful in using the product. We have a lot of opportunities to even add more use cases and so on. The product has been very stable. We have a great relationship with the product owner. Our team is able to do a lot of stuff with the product. It's a solid platform.

            Considering that the platform has been stable and scalable, how the experiences of our internal and or external customers changed since implementing FileNet is a big area of focus; number one in terms of evaluating the product. Our clients have been quite satisfied. When I mentioned we were able to improve the performance of the platform by changing the infrastructure and tuning the performance, that has resulted in great savings. Imagine 75% improvement in performance, response time of the system, that is directly linked to the productivity of the end users who number in the thousands.

            In general, the most important criteria when selecting the vendor to work with really depends on the use cases. If it is a situation where critical business processes will depend on the product, the stability, the availability, and all that stuff, then I definitely would have to scrutinize each and every area of the product. In general, we take care of our own development. We rely on the vendor for only specialized skills. The ease of use of finding resources in the market who know the product is very important. When the vendor is flexible in attending to our needs, this is very important because if I compare FileNet to other systems in our area, it's like day and night between the two vendors, where, if I try to get something done through the other vendor, it's more of a challenge.

            We are not considering employing IBM cloud, hybrid, or box solutions in the short-term, but we are assessing this.

            As far as new analytics or content management services that we're now able to provide your organization, we are implementing IBM Case Manager, including the analytics piece of it. We are very interested in exploring further content analytics. It's still on our roadmap. We're taking some steps to explore that.

            There certainly are existing services that we're now able to provide better than before in some client processing areas with our business partners. We have taken some strides in improving and renewing the solution from a legacy, hard-coded solution on all their platforms; it has influenced our way of dealing with those business processes.

            We certainly do have some plans to include mobile, and that is still in the process of maturing the business requirement.

            Disclosure: I am a real user, and this review is based on my own experience and opinions.
            it_user543282
            ECM Filenet Architect at a insurance company with 1,001-5,000 employees
            Vendor
            We use it to store policies and claims documents.

            What is most valuable?

            We use FileNet as an enterprise content management storage for our underwriting policies and our claims documents. The major products of FileNet that we use are Content Manager and ICC for SAP.

            It's very robust. It's very good at document retrieval and storage, as well. The solution that we deployed is really good and it works fine.

            How has it helped my organization?

            FileNet provides secured facilities, which helps a lot.

            A few products that we use in FileNet that really help our organization a lot. For example, Capture Pro and ICC are the important products that we use. They save us a lot of time.

            We also use Image Services, which is another strong product from IBM. That also has a lot of features. It helps a lot to do annotations and then print services. The other features on that are excellent.

            What needs improvement?

            My thought process is that, we use a lot of FileNet products, and with the new versions that come from IBM, we were expecting IBM to provide some extended support for the products that we use at the customer's level. To make sure when we go to upgrade, we should have enough time to do any kind of upgrades or migrations.

            I attended an IBM World of Watson conference to find out what new products they have. For example, we need more data analytics than we have now.

            What do I think about the stability of the solution?

            Some days, stability’s really good, especially with the product running with AIX and DB2. We have never had any bad experiences; it runs very well along with that operating system and that database.

            What do I think about the scalability of the solution?

            For scalability, we have a load balancer and the AIX systems, which really help us to handle the volume and the user input also.

            How are customer service and technical support?

            Technical support is 10/10.

            Which solution did I use previously and why did I switch?

            It has been there for many years; they've been using it in our organization for more than 12-13 years.

            They have been using a few products, but definitely the features and because it is an IBM product. We are basically an IBM shop, so we just prefer to use IBM products. That's why we are moving towards going to the ECM solutions from IBM.

            How was the initial setup?

            Over time, initial setup has become more simple. Initially, with previous versions, it was harder. Now, it's getting very simple, because IBM has come up with a new hardware architecture, which helps a lot to simplify upgrades and installations.

            Which other solutions did I evaluate?

            They do have SharePoint for a few applications, but that doesn't really solve what the business needs. IBM FileNet is the right solution and we are currently using it. We'll be adding more features and more products into it to make it better for our customers.
            We also have custom developments on top of FileNet.

            The decision-making process takes about 6 months. We have a process to be followed. It takes a minimum of about 6 months to go through all the approvals; the business as well as our directors have to approve it.

            The most important criteria for me when selecting a vendor to work with is most likely the complexity. When there's any kind of situation with any architecture being introduced, that's when we need to have IBM or anyone to be involved directly to help us out.

            What other advice do I have?

            Depending on the business needs, I would suggest FileNet and the architecture, as well as the features that it has. I would definitely recommend it.

            According to my experience, over time, it has become perfect. The early versions had a lot of issues. It was running on different platforms, which had some issues. We had terrible outages in a back in 2008-2009. Over time, the new version upgrades really helped out a lot. With the current versions that we use, it's really great.

            We are considering using IBM cloud, hybrid and box solutions. Those are leading features that IBM is coming up with. We definitely look forward to utilizing those products in the future.

            We have a few analytical products, Hadoop and a few other products. They be working with a different group of teams, so they are definitely looking forward into it.
            There aren’t really any existing services that we're able to provide better than we were before.

            We do not have any plans to include mobile at this moment.

            Most of our customers are in Dunwoody and external customers only use very few applications. We provide external login access to them, which helps a lot. We mainly now use FileNet to store the policy documents and the underwriting and claims documents. From a retrieval point of view, it's very fast. The security is very good.

            We have about 6,000-8,000 users and there are no complaints from the usability perspective. With some other products, such as Case Manager, when the new thing comes out, we need to make sure that the users are comfortable using it. Then, we look forward to switching to that.

            Disclosure: I am a real user, and this review is based on my own experience and opinions.
            it_user543231
            Application Architect Executive at Anthem, Inc.
            Vendor
            FileNet helps us implement case-centric or content-centric workflow solutions.

            What is most valuable?

            The most valuable features for FileNet are the ability to do information governance, compliance, and implement case-centric or content-centric workflow solutions; to provide enterprise search capability; and we have Content Navigator. Those are a few.

            How has it helped my organization?

            It has provided our users the ability to conduct their business processes more efficiently. They're able to search documents faster; integrate with the external systems. We're still at a point where there are a lot of improvements that can be made through newer versions of the newer FileNet platform that is coming from IBM.

            What needs improvement?

            We are looking for real-world capabilities within mobile, which has annotation features. We saw a lot of things at a conference but we are looking for more advanced rule-based – or, even if not rule-based, a better – cognitive approach that can be applied to cases.

            Those things, and we are also looking for an improved mobile experience for our customers.

            I haven’t rated it higher because of the workflow engine. I believe it can be improved upon, looking at other workflow solutions like Pega and Lombardi. FileNet has room for improvement there, as well.

            What do I think about the stability of the solution?

            We do have certain concerns about stability, especially with large volume, even within that, around web service APIs. That is something we'll try to prove out in a lower environment. Outages have become a regular thing, especially with our C-MART on-demand APIs, not so much with the FileNet. We are having some memory leak issues. We are working with IBM on that, but we are looking for alternatives to see how we could mitigate those.

            What do I think about the scalability of the solution?

            If you implement the infrastructures correctly at the beginning, it's a pretty scalable solution. The platform is scalable, both vertically as well as horizontally.

            How is customer service and technical support?

            I have used technical support a lot. A lot of times, it is 10/10; sometimes 8/10; sometimes 5/10. That's how I would evaluate it.

            We have a good partnership and we get a lot of good support from our IBM sales partners and through our PMR support, but occasionally we run into certain issues where I'll evaluate it a little lower.

            How was the initial setup?

            I was not involved in the initial setup of FileNet at my current organization, but in the past I have and we are right now, as I’ve mentioned, working on a road map and that will require a setup of FileNet in the organization.

            From when I set it up in the past, while not exactly straightforward, if the methodology is followed, it is pretty streamlined and not so complex.

            What other advice do I have?

            It does most of the things that an ECM platform can do.

            In the future road map, we are looking at mobile, the cloud, and those kind of things. We plan to use mobile in 2018. First, we want to try out search and retrieval with Content Navigator, possibly, and maybe through DataCap Mobile. Either one of them would be the first.

            We’re also considering employing IBM cloud solutions at some point, but there are certain regulations and compliance that we have to factor in before we can do that. But we're thinking in that direction.

            Cloud gives us benefits; for example, the infrastructure will be handled more efficiently. The cost can be reduced. We are also looking for a partner. It will also provide a partner who can manage our lower infrastructure rather than us having to keep upgrading ourselves and putting in those patches and stuff like that.

            There aren’t yet any new analytics or content management services that we're now able to provide for our organization, but we were looking at those at conference, looking for cognitive solutions for Case Manager and DataCap. And we'll see an opportunity there.

            We are actually at the onset of a transformation. We are looking at services we have not yet provided. We are looking at those opportunities as we do, what we are calling, our ECM transformation starting next year.

            With the new Content Navigator platform, the usability has become a lot better and it has become integrated. I think it's becoming better with the new mobile integration; it's getting better and better.

            When selecting a vendor to work with, the most important criteria for me are scalability, security, and that we also have strategic partnership with the vendor, somebody who can meet our roadmap objectives.

            Disclosure: I am a real user, and this review is based on my own experience and opinions.
            it_user543249
            Solution Architect with 1,001-5,000 employees
            Vendor
            With Case Manager, nothing is left where it won't be found down the road. Usability could be better.

            What is most valuable?

            We use the Case Manager component of FileNet, itself. It helps with the business process, mainly; incoming documents; and then collaboration of the underwriters or adjusters. Besides that, we consolidate all documents within FileNet, so nothing is going to be left on a file share or somewhere that is not going to be found down the road. It's very important for the company to have something like that in place, to control every asset of the documents within the enterprise.

            How has it helped my organization?

            Documents used to be everywhere; anybody's desktop or shared file systems. Now, everything is in one location and people can share or view the same document at the same time, without waiting for each other to finish a folder, paper or document, to go ahead and work on them again. Basically, that's it. You can have many people using the same document at the same time, sharing it without any problem; annotating on them, if need be; having it all in one place; and being easily accessible.

            What needs improvement?

            I would rate it higher if they improved the usability, because as a product, it went through iterations and things like that. If it was supposed to be a perfect product, Content Navigator would have been developed earlier, so that people would have been using the system much, much better. We still have lots of customers that are used to using XT; migrating them from one environment to another always causes issues. Training them again on the new product for the same backend, for the same solution, that always creates some issues. It's the response from the customers, mainly; the end users. When there's a change, there is always resentment. You have to deal with all of those things.

            It would have been better if things were what they are today five years ago or seven years ago. The product could have matured quicker.

            Because it's a content management solution, they could start providing an analytics component on it. They already have the content, so they could start adding components. Usually, they rely on third-party or external products to do those things. If they start doing the analytics, that would make it easier for me, instead of implementing other products, but I guess that's the trend now. You have to go with that. It's something that we don't currently have that I would like.

            The way I see it, IBM is going more towards cloud-based solutions; more towards Box being a content management solution for the cloud. Even with the delay, how that's going to fit with the Case Manager, I don't know. I don't know what the future is going to be for content management.

            They could have done things differently or better. No product is perfect 100% of the time.

            What do I think about the stability of the solution?

            It is stable. We have no major issues.

            What do I think about the scalability of the solution?

            It's an enterprise solution. Everybody, from coast to coast, is using it. It's not only departmental or one geographical area. It's enterprise, coast to coast, and it’s being used.

            What other advice do I have?

            My advice wouldn’t be positive because, as I see it, everything is going cloud-based. Everything is going in a direction where content management is becoming like the database products used to be 10 years ago; they are in the back room and nobody knows about them anymore. They do their job, day in and day out, but they are in the dark now. That's the trend I'm seeing with the content management. They're going to go in the back room and nobody's going to be dealing with them. They will just sit there and do their job; collect the content and then do nothing else. That's where it's going.

            Just because it's not sexy doesn't mean it's not good. Everything runs on the databases but they just sit there; nobody cares about them anymore. The same thing goes for content management. That's my impression. That's my gut feeling about what's going to happen.

            We're looking into the IBM Box solution, for cloud collaboration with external vendors, external users and external suppliers. That would make it easier for them to come in, send documents or upload documents, without having to go through emails, which is currently the case. It makes the work process easier, document management easier.

            As far as new analytics or content management services that we are now able to provide our organization, we are doing some proof of concepts but nothing in production yet; mainly content analytics, not streams or anything that's coming in from other sources. We're doing analytics on the content that we already have. We're looking into the sentiment part of the documents that are coming in, to see if it’s something people are going to be using, or to escalate it to be looked into right away, or it's something that anyone can view anytime they want; there's no urgency on it.

            Regarding existing services that we're able to provide better than before, it's easier to respond to documents that are coming in or are requested; coming in from brokers, for example. It's easier to work on them. It's faster to work on them. Turnaround time used to be two or three days; now, it's minutes or less than an hour.

            Mobile is probably going to be part of the Box solution coming in but nothing has been decided yet.

            As far as usability, it's user-friendly. Now that we're using Content Navigator, it's easier to use and easier to present it to the users. Training-wise, it's much easier because you teach them on one application so everybody knows how to use the next application that's going to come on as a solution. That's a plus.

            The most important criteria for me in selecting a vendor to work with is how accessible they are; how support is available, especially IT or technical support; and if we're doing development, how fast they're going to respond for problems that we encounter. Those are the things that are important.

            Since we implemented FileNet, the users are happy with the experience. The users are using it on a daily basis, especially when they don't deal with paper. Whenever they need, it’s there and they don't have to worry about paper. It helps them in their daily work and job.

            Disclosure: I am a real user, and this review is based on my own experience and opinions.
            it_user543228
            IT Professional 3 Filenet Administrator at State of Nevada
            Vendor
            Fast and stable. In one year, we have digitized and removed 8 million pieces of paper.

            What is most valuable?

            We recently upgraded to P8 Version 5.2.1. We find it to be incredibly stable at this point. We find it to be incredibly fast in our particular implementation.

            One of the best parts of it is definitely the stability. We have a lot of outside entities that attach to our FileNet infrastructure. Because a lot of it deals with court cases, it's absolutely vital that someone be able to access the information when they need to.

            How has it helped my organization?

            It has definitely made it easier to become a paperless organization. Just within the last year, we have removed eight million pieces of paper from within our organization and digitized it into our FileNet infrastructure.

            What needs improvement?

            Technical support is amazing. With our upgrade, it was massive project and I had to interact with three different IBM personnel. The wealth of knowledge that they were able to give me took so much of the hassle out of that implementation.

            With our new implementation of a database based ObjectStore, there is not a great deal of documentation in regard to installation/implementation of database based ObjectStores. I encountered quite a few issues with that particular ObjectStore that required a great deal of assistance from our DBAs to resolve. I was consistently referred to our DBAs to resolve database issues during the implementation, because the documentation should have been either more readily available or handled by whomever was handling the PMRs that were open in regard to it.

            What do I think about the scalability of the solution?

            It's just amazed me how we were able to scale it, the size of it and its stability going along with that size.

            How are customer service and technical support?

            Going forward, it could be made a little bit easier for the end user. We're a DB2 shop. Our implementation against DB2 could be a little bit cleaner in some ways. Not every shop is necessarily going to have a DBA in house that can handle those duties. In some of the FileNet implementation, I saw that there was a fair amount of database work that needed to be done and that wasn't clear at the outset.

            I felt that support often times “dropped the ball” during our implementation. I will add that other than the database related issues of our implementation, the support I was received was excellent. However, the database related support, or lack thereof, stands out.

            Which solution did I use previously and why did I switch?

            An older version of FileNet was already in place when I took over my position.

            How was the initial setup?

            It was a very complex installation and upgrade because it was a forklift upgrade, but IBM's assistance was invaluable.

            Which other solutions did I evaluate?

            When we decided to invest in the upgrade, no one else was considered, to my knowledge, because we were already on that path and we saw a lot of benefit to upgrading. It was a natural step to upgrade.

            In general, the most important criteria for me when selecting a vendor to work with are stability and excellent support. When something breaks for us, it affects thousands of users. It can cost us thousands of dollars and man hours. Since no product is fool proof, excellent support is an absolute must.

            What other advice do I have?

            I have a former colleague that works for another governmental organization and they are also a FileNet shop. They have a slightly different architecture than our own, but when he asked me about the particularity upgrade from 4.5 to 5.2.1, I did tell him it was completely worth it; that he'll have so many additional benefits into how he could manage his object stores and all of his data; and that it is completely and absolutely worth it.

            We would potentially consider employing IBM cloud, hybrid, or box solutions. We're trying to find other ways we can add to our FileNet implementation to better service our end clients.

            As far as new analytics or content management services that we are able to provide to our organization, we are looking at Case Manager and Box as additional implementations to our current FileNet instillation.

            There are most definitely existing services that we are now able to provide better than before. Our document imaging services are much more stable than they used to be, especially given our recent upgrade.

            Potentially, our plans could include mobile. We're trying to find every possible way to make it easier for our clients to interact with us.

            Regarding how our customers’ experiences has changed since implementation of the solution, there are far fewer calls from the field, from all of our users. The times we have had problems, it has not been FileNet related. It has usually been some other piece of our infrastructure that touches FileNet that might be developed third party or in house. Over the last six months, since our new implementation, none of those problems have been FileNet related at all.

            As far as FileNet’s usability, the new component, the ACCE, is a little slower compared to the old FEM, the FileNet Enterprise Manager tool. I see a little bit of room for improvement, especially in the area of searches. Overall, it is nice to have a web interface versus a client that has to be installed on a system.

            In some areas, the usability could be a little bit smoother, especially for someone that is not an active developer or a database administrator. Other than that, we're really happy with the product.

            Disclosure: I am a real user, and this review is based on my own experience and opinions.
            it_user543219
            Software Engineer at a aerospace/defense firm with 1,001-5,000 employees
            Real User
            Is unlimited as far as size and file types that we manage

            What is most valuable?

            FileNet is very robust and it’s scalable. It's unlimited as far as size and file types that we manage. It's very accessible. It really works for us, for what we use it for.

            How has it helped my organization?

            In ECM, the M is management. Before, we didn't really manage very well. We had shares with files stuck over here; a laptop with some important files on it over here that are important to our enterprise. FileNet has allowed us to have a true enterprise system for all of our employees, customers and so on.

            What needs improvement?

            I would like to see a hybrid cloud, where we could have a cloud solution behind our firewall and use the benefits of the cloud without exposing it to the outside world. I would like a private cloud in conjunction with an external-facing cloud, like the box solution that they're talking about now. We don't have that right now.

            We have a different use-case for our ECM solutions than most. We are a government lab with high security requirements. I probably would never house much of our data on an external cloud. The access that administrators would have to data does not meet our security requirements (i.e., Security Clearance for the US Government and ‘need-to-know’ requirements). However, I feel that cloud technology is a much better way to secure and share data. I would like to utilize cloud technology that we could implement on our own servers behind our firewall in conjunction with an external cloud for storing data outside our firewall or maybe in a DMZ to enable collaboration with our sister labs and customers in the government and industry.

            What do I think about the stability of the solution?

            It's very stable.

            What do I think about the scalability of the solution?

            Scalability is unlimited; it really is.

            How is customer service and technical support?

            Technical support is good. We rely on them a lot. We think of them as a partner. They're excellent, for the most part. We've had a few times when we were stuck and never had a solution. It was because we were way outdated on our system. For the most part, IBM, they're good. They're really good.

            What other advice do I have?

            I have given it a high rating because we've analyzed other systems; compared everything out there. We do that because our CIO's office wanted us to. There just isn't anything better out there for what we use it for, for ECM.

            The most important criteria for me when selecting a vendor to work with is that they deliver what they promise; not just a white paper but actually implemented it and it's working. If they do what they say, I think that's most important.

            Disclosure: I am a real user, and this review is based on my own experience and opinions.
            it_user543225
            IT Manager at a financial services firm with 1,001-5,000 employees
            Vendor
            We are re-engineering our business process from manual work to automation. We are not using DataCap because of unreliability.

            What is most valuable?

            Right now, we're trying to roll out our automation to our branches. It's very, very important for us to do the re-engineering our business process right now from manual to automation. That's pretty much the most important feature.

            Automation is one of the best parts of FileNet; second, of course, is the repository being able to actually archive all our documents in there; and then, records management, which we implemented about a year ago.

            How has it helped my organization?

            There are some tangible and intangible benefits. The tangible part is the cost savings and all that; the intangible is making everything more efficient, and being able to access the documents across the board, anywhere in our bank.

            What needs improvement?

            I've been working with our business partner on what we can improve, more on the presentation layer, on our content, as well as being able to provide us with more recommendations when it comes to how we apply the technology such as DataCap or Case Manager into our business right now. We're not quite getting that on the presentation level, because we need someone who will be able to present to us the latest and the greatest when it comes to technology, when it comes to ECM, so that we could present it to our business and say, “Hey, we have this.”

            We're in our baby steps on this. After we have implemented a solution, we do a review and see how we can make it efficient. In that respect, I’ve mentioned the presentation. We're in banking, so there's a huge need to be able to see our search results and images, rather than just a text result panel. We're implementing that right now. I know ICN just came out about a couple of years ago. I wish they were fast enough to develop APIs for that. The presentation site that we use through our business partner is not quite developed yet. I wish that was developed already. I think the responsibility for that falls on both IBM and our business partner, but more on our business partner.

            There's always a need for improvement. As I’ve mentioned, I wish the ICN part that our business partner is actually developing right now was already complete because we ended up purchasing an application that sucks. We're looking to replace it with the ICN.

            I might give it a perfect rating if I was able to use DataCap as promised, definitely.

            What do I think about the stability of the solution?

            It is actually very stable. As of right now, the only negative feedback I have is on the capture piece, the DataCap part. We have actually piloted that. It didn't quite work out. I’m kind of hesitant to use the DataCap technology because of the unreliability. However, I heard that the current version is actually more reliable.

            What do I think about the scalability of the solution?

            It is definitely scalable. Right now, we're planning to move most of our departments over and I don't see any issues at all, infrastructure-wise, being able to accommodate most of our departments.

            How is customer service and technical support?

            We have a business partner that we go through, and then to IBM. The technical support we receive through our business partner is excellent. We have very good relationship with them. They provide and recommend solutions to us and how to make our setup more efficient. If we have a business case, we're set up to go.

            What other advice do I have?

            Do your research. Don't listen to the vendors all the time. Make sure you have a reference about using the technology and are able to get feedback from those customers.

            The most important criteria for me when selecting a vendor to work with are knowledge, being able to support us and availability.

            As far as I know, we do not have any plans to consider IBM for cloud, hybrid or box solutions.

            Regarding new analytics or content management services that we are now able to provide to my organization, we haven't really gotten that far. We're taking our steps slowly, right now, because we are just trying to convert all of our departments into ECM.

            Automation and capture were existing services that we are now definitely able to provide better than before.

            We have plans to include mobile. That was the reason I attended a session on it at a recent IBM World of Watson conference. We're not sure yet how we're going leverage the mobility part. I just wanted to see what technology we need. According to their content, it looks like we have it; I just wanted to see how they use it.
            Usability is excellent. The API website that we're using right now has everything. It's really good because it presents all the functionalities that we need in order to search and retrieve documents, as well as in workflow.

            The feedback has always been positive regarding changes to our internal and external customers’ experience since implementing FileNet. A lot of our businesses right now are going to the next level; meaning, automating their business process right now and being able to use e-signatures and all that; integrating with FileNet.

            Disclosure: I am a real user, and this review is based on my own experience and opinions.
            it_user543240
            ECM Administrator III, Enterprise Content Management at a insurance company with 1,001-5,000 employees
            Vendor
            We run workflows on items and content in the storage. I'd like to have SQL 2014 support.

            What is most valuable?

            The Workflow feature is the most valuable feature of FileNet, and then the content management and storage. These give users the ability to quickly store items, retrieve items, and then run workflows on the items and the content in the storage.

            How has it helped my organization?

            It's made using the wealth of the content a lot better; a lot faster for users.

            What needs improvement?

            One of the things I'd like to get installed is the Content Navigator. That offers a little bit more scalability for the users. It's not as clunky. It's a little bit more user friendly, with anything that reduces the number of clicks the user needs to get to the content.

            Right now, I'd like to get upgraded to the 5.2.1 environment. We're kind of behind the curve on that with the rest of the country. I know you don't need the 5.2.1 environment to employ the Content Navigator. You can deploy it with 5.1, but it is something that we're going to move forward with.

            One thing I'd like to have is SQL 2014, but we really can't move to that until we're on 5.2.1. Our current version doesn’t integrate with it.

            What do I think about the stability of the solution?

            It's very good. It's very stable. It's just like anything else; it's built up on the foundations. As long as your foundations are strong and sturdy, the application's fine.

            What do I think about the scalability of the solution?

            Scalability-wise, it's incredible, especially if you deploy it either on a WebSphere or application server. You can build it as big and as small as you need it to be.

            How is customer service and technical support?

            Technical support is very good, as long as you're providing the information. If they slack a little bit, just make sure you give them a call and remind them that it's an important issue to you.

            How was the initial setup?

            I was not involved in the initial setup, but I was involved in subsequent upgrades, rollouts, improvements, moving to different configurations with fixed content devices and using Hitachi content platforms and SAN units. Those were a little complex; the more pieces you put into a puzzle. That was more on your end; making sure that the third-party apps work with the P8 system.

            What other advice do I have?

            I have recommended FileNet to friends of mine at other companies.

            Make sure you know what you want to do with it, how you're going to do it, and plan.
            Nothing's perfect, but it's very good. It's above average.

            I might give it a higher rating if it cost less; as with anything else, licensing is an issue. Anything with business boils down to money.

            With anything, the most important criteria for me when selecting a vendor to work with is cost, system stability, features, and different components and third-party apps that'll work with it, for any company that has existing storage and hardware.

            It’s possible that we would consider using IBM in cloud, hybrid, or box solutions. We are looking at cheaper ways to store items; faster retrieval. Maybe in the future, making the items more cognitive; getting the wealth from the data, the value that we have in the data.

            At this moment, I don't have any plans to include mobile.

            I'm not sure if there any new analytics or content management services we're able to provide for our organization. I'm not in that position, so I really can't answer.

            There are existing services we're now able to provide better than before: quicker response to customers in the data center, when they call in, to answer questions about forms and medical records that they've received from us.

            The usability is great. It's not difficult at all.

            Disclosure: I am a real user, and this review is based on my own experience and opinions.
            it_user543255
            Senior Director, Retail Operations, ECM and Forms Technology at a financial services firm with 1,001-5,000 employees
            Vendor
            We use FileNet to pull out all of the customer-related content for a particular customer.

            What is most valuable?

            The most valuable feature of FileNet is the storageand records management capability. It allows us to records manage our content properly.

            How has it helped my organization?

            It's allowed us to consolidate content all in one spot, to make it easier to pull out all of the customer-related content for a single customer. We provide better service to the customers. It can be more efficient, if they're not looking in various places.

            What needs improvement?

            We've talked a bit about Content Navigator on top of it; some improvements there right now. We use a customized viewer, because ICN doesn't have a couple of features we need around security, restricting content; who can see what content within the repository. We want to roll that out.

            We’re also looking at other solutions that work with FileNet. It's a pretty bulletproof back-end solution, but we want to look at what else can we use, the cognitive and so on.

            It’s lacking from our standpoint. We haven't done it. There have been different priorities. With things like box and so on, they're rising to the top because we need those types of solutions to go with the mobile or with the customer interactions.

            What do I think about the stability of the solution?

            It's been great; very stable; very few issues.

            What do I think about the scalability of the solution?

            No scalability problems at all.

            How is customer service and technical support?

            We have not used technical support, because we have an IBM service team that we use directly. They're not the actual tech support guys, but we do have an IBM team that does a great job.

            What's my experience with pricing, setup cost, and licensing?

            I do not find it particularly expensive. We're having some discussions around licensing for external customers, and some of the licensing seems pretty expensive; the records management piece of it that's layered on top. You can get enterprise agreements on that sometimes. For smaller companies, it might be a pretty big ticket, though. If you're smaller, cost-wise, maybe it's not something you need.

            What other advice do I have?

            If a colleague asked me for advice, from my standpoint, I'd certainly recommend FileNet as an option. I'd want to understand what else they're running, because it depends on what else is integrating with it; do they have workflow, do they have capture, what is it, how well does it play in the sandbox with FileNet? From what I understand, almost every vendor I talk to has out-of-the-box connectors for FileNet, which tells you it's a pretty big solution.

            Relationship is the most important criteria for me when selecting a vendor to work with. How do they react to problems? You don't expect no problems; you know you're going to have problems. It's about the reaction to them; how fast are they, how quickly can they get it done, what do they do to address the root cause, and so on; being more of a partner than a vendor.

            Also, with working on new solutions, helping me identify what's out there in the market, not just their solutions. I have a big Kofax deployment, and IBM supports us having that. They are not trying to sell us DataCap, because they know we have Kofax. It makes sense, so they support that decision. They integrate well. We have an internal layer that's in between; it's not a native integration. We built something in between, unfortunately; that just complicates integrations. It's another layer, something else that can break. It's customized for us. We're not quite sure why it does that. I think it's because, if we ever went away from FileNet, we wouldn't necessarily have to change the front-end applications, but we have no plans to do that.

            We are considering employing IBM box solutions. Right now, IBM hosts our FileNet for us, but we're looking at box as a potential option, so that we can interact with external customers, without having them get into our firewalls, mainly.

            Right now, there aren’t any new analytics or content management services that we're now able to provide for your organization. At a recent World of Watson conference, we were looking at some of the solutions. We have Cognos running, but we're now starting to look at the more advanced solutions.

            It’s hard to say whether there are any existing services that we're able to provide better now than before because of the implementation of FileNet. I’m not sure.

            As far as how the experiences of your internal or external customers changed since we implemented FileNet, we implemented it a long time ago, so that’s hard to answer. Nonetheless, as we've gone along, customers will see slower but steady progress in terms of knowing more about them and being able to retrieve the documents. We used to have a big problem with not finding a customer's document, often. FileNet makes it easier to find, so it gives the customer more confidence.

            We've launched mobile applications. Most of the launches so far have not used FileNet, because the deployment of the app was the most important thing. They didn't do a proper back end solution, and now they're following up for the proper back end. They’re catching up, but we'd like to get to a point where we're deploying with them upfront.

            I'm not that close to FileNet, but I haven't heard anything negative about its usability.
            It's been a really solid product. I've only had this area for about a year, but it's been a really good product; very few problems. We’ve had some technical production issues, that might have to do less with the product, and more about how it's deployed, but nothing major; enough that I haven’t given it a perfect rating. I'm not sure I'd give anything a perfect rating.

            Disclosure: I am a real user, and this review is based on my own experience and opinions.
            it_user543252
            ECM Architecture Manager at a financial services firm with 501-1,000 employees
            Real User
            It supplies us with a system of record that's well supported. We're applying a real taxonomy to our environment.

            What is most valuable?

            The most valuable features of FileNet are the document management, records management, and integration with other solutions. We want a system of record and that's what it supplies us with, a system of record that's well supported.

            How has it helped my organization?

            It's given us the ability to organize and apply an actual system of record to it, so that we're tracking and making sure that things are disposed of when they need to be. We know where things are. We're applying a real taxonomy to our environment. We're taking many disparate systems and merging them all into one system, and it's now our system of record.

            What needs improvement?

            I would like to see more integration with other solutions, such as SharePoint; that would be a key one. IBM knows that we want that. Integrations with that and other solutions, in general – other records management solutions, other document management solutions, including those from competitors; that is key for us. While we're trying to coalesce everybody into one system, for the most part, there are other systems that we still have. We still need the connectors to go out to them and connect up everything.

            Also, their integration between their own products, such as Watson; things like the Content Collectors and so forth. It would be much better if they made all that work seamlessly together. We've had some troubles with FileNet working with Content Collector, working with Watson and working with Classification. You would think that these things would work seamlessly together but the bridges aren't there. All of the connections aren't in place. It's taking time for that to happen.

            What do I think about the stability of the solution?

            One of the key reasons why we went with FileNet is how stable it was. We're very happy with the stability of it.

            What do I think about the scalability of the solution?

            Scalability-wise, we're really happy with that, as well. It's a system that we built with scalability in mind. We went highly available with it and we know exactly how to branch out for every single node that we want, every component that we've got.

            How are customer service and technical support?

            We have used technical support quite a bit. We're heavily engaged with the Lab Services on a regular basis. We have a lot of enhancement requests that are going out and so forth, and IBM has been very responsive to us.

            Which solution did I use previously and why did I switch?

            We had a lot of different systems. We wanted an industry leader. At that point in time, they were one of the top ones in the Magic Quadrant from Gartner or Forrester. We did look into this with Gartner and Forrester. We tried to stay as neutral as possible in this decision, and we were looking at several different companies. They just worked their way up to the top, eventually.

            We were a very siloed organization. We had different systems in different regions and so forth. It was very difficult to find information, so we knew we needed one. We also knew that there were new government regulations on how we handled our records, and we needed to have something that we could really leverage to facilitate all of that.

            The most important criteria for me when selecting a vendor to work with has to do with the size of the organization; what they're able to bring to the table, as far as the number of people and so on. We've dealt with small groups, where there's 1-2 people working for a company. That can make it difficult for us. It's the personnel, the power of the people that they can bring. That's really critical for us.

            Also, experience, obviously; that they know what they're doing. I've also dealt with vendors where they come in and they learn with us. When we started with our implementation, ICM was brand new. When we were sitting down with our vendor, we realized quickly the vendor was learning it as we went. So, having some experience with the product is obviously key.

            We're a pseudo-governmental organization and that means that we're a slow ship to turn. The decision-making progress takes a long time. There are a lot of different policies and procedures that are in place to gate us as we go through that process. It just naturally takes us a long time to get through it. From strategy, through an RFP, to getting to the point where we made a purchase, it probably took two years.

            We did not really think about building an in-house solution. There are components of this that you could probably do on your own. We looked at things like platforms such as SharePoint and so on, and realized that there were limitations. That's why we wanted an enterprise leader; something that's already pre-built that we didn't have to build from the ground up and support. That's not to say that we won't build certain things going out. We've looked at connectors and what we want out of those connector products and we've toiled with the idea of actually building it from the ground up ourselves.

            How was the initial setup?

            In addition to myself, we also brought in others who have consultant experience, so we knew how to do this from the ground up. If you threw someone new into it, it's very complex, very difficult to do, but since we had lots of experience, we knew what we were doing. It was still complex; not an easy thing to do. You have to have some people with some pretty decent experience to build it up; not only that, but also understand how your customers are actually going to use it. It's one thing to build up a foundation that they can use, it's another thing to make sure it actually does what their business needs.

            What other advice do I have?

            Really listen to your customer, your users, and what they need. Understand what they need from a records management perspective and what they're going to be migrating from and coming into this with. With these solutions, there are a lot of dials to play with and some of them handle that better than others.

            It's a very stable platform. It's obviously a leader. When used properly and the customers understand what it's to be used for, it's an excellent product. Whether or not it's as customizable and user friendly, that's where it starts to drop a little bit as far as I'm concerned. When you compare it to the flexibility and what users can do with SharePoint or some of the competing products like OpenText and so on, it seems like there's a little bit more flexibility on the user side for them to do more with those than what you can with FileNet when it comes out of the box. Now, I do understand, IBM is changing that. That's the reason behind my rating.

            We are considering employing IBM on cloud, hybrid or box solutions; a little bit of everything. The box solution is a nice way for us to work with outside agencies such as banks and so on, when we do reviews of them and so forth. We would look at the cloud for development systems and things of that nature. I don't see us moving any of our production-level data out to the cloud at this point in time. An in-house cloud, that's different, perhaps.

            We’re now able to provide analytics and content management services for my organization that we weren’t able to provide before, because we didn't really have a complete system before we had this system. We're now a records management system for a central bank.

            Document management is probably the key existing service that we're now able to provide better than before. As I’ve mentioned, we had disparate systems, many different search engines to find all that data and now we're all kind of coalescing into one.

            We have plans to include mobile. It's a little bit further out and, being a central bank, we have some restrictions as far as what we can do on mobile devices and what they can do to access their network. That makes mobile difficult.

            The experiences of our internal customers have changed quite a bit since implementing FileNet. As I’ve mentioned, they've got one area to go to find all their data. For the customers that are using it, they like that quite a bit. Being able to leverage new workflows to improve their business processes is fantastic. As far as external customers, we haven't allowed anybody external. We have no external access to it. That's where we might use something like box down the road.

            There's an ebb and flow to usability, as far as what you're willing to customize on the user front end. Coming out of the box, it's difficult to say that it's very usable for customers until you get in and really start customizing it for their needs and understanding how they're going to use it in their day-to-day practice. ICM out of the box is OK from a document management perspective, but it's very generic and it needs to be ironed out and customized. I'm not referring to custom coding, but really going in and tweaking the settings to facilitate what the customers want.

            Disclosure: I am a real user, and this review is based on my own experience and opinions.
            it_user543243
            IT Manager at a financial services firm with 1,001-5,000 employees
            Vendor
            Provides flexibility with ingesting content, storing content, metadata, and security.

            What is most valuable?

            FileNet gives a lot of flexibility to the different problems we run into within our environment. It gives us flexibilities for ingest in multiple different ways of different products in order to store the content in FileNet P8, as well as flexibility of where we want to store it; the flexibility of creating metadata associated with your documents. It helps in the metadata, as well the security aspects as well. The flexibility is really the biggest advantage, I feel.

            How has it helped my organization?

            It helps put structure around unstructured content. Having the structure there makes it easier for people to find their content, in many different ways, whether it's in a mortgage space or some sort of other space. It gives us the ability to unify all the content and makes it easier to find.

            What needs improvement?

            Over the years, it's actually improved quite a bit. I do like what they are putting into the product itself. Previously, your process engines and all these different components were outside of the actual FileNet Content Manager product and now more of that is coming internal to it; that makes it easier to deploy. I like the fact that it's easier to deploy; upgrades are much easier.

            From an improvement perspective, one of the things we often have challenges with is, within the FileNet product, changing properties or just general configurations within the product to support a business. That's been one of our biggest challenges, to automate that and make that an automated deployment, rather than somebody having to go in all of the time and click on the button to make that configuration. More automation in that area would probably be one area I would like to see.

            For how long have I used the solution?

            I've worked with the FileNet product for over eight years.

            What do I think about the stability of the solution?

            I feel it's very stable. I've never had any real challenges with it.

            What do I think about the scalability of the solution?

            It gives us flexibility to expand it and grow it and scale it really simply.

            How are customer service and technical support?

            I've always had a great experience with technical support. I've used them enough that I know most of the tech support people by name. The good feeling is, yes, they recognize you as well and they understand your experience and where you are coming from. They are easy to work with, to get on the phone. Having that phone conversation usually speeds up the resolution time quite a bit.

            Which solution did I use previously and why did I switch?

            We were previously using an earlier version of FileNet.

            We were looking for the next generation, where we were. We had used FileNet Image Services, and we still use FileNet Image Services, but we were trying to move on, grow and get into newer technologies. That's part of the decision to do that as our strategy to move forward.

            How was the initial setup?

            The product itself, I wouldn't say it was complex to set up. It was to integrate it within our environment’s current systems. Not every environment was ready to go or integrate into a FileNet product like that when we first implemented it. Eventually, we worked with IBM, we found the right solutions, had to make some product changes at the time and it worked out just fine.

            Which other solutions did I evaluate?

            We reviewed different vendors that we had worked with. Our organization is quite large, so we had multiple, different types of products where we are. Everything was analyzed, and we came to the decision to move on with FileNet. I think it has to do with the supportability. With our organization being large and IBM being large, they are able to support the types of volumes and types of challenges that we have. That played a lot into it, along with the fact that we do have some other IBM products already. That worked out well.

            The most important criteria for me when selecting a vendor to work with is having that ability to contact them easily and communicate our challenges because you always have to have that open dialogue and collaborate and understand our challenges so they can suggest improvements for us. There might be something we have to change as a client of IBM but we have to have that collaboration in there so that we can get that done.

            It was probably a year-long decision-making process, to fully go through it, because of the size of our environment. One of the key factors to actually move forward was the fact that IBM was able to change some of their connectors that work with our environment. If that wouldn't have happened, it might have been a different decision. Knowing that they were able to make some adjustments to the product; that helped.

            In the content management space, we probably did not think too much about building a solution in house. That’s not something that we would typically do in our environment. If there is a product that does it, we tend to lean towards the product.

            What other advice do I have?

            You have to look at the requirements you have for your business. Then, based on those requirements, look at your options. Look at the different vendors and different products and make sure you are making the right decision for your requirements in your organization, because the skillset of your organization is key, too. You have to have the support within your organization to have support for the product, whether it's the FileNet solution or some other solution.

            My rating reflects the fact that there is always room for improvement. The product is very good; its stable; its served us very well for 8+ years, but there is always room for improvement. The technologies and the industry changes; having that flexibility. As long as the product keeps improving, it will continue to be a great product. I’m not sure I would give anything a perfect rating because there is always room for improvement. As far as what might earn it a perfect rating, I would almost have to use Watson to think into the future to tell me what I don't already know.

            We've been looking at ways to analyze content that’s at rest or been sitting on file shares, SharePoint sites and different areas within the bank that people might not be aware of or don't really know how to classify it, and using different IBM tools in order to do that.

            As far as existing services that we are now able to provide better than before, in general, it’s the find-ability for our content; exposing more of our web services to different applications that we support with our environment; give them that flexibility so they can actually find the content.

            Regarding usability, I hesitate to describe it as simplistic, but it is simplistic, yet it can be complex if you need it to be. You can keep it simple if you need to keep it simple but yet, if you need a little bit more complexity in your business requirements, it's there and it's available.

            For internal customers, I think the experience has changed a lot. FileNet has made it much simpler for our clients to get to their content. They understand that it's one place, now they know how to find it and it's more repetitive, rather than trying to search this way here and another way somewhere else. It's improved from a time perspective for clients, with our basically internal associates, to find content. It’s a great time saver.

            We are not considering using or employing IBM on cloud, hybrid or box solutions at this time.

            We do not have any plans to include mobile at this time.

            Disclosure: I am a real user, and this review is based on my own experience and opinions.
            it_user543279
            Architect Integrator at a financial services firm with 201-500 employees
            Vendor
            We can attach all documents related to transactions that we want to manage. We don't have any experience with ECM analytics.

            What is most valuable?

            The most valuable feature of FileNet is the capability to manage a large number of various documents, dynamic documents. In our case, we are using mostly transactional documents. It provides the ability to attach all documents related to transactions that we want to manage and provides guaranteed support to the transactional aspect with unstructured content.

            How has it helped my organization?

            It supports and provides the capability to expose content to line-of-business applications.

            FileNet is mostly internal for us. It is very interesting because it is providing capabilities that, in the past, we would have had to retrieve boxes of paper documents, and so on. It's easier. We are in the process of straight-through processing and the digitalization of processes. Of course, content is a major part of that. We definitely want to investigate that and leverage content into transactional and improvement of processes.

            What needs improvement?

            I would like to use the analytics features more. That's part of the solution; it's already there. However, for the ECM part, we don't have any experience with the analytics. That's something we can envision and would like to consider integrating into the solution. However, at this time, it's not part of it. It’s definitely something we're looking for to provide value and more intricate information that we cannot consider with the basic connection process.

            When we compare it to other vendors, there are some capabilities that we might improve.

            We have some applications that we can build on and an API is also available; that gives us some capabilities.

            What do I think about the stability of the solution?

            We don't have any stability concerns for FileNet. IBM manages it on our site. IBM is our outsourcer. Stability’s OK on the site. We don't have major failures, or anything like that. We are considering a different approach for DR. But otherwise, it's okay.

            What do I think about the scalability of the solution?

            Scalability’s something that we want to consider. With the cloud offering, that's something that we can definitely leverage. In terms of scalability, cloud offers us something good and new. We discovered at a recent conference that IBM has an interesting cloud offering.

            How is customer service and technical support?

            We have not used IBM technical support for FileNet.

            How was the initial setup?

            Initial setup was done a long time ago. I was not at the company at that time.

            What other advice do I have?

            The cloud could be really interesting, as soon as you don't have any constraints regarding the regulatory aspect, sovereignty, and so on. We have some IBMers in charge of operations, upgrades and reliability of the environment; I think that's very interesting.

            A hybrid solution could be something that we can consider. We have some regulatory concerns. Because it's mostly sensitive information that we have on our repositories, we need to find ways to securely involve cloud capabilities. That's something we need to consider but, of course, we are interested.

            There are no new analytics or content management services that we're able to provide for your organization, yet, but I'd like to have some more, mostly for the capture part of the process. I'd like to have some more analytics capabilities to classify or extract content, and to structure content from the unstructured content.

            We have plans to include mobile as well; that is part of it. We have a few line-of-business applications, so we need to consider it as an integration. It's mostly for supporting documents that we want, too. The IBM Box offering could be something that we can leverage.

            With all applications that we are using, we are going to leverage Content Navigator. That's one thing that's very interesting. Case Manager, Datacap, and all of those products are interesting.

            The most important criteria for me when selecting a vendor to work with are robustness, the fact that they understand our business, they are willing to accompany us with various strategies and various solutions we can implement; not only with IBM solution, but with third parties as well.

            Disclosure: I am a real user, and this review is based on my own experience and opinions.
            it_user543273
            Solutions Architect at a financial services firm with 1,001-5,000 employees
            Vendor
            Does not require a lot of custom coding.

            What is most valuable?

            The most valuable feature of FileNet is its out-of-the-box functionality; not a lot of custom coding that has to happen for the solution to work.

            How has it helped my organization?

            We have access to all the documents that we need. We have all kinds of documents. We have access to all of those documents from anywhere within the organization. With Navigator, it is essentially browser-based access.

            What needs improvement?

            They are already working on the areas with room improvement. It's being accomplished now. There's FileNet Enterprise Manager, affectionately known as FEM, which has functionality that is not completely in ACE yet. I know they're working on getting all of the functionality from that tool into the ACE tool. There are certain functions that we still go back into FEM to accomplish. They've been working on it. Each one of the releases, they include more of the functionality. That's the roadmap: to get rid of the FEM and have all the functionality in ACE.

            What do I think about the stability of the solution?

            It is very stable. We have had no outages. We've had planned outages, as far as upgrading. That's another benefit; we've found upgrades to be quite simple, quite easy. Even now, with the latest versions, we can do that without taking the system completely down. That's partly because of WebSphere, which allows us to upgrade on the fly. That is important to us.

            What do I think about the scalability of the solution?

            There are no scalability limits. The scalability is everything that we've needed.

            How are customer service and technical support?

            We have used technical support. During the initial launch, there were a few issues, I guess, with the multi-value fields, but they were resolved fairly quickly.

            Technical support was not excellent, but very good.

            Which solution did I use previously and why did I switch?

            We were previously using other ECM systems in the corporation. There still are, but there's a standardization going on towards the FileNet, the P8.

            How was the initial setup?

            Initial setup is somewhat complex, especially if you've had no exposure to it previously, but it wasn't a terrible task. It was doable.

            Which other solutions did I evaluate?

            There was Documentum, and we still have a limited Documentum installation. There really weren't many others in the running.

            One of the reasons we eventually chose the IBM solution was the peer reviews, as well as from Gartner, industry reviews; peer reviews from other, not necessarily banking customers, but other customers in our area. They have FileNet P8 installations and have had good experience with that.

            We encountered these reviews by word-of-mouth, associations, networking with these other companies; that proved very beneficial to us. A good recommendation from somebody that's already using the product is worth a lot.

            The decision-making process lasted a number of months, not years. One of the factors that expedited that process were the good reviews or good experiences by others that proved to be helpful to us.

            In general, the most important criteria for me when selecting a vendor to work with are reliability and the customer service being able to respond to our requests. That's important. Then, we don't like to be on the leading edge of technology, but certainly have the capability to stay current with changes, the technology. We've seen that with the HTML5 viewer that was incorporated into Navigator. We went to that immediately, as soon as it was available.

            What other advice do I have?

            Try it out. Test it out. Put it on the top of your list. It should be at the top of your consideration list.

            The ease-of-use is important, and for us, we didn't have to customize a whole lot, or anything, really. We just had to configure, and that's always real important.
            It is very intuitive. I don't find any of it hard to use. Our experience in rolling it out to our customers is that it's very intuitive. They didn't have a hard time finding what they needed to do their job, and finding it much quicker than previously, too.

            Employing IBM on cloud is tough for us because of all of the security and regulatory requirements around the banking or financial industry. We're looking at it but we're not making the jump. We’re looking at it for various reasons. Part of it is not having to deal with the on-premise headaches, I'll call them.

            We haven't deployed much of the analytics, but it does open the door for us to be able to provide new analytics services for my organization.

            There are existing services we're able to provide better now than we were before, especially in the display of the documents. We're using the virtual viewer in Navigator, which was a big plus for us. No longer do we have to worry about which Java version is deployed here and there, and throughout the West. The HTML5 viewer has been a plus for us.

            As far as how the experiences of our internal and/or external customers changed since implementing FileNet, there was somewhat of a learning curve from the old way that they displayed or got at their information, got at the documents, to the new way, but it was a short curve. It was pretty intuitive. Doing the search and then displaying the document is pretty simple.

            At a recent conference, I sat through a session with mobile. We don't have the right use case yet, but there's interest in that.

            Disclosure: I am a real user, and this review is based on my own experience and opinions.
            it_user543285
            Vice President, Enterprise Architecture & Strategic Initiatives at a pharma/biotech company with 1,001-5,000 employees
            Vendor
            A large vendor solution. It is robust and stable.

            What is most valuable?

            We use FileNet as an unstructured content repository today. About six, seven years ago, we also used it as a case management solution but we don't use it as a case management solution anymore. We use it primarily as a content repository. We like the fact that it is a large vendor solution. It is robust and stable; hardly comes down. One of the challenges we face is finding qualified personnel to take care of the upkeep of the solution but, other than that, it's serviced very well.

            How has it helped my organization?

            It has actually simplified some of our business processes that rely on unstructured data. We are in the health care business, so centralized storing and management of unstructured data allows the different business processes to go to the same single source of truth for that information. For example, we process claims. We also have to answer questions at the contact center on the claims that we've processed. If there is a document that is associated with a claim, for both those business processes to have access to it from a single source of truth is valuable. There are multiple business processes that rely on that. Having a centralized repository has become very useful and valuable. And, naturally, the audit and compliance requirements have also been fairly well satisfied, thanks to the fact that we have that centralized repository.

            What needs improvement?

            I would like to see better integration with other tools. For example, we use IBM Security Suite. We also use IBM's Business Process Manager, Rules Engine, Cognos, and so on. I think IBM products can be better integrated across themselves. We find that, sometimes, we have to jump through hoops to get one product to work with another.

            I would give it a perfect rating if all the upgrades had been smooth.

            For how long have I used the solution?

            We've been using it for almost 10 years now.

            What do I think about the stability of the solution?

            It is very stable and it does scale well. It does require a certain amount of discipline in setting the infrastructure up right and keeping up with the patches and releases. But it has been very stable for us and it has scaled well.

            How is customer service and technical support?

            I think technical support is pretty good. They've been very responsive and helpful, but we haven't really had to call them too many times in the last few months.

            How was the initial setup?

            I was not involved in the initial setup but I was involved in an upgrade that was almost an overhaul, about four years ago. It was fairly complex because I think the model we used to lay down the unstructured data within FileNet originally was not really very extensible. We had to redo a little bit of that work, so there was some complexity in it. And, also, we were coming from a fairly older version of the software... Lack of upkeep, I guess. And that's why it was a fairly difficult exercise at that point.

            What other advice do I have?

            First, know the problem that you are trying to solve. Different products have different sweet spots, different scales, for operation. Understand the business problem that you are trying to solve. Understand the ability of your organization to adapt to change, because these things require the entire organization to think a little differently about how they do what they do. And then, make sure you have the right technical strength to implement a large infrastructure solution like this.

            The most important criteria for me when selecting a vendor to work with are reliability, technical support, and, definitely, the cost.

            We are able to provide a lot more content management solutions than before. We've been using it for almost 10 years now. There's really nothing dramatically different or new that we've done in the last 12 months.

            It's very usable. I haven't seen it lately but I'm sure it has improved dramatically in the last 12 months, too. Compared to what I saw five, six, years ago, and what we actually upgraded to, it's come a long way.

            We are not considering employing IBM on cloud, hybrid or Box solutions, nor for mobile, at the moment.

            Disclosure: I am a real user, and this review is based on my own experience and opinions.
            it_user543300
            Developer at a financial services firm with 1,001-5,000 employees
            Vendor
            The flexibility with which it can store metadata and with which you can search on that metadata are important.

            What is most valuable?

            FileNet P8 Content Manager is the primary platform we use. We use it essentially just as a document repository. We don't currently do any business process with it. We use it purely for storing and retrieving documents. The most important features would be the flexibility in which it can store the metadata, the flexibility in which you can search on the metadata and the scalability.

            How has it helped my organization?

            We have millions and millions and millions of documents and we have to put them somewhere. That is where they get put. A user can go to the FileNet system and pull up a document within a matter of seconds. Rather than, if you had no ECM system, you would send a request somewhere, someone would walk through old paper files somewhere and you would get your file in a day. That was thirty years ago. I don't think anyone does that now.

            What needs improvement?

            The particular aspect that I would like for us to improve on is the ingestion of new documents to data capture. We're looking at ways to more automate our document capture, more automated categorization of documents.

            We were looking at the Datacap product. We're currently using Kofax. We're looking at Datacap to see if that might do it better. We don't know the answer to that yet.

            It does what it's supposed to do well: you start a document on it; it pulls the document back; it displays the document. For what we use it for, I can't think of features that it's lacking. Now, there are other aspects of it that we don't use. There's a whole BPM system that's tied into it that we've never used.

            Going back to data capture, that is not part of the FileNet P8 system. You have to have something to pull the documents in. IBM’s solution is called Datacap. Cofax is another company who we've been using. I went to a recent IBM conference hoping that they had the Datacap products smarter; all the talk there was about Watson and how smart it is. They have a new version of Datacap called Datacap Insight Edition. I was hoping that it was actually really smart; you could give it a bunch of documents, it could understand what the documents are, sort them out for us and extract relevant information. It's not there yet. The hype exceeds the reality.

            What was my experience with deployment of the solution?

            At first, the customer experience was pretty rocky. A lot of that is just because when you give them something new, they liked the old thing. You give them something new and there's some good features and some bad features, but they're only going to complain about the bad stuff.

            From an internal point of view, we had some big improvements in maintenance. The access management – the customer account management – moved from being entirely separate management on the old system to something that was integrated with our Active Directory system. Requests for passive resets and so on went from 100 per day down to zero.

            We've standardized on an HTML 5-based viewer. We’ve gotten over some of the problems with being reliant on Java installed in all the various browsers. Functionally, the end customer experience is about the same. It looks a little bit different but there have been a lot of improvements in reduced maintenance costs and trouble.

            What do I think about the stability of the solution?

            It's been rock solid. Once you get it going and you get over the initial hump of the initial installation, it's solid.

            What do I think about the scalability of the solution?

            Scalability is good.

            How are customer service and technical support?

            FileNet tech support is wonderful. Sometimes, they prioritize according to whether the issue is a casual question or an emergency? If it's an emergency, they're right there; they'll have somebody there. They will get it fixed. If you ask them a low-priority question, it might take a while, but it's a low-priority question.

            Also, once you find a document on their website, it's generally very good. The problem I've always had is that their website is sometimes horrible to find things on.

            Which solution did I use previously and why did I switch?

            Our FileNet P8 system is an upgrade from an older FileNet Image Services system, which we've had for 14 years, I think. We're trying to obsolete that. Everything we're doing on the P8 system is really a mirror of the old Image Services system. We really haven't got around to trying implementing anything new yet.

            I was involved in the decision to upgrade to the FileNet P8 system; I've been pushing for ten years.

            How was the initial setup?

            FileNet P8 system installation is complex. I don't know how complex it is to similar products but it is definitely complex. It's not something you want to do unless you're an expert in it. You want to make sure you have somebody that knows how to do it.

            Which other solutions did I evaluate?

            I was not involved in any comparison to any other system. I don't know exactly what was done. I'm a lowly developer. I can't really compare the FileNet P8 system against any of its competitors.

            When I’m selecting a vendor to work with, the most important criteria for me are: that they're going to exist in the future; their product is good; and their documentation is good. I like to be able to go out, find the documentation, and have it be nicely organized; I can find what I want; I can read about what I need to read about and do a deep dive into the nitty gritty details.

            What other advice do I have?

            It is not my position to consider employing IBM on cloud, hybrid or Box solutions. There's been some conversation about what would be the economic benefit of having stuff moved to the cloud versus hosting it internally. The conversation has only been, “I wonder what the numbers are.” We don't know.

            There are no plans of doing mobile in relation to the FileNet P8 system. The FileNet P8 system we use is entirely internal. There are no external, customer-facing applications. There are other departments that do mobile applications. We're a bank, so they have the bank mobile application. They do some FileNet documents but they call an ESB service, which then calls FileNet. We don't do anything directly with it.

            I have no complaints regarding the usability of FileNet. I've seen other similar systems and it's comparable. It's kind of boring stuff: you pull up a screen; you put in some query conditions; you find some documents and you look at your documents. It's nothing exciting.

            Disclosure: I am a real user, and this review is based on my own experience and opinions.
            it_user543288
            SysAdmin - FileNet at a healthcare company with 10,001+ employees
            Vendor
            It works for 800 million documents of patient records and patient financial information.

            What is most valuable?

            Very easily, the most valuable feature of FileNet is its reliability. We've been using FileNet Image Services since 1989. I average under one hour of unscheduled downtime per year. I have 800 million documents of patient records and patient financial information that reside on my box. It is sub-second response time and it just plain works.

            How has it helped my organization?

            It has done a significant number of changes. One, it has gotten us off of paper and it has also allowed us to streamline some of our work processes, so that we are electronically controlling those as opposed to doing them in the paper-pushing world.

            What needs improvement?

            The key to me is the ability for Watson and other analytic opportunities to be able to reach into the dark, unstructured narratives that are a key component of our medical record and read them, ingest them, and apply their analytic skills to them.

            We will not have that until we complete the migration onto the FileNet P8 platform. Then, even then, we expect that there are going to be some significant challenges. I'm confident that IBM, which has very smart people, is going to be able to figure it out. That's absolutely something that I’m looking forward to them adding onto the solution; 100%.

            What do I think about the stability of the solution?

            The stability is second to none. We have consistently, year after year after year, been able to maintain an uptime of, I don't know how many nines it goes down to, but you can do the math; I have under one hour of unscheduled downtime per year.

            What do I think about the scalability of the solution?

            The scalability is phenomenal. It just keeps growing. I've often likened FileNet to a teenager at an all-you-can-eat buffet, where you can just keep on feeding it and it'll keep eating and eating and eating. You'll run out of food long before the teenager stops eating.

            How is customer service and technical support?

            We do use technical support. I'm a member of what IBM calls the AVP, Accelerated Value Program. They're phenomenal. These guys know their stuff. They are responsive. I have a wonderful and long term relationship with Peter Fagan, who is my AVP tech. I absolutely love the guys.

            How was the initial setup?

            The initial setup was 1989. That perhaps predates many of us. I joined the firm in 1995, so I was not there for the initial set up. I've been there for, I believe, a representative period of time.

            Which other solutions did I evaluate?

            I’m involved in the decision process to continue making upgrades, absolutely. In fact, it's a very small team of very dedicated and focused folks who have all been with the firm for approximately 20 years like me. We don't have turnover and we don't want turnover in our product line.

            From time to time, we do explore options. We looked at EMC's Documentum product, for example. We found that the migration to it was going to be as painful if not more painful as the migration onto FileNet P8, and was going to have the added detrimental aspect of bringing in an entirely new relationship. We were not confident, honestly, that the product line was going to survive for the long term.

            When I’m selecting a vendor to work with, I need one with vision that is going to be able to stay with the course over the period as long as a decade. Things do not move necessarily at the speed of light. We need to know that a product line that we spend a year or two or three migrating onto, is going to be consistently available and enhanced over the next decade.

            I'm not convinced that migrations can ever be made easy. I think migrations are a pill; you swallow it, it works its way through your plumbing and it comes out the other end. There are various times in the process when it hurts.

            As far as building a solution in-house, I'm not sure that an enterprise content management solution is the kind of thing that is buildable in-house, though there are some who are perhaps arrogant enough to think that they can pull that off.

            What other advice do I have?

            The key is to get involved in the user community, whether that means coming out and dedicating a week at a place like World of Watson or whether it means reaching out to a local user board if one exists local to you. The customers and the other users of the product line are sometimes more honest than one would expect a Salesforce representative to be. Get as much information as you can from people who are actually using the product.

            We are not employing IBM on cloud, hybrid, or box solutions in the immediate short run.

            We absolutely have plans to include mobile. We are hoping to allow our clinicians access to importing of documents or importing of photographs that are taken during the course of patient care and including them in the historical medical record.
            As far as new analytics or content management services that we're now able to provide for our organization, we are in the process of migrating off of the Legacy Image Services product onto the new P8 product line. Once that is complete, we hope to be able to take advantage of some of the content search services and other bigger analytics that might become available at that point. Until we're there, I can't speak to that.

            We've been on Image Services so long that I have to say no, there aren’t any existing services that we're now able to provide better than we were previously. Image Services is at the tail end of its life expectancy and all of our focus now is on moving onto the newer platform called FileNet P8.

            Regarding how FileNet has changed the experience for our customers internal and external, there's no question that it has enhanced our ability to manage access to the medical record and to make it available both to our researchers and to the clinicians at the same time. Back when it was paper, it would be signed out of the library just like a book. With only one copy of it, if it was being used by a researcher, and Mrs. McGillicutty came in unexpectedly for an appointment, we had to track down where that record was and sometimes it led to delays. Now that it's all electronic, that's no longer a factor.

            As far its usability, I have been using FileNet exclusively in my work environment since 1990. I'm very comfortable in it. I have found that it is a reliable, fairly simple, but somewhat niche product. We are confident that the P8 platform, while it is more open, is going to be as reliable, is ultimately going to be as usable when we move forward, and perhaps much more modern and able to take advantage of a lot of the newer tools, such as mobile, that really have not existed.

            The older product line is phenomenal, but limited in what it can do. The newer product line is not sufficiently well known to us yet, but over the course of the migration, we will certainly learn a lot more about it.

            Disclosure: I am a real user, and this review is based on my own experience and opinions.
            it_user543297
            IT Manager at a financial services firm with 1,001-5,000 employees
            Vendor
            With FileNet, you can design high-capacity object stores and search across object stores.

            What is most valuable?

            The most valuable features of FileNet are business process automation, and providing our business users access to all of the documents they need and when they need it, and having that ready access to all of the documents that they need to reference to complete their job functions.

            How has it helped my organization?

            There are a lot of processes that our business users were handling either manually or in less-than-efficient ways. We were able to optimize those processes for them through FileNet P8 workflows. That's probably the best way IBM ECM platforms help them.

            Our legacy platform wasn't necessarily sustainable. It wasn't designed to handle the volume of documents, hundreds of millions of documents, that need to be managed through our enterprise content management platform. One of the main services or benefits that we're providing is a stable enterprise tool that they can rely on to handle that sheer volume of documents.

            The front ends and the intelligence that we can build into them are leaps and bounds better than the service that they were being provided previously.

            What needs improvement?

            It's a very good tool. The one feature or direction I would like to see IBM move the tools, is to make them more tolerant for or lend itself more to continuous integration, continuous delivery; the DevOps model that most organizations are adopting.

            We're on a lower version and we need to upgrade our platform, but there is still a lot of configuration that somebody such as a system engineer has to do by hand that isn't easily scriptable. It's done through configuration consoles such as FEM. That might make it difficult to deploy, for example, once an hour, like Amazon does, or every five minutes, or whatever their continuous delivery model is. We're still only deploying the production once every 10 weeks. We could deliver a lot more features to the business if we had the capability to deliver new features to them on a daily basis. That's kind of the holy grail of continuous delivery and DevOps. As of today, I don't know that we could really accomplish that with P8.

            What do I think about the stability of the solution?

            Stability’s been pretty good. We're maturing in terms of our monitoring and automation of FileNet services. When there are crashes, we're still responding to those pretty manually. That’s on our end and on IBM's end, a little bit of both.

            The one area where we've had stability issues is when we're doing large-volume document ingestion. Part of this is related to the fact that we have regulatory requirements that require us to store documents on a WORM device, which stands for Write Once Read Many. There's just more overhead in doing that. There are times where we have flooded the system with documents, which has affected end-user experience. Those are the most high-impact stability issues that we've experienced, when a flood of documents comes into the system and Content Engine threads get buried.

            There is definitely the potential for some improvements there. Although, we're at a point now, in our life cycle, that we're beyond a lot of those large-scale document migrations. For any newer customers that have that WORM requirement, it's definitely something that they need to take into consideration and have some defensive guards against flooding the system in that way.

            You could consider it a scalability issue, I suppose. It might be a limitation of the way Content Engine is designed. There could be some more automated guards that are just built into the tool to turn off that ingestion if the system is starting to get flooded. We've instrumented some monitors to do exactly that on our side with custom coding. If IBM had a feature to protect against that, that's something that should definitely be looked at.

            What do I think about the scalability of the solution?

            My overall impression of scalability is great. The way IBM allows you to design object stores, and have cross-object store searches, and the quantity of documents that are supported per object store or within FileNet P8, far exceeds what we had with our previous vendor, with the legacy system.

            The scalability is great, it's just there are a couple of places, and some of it is specific to features that aren't used by every customer, but there are certain features that, if it's not a scalability issue, it might be a monitoring issue, and taking action against a potential negative impact to the system.

            How is customer service and technical support?

            We've been pretty successful with the PMR process. I don't have any real negative or positive feedback exactly; it serves its purpose.

            How was the initial setup?

            I came in towards the end of our first phase. The initial install of the software I wasn't there for, but I was there for the initial migration of documents from the legacy system. It was fairly straightforward. We definitely leaned on consulting from some IBM partners such as Perficient, and from IBM themselves for a few different things. We set up Datacap five years ago, and there were some issues with performance across a wide geography; my organization has 500 branches across the country. There were some issues there that IBM was able to give us a patch to correct those problems. Overall, it's been pretty good.

            What other advice do I have?

            If you have a very large-scale ECM system, then I think it's the best tool available, based on my limited exposure. I've been working in a P8 shop for the last four years. It’s my first ECM shop, so I don't necessarily have a lot of experience directly with some of the other tools. For a large-scale solution, like what we needed at my employer, it was great. To my knowledge, for a large-scale ECM system, it's one of the best tools available.

            Employing IBM on cloud, hybrid or box solutions is definitely a consideration, although my company is only just starting to get into moving our on-prem solutions to cloud. We have to understand a little bit better what the broad-view cloud strategy is from the entire IT organization standpoint before we get to that point.

            The experiences for our customers, both internal and external, have changed by implementing FileNet. They're using a different tool set, so that's changed. With our scanning solutions and indexing, and especially from a data perspective, we can better cater to their needs, because of those features that are available through P8.
            I don't have a great use case for mobile at this time. Most of the end users that we are providing services to are either physically located inside of a branch or located in our home office, performing more operations functions. They are not necessarily out in the field capturing documents in real-time from customers. It's just not the business case that we're servicing.

            The usability is pretty good. There are a lot of great features in the upgraded platform, 5.2 and above, that we're not yet taking advantage of; we're still in 5.1. The Content Navigator, front ends and consolidation of the administration to Content Navigator consoles definitely are benefits. End users definitely benefit from that tool. It's been pretty good for us, even in 5.1.

            When selecting a vendor to work with, the most important criteria for me is having somebody that can really demonstrate the tool, has the technical knowledge and can speak to the capabilities; preparedness for the presentation. With the RFPI, I wasn't there, but when we were first looking at vendors for ECM, IBM was certainly the most prepared and had a demo-able platform, as opposed to just something like a PowerPoint presentation. Being able to really demonstrate in real-time what your tools can do is the number one thing that any vendor can do to win over a customer.

            Disclosure: I am a real user, and this review is based on my own experience and opinions.
            it_user543246
            Data Architect at Suramericana
            Vendor
            APIs and web services allow FileNet to integrate with other business applications.

            What is most valuable?

            FileNet integrates other solutions with my business applications; the APIs, the web services, all of the frameworks that we have developed around the FileNet solution.

            How has it helped my organization?

            We have used FileNet for legal proposals, digital governance and storage; digital documents that we would otherwise have to store physically. We have reduced costs for storage, by using digital and electronic documents instead of physical. That also makes us faster. For example, with our storage policy built into the application for electronic documents, we can now easily print the document.

            What needs improvement?

            I would like to see analytics from the unstructured data. Our documents are not always prepared in a way that Datacap and other tools can recognize or extract text from them. I don't know; maybe analytics from two rows or from handwriting.

            What do I think about the stability of the solution?

            It is very, very stable, like 99.9%.

            What do I think about the scalability of the solution?

            Scalability is great. We have increased our size in FileNet. We have doubled its size in the last year and it is working well.

            How are customer service and technical support?

            We have not used technical support.

            Which solution did I use previously and why did I switch?

            We were looking for a BPM solution, and we found the FileNet BPM solution. It was integrated with ECM. We decided that it was a great integration, the way FileNet was showing the way to solve the problem.

            How was the initial setup?

            Initial setup was a little complex but that was before the FileNet was part of IBM. It was many years ago. It was complex, but we made it. We had to change our document process, and define the governance policy for the documents. It was kind of difficult to figure out the right way that FileNet could do that at the time. That was difficult, but we found the way to do it right.

            Which other solutions did I evaluate?

            We considered solutions other than FileNet, but I don't remember which ones. We had three proposals at the time. We chose FileNet because of the integration, the brand name and the way that the brand would support us in the future. Then, IBM made it better.

            The decision-making process took 10 months. The price was higher than we thought they would be. We did not consider building a solution on our own.

            The most important criteria for me when selecting a vendor to work with is the brand support; the way that they can improve the product in the future and work with you with those solutions.

            What other advice do I have?

            FileNet is a better way to solve the ECM problems and needs that you have in your company. I have seen different solutions, and I found FileNet to be the more complete solution.

            As far as how the experiences of our internal or external customers have changed since implementing FileNet, projects are easy. They need to find some information, some data, and they have it right at the moment that they need it. That changes the way that they use the information.

            We are considering employing IBM for a hybrid solution. Right now, we have FileNet in a private network. We want to see if we can transform that into a hybrid cloud.

            We also have plans to include mobile. We are now researching the possibility to implement the Datacap mobile solution.

            Usability is very good; very, very good. We have different kinds of people working in administration; using FileNet is easy for everybody. We have no problems; we don’t have to keep explaining the way to use it. It is easy.

            I have found in FileNet almost everything that we wanted to find; we can search quickly. For example, if you need a text translated from electronic to text, to then go to analytics, you can do it, and IBM is looking at it the same way.

            Disclosure: I am a real user, and this review is based on my own experience and opinions.
            it_user543276
            ECM Program Coordinator at a government with 1,001-5,000 employees
            Vendor
            People can find documentation in a secure location and use it for archiving. I would like to see pricing improved.

            What is most valuable?

            The most valuable feature of FileNet is that it's a secure location for us to store our documentation, where we can put some rigor around it so people can find it and use it for an archiving type system.

            How has it helped my organization?

            Before, we would have things on server stores, hard drives, SharePoint. It allows us to have a central place that everyone knows that it's the official copy of something that they can go and access. FileNet has given both internal and external customers a way to access central data that they might not have had access to before. It allows access out in the field to documents that, before, they would have to get a paper copy of, sometimes.

            That makes us more efficient, and saves us time and space.

            What needs improvement?

            We have Content Navigator and it seems like we still need to do a level of our own coding for plug-ins and so on. I'd like to see something a little bit more out of box, where there are plug-ins that we can get to do some of what we need to do, instead of having to build it ourselves, to make it simpler. Faster time to market is important and we're not really there.

            I still think it's kind of expensive. I didn't notice that the cloud offerings were going to be any cheaper. Expense is probably another area with room for improvement.

            Also, when I attend conferences, activities are shown that sound very easy. "Oh, look at this bright, shiny thing." But then, when you really start digging, it takes a lot more work to implement the bright, shiny thing. It's a nicer on a PowerPoint.

            We have a lot of content stored on server shared drives, and because there is often no naming or filing standards, or metadata, users find it difficult to locate documents. Also, users tend not to go back and delete items per our records retention policy (which can be decades depending on the document), and content can continue to clog up servers. It is helpful to setup automation of records retention.

            Users also keep documents on their computer drives making it difficult to share. We also have a lot of legacy documentation in file drawers that could be digital for easier sharing.

            What do I think about the scalability of the solution?

            We have an enterprise license. We've been able to scale it up to large groups, as well as very small independent areas.

            How are customer service and technical support?

            I don't actually put in tickets; my dev team does. Sometimes they've been a little frustrated with response times, especially for production systems. It’s hit and miss.

            Which solution did I use previously and why did I switch?

            I was consulted during the decision process as well to invest in FileNet.

            We were starting to acquire a lot of little, home-built document management systems. It didn't make sense to build something when we could buy a package that already had a lot of capabilities. We had already built, I think, three or four little scanning applications. It just didn't make sense to keep building. We had a hodge podge of stuff.

            How was the initial setup?

            We acquired FileNet back when it was owned by FileNet, and it was much more complex then. You had to hire them to come in and do all the installation. Now, we can do our own installation. That’s because of the steps IBM has taken. Before, you had to hire them, you had to hire FileNet to come do it; you couldn't do it yourself.

            Usability all depends on how it is set-up. FileNet itself is good, but it relies on just how complex does the business want to get.

            Which other solutions did I evaluate?

            We had an external consultant group that was coming in to do a significant amount of work for us. They were bringing in new technologies and they were the deciders of bringing in FileNet.

            Nonetheless, when I select a vendor to work with, cost is very important and a level of expertise in a similar type of industry is helpful, peer experiences. If they've worked with a company that is similar to ours, it seems like there is faster ramp-up time for them.

            What other advice do I have?

            Really understand your use case and capabilities that you're going to need, especially because we start out thinking it's just document management or content management, but then there's always all this other stuff. Does the product or product line have the ability to expand to the other stuff that the business wants?

            I think Box has potential for us because of our interaction with external consultants, but not at this time.

            As far as any pre-existing services that we're now able to provide better than we did before, we’re now able to provide better centralized access by using FileNet; that's where we're at, at this point and time.

            We have plans to include mobile. We have folks out in the field, so we want them to have access to electronic documentation via a tablet or other mobile device.

            Disclosure: I am a real user, and this review is based on my own experience and opinions.