Support could be enhanced. The first line of support consists of individuals who lack experience with some key aspects. When you create a support ticket, the time to resolve the issue may be prolonged because the first person may not understand the system or the solution.

View full review »

OpenText Content Manager needs to improve its user interface. Its installation process is difficult and can be made easier. 

View full review »

The stability of the solution is an area of concern where improvements can be made.

View full review »

We have not yet utilized the web version, as we encountered a few issues during testing.

View full review »

The product could improve its scalability.

View full review »

There could be an improvement in security and permission infrastructure, which is very complicated. Most of our build governance and security is set at the group or department level. Setting that up and the efforts required for management or information architecture are very high-level. Setting up information architecture is much quicker and easier in SharePoint than in OpenText. Compared to SharePoint, OpenText is a bit more secure, but I agree that SharePoint is better from a maintenance point of view.

Also, the solution could be more user-friendly.

OpenText Content Manager is tightly coupled, using Java-oriented applications at its server site. However, other applications like SharePoint are moving to Angular, providing a proper front-end stack. This allows development on the front-end side without requiring server-side implementation, resulting in a decoupled front-end. OpenText Content Manager, on the other hand, is still mainly using transcripts.

View full review »

We have not seen the working product yet, so It's difficult to talk about things that are not covered yet. We are still in a stage of getting it working. But we would like it to be more integrated. I would really like to see an ERP-type system for the legal community. There's much more to it than just a document repository. It's also about managing time registrations, and these type of things. So how can we further integrate it? How can we set up and organise an ERP system for legal, which is integrated with Microsoft Outlook and SharePoint-type services, and so on?

View full review »

The space management functionality, whilst incredibly useful to locate records, lacks the ability to perform a census of records. As a result, reports have to be printed and reconciliation of records on shelves conducted, which is incredibly laborious and time-intensive.

Also, the triggers and workflows could be improved upon. The system is difficult to navigate and understand the full scope of functionality available for end users to appreciate the value.

It is also challenging for end users to manage digital information in HPE CM, as physical records management practices and processes do not always translate to a digital environment.

View full review »

This is a client-side app, and a web-based app would be easier to support. 

Easier integration with SharePoint and other apps would be an improvement.

View full review »

There is no integration with social media. Functionality gets removed as new versions are released. The full client has had no new functionality since HPE bought it in 2008; only functions and features removed. (Document Assembly, Web Content Management, long-term email preservation format VMBX, all removed. The Meeting Manager was rendered useless.) A simple and important feature was to be able to default a record type at the document level. This can no longer be done with the release of HPE Content Manager. This means you now have to teach everyone about record types, and therefore records management, which they may not be interested in. So you lose them at the start, rather than just being able to keep things simple, such as default record type.

View full review »

Many users have expressed that it is too hard to find what they are looking for. I’m not sure that the functionality can be improved. Most of this issue is due to user training and the users not using the system every day. Enhancing the full content searching capabilities by including some refiners could possibly help.

View full review »

Many government (and other) organizations struggle to find a system balance between user requirements and records requirements, and HPE Content Manager is no different. Users are intimidated by the Content Manager client application, especially when it comes to searching and managing content at an individual’s level. The “tray” system, the limited “favourites” options and the inability to “share” content in an effective way (at the user level) means that users are confused about how to find content and manage content for themselves. This means that the power inherent in the product, particularly with the “trays” and metadata searches, is lost on users. Extensive training is required for users to get the most out of the product The good news is that if you train users to a certain level of competence, they tend to love using it.

Other feedback regarding the client suggests that the check-in/check-out requirement for records is cumbersome. It does not allow for concurrent editing of documents. Document preview and search-word highlighting could be improved.

Integration with Outlook could be improved, and a more-intuitive and less-intimidating search function could be implemented.

View full review »

Drag-and-drop in a Windows 10 environment has been an issue, but 9.01 resolves that issue.

Another resolution in 9.01 will be the removal of the custom email format. Currently, we must manually extract email messages when we want to distribute claim files on a CD.

There is no direct link from Adobe into HPE Records Manager. Since we work with a lot of PDFs, users must save to the desktop and then drag-and-drop into HPE Records Manager.

We currently use 8.x as our production client of Records Manager. That version does not support dragging and dropping of documents into Records Manager when your operating system is Windows 10 (It gives you an OLE error). This is a known issue by HP and they have no plans to upgrade and fix this in the 8.x clients. To resolve this issue we install a 9.x client on our Windows 10 machines. But this introduces another error. Now the Windows 10 users cannot edit custom properties on the records. This is due to a change between the 8.x security model and the 9.x security model. The 9.x client is not fully backwards compatible to the 8.x server. The solution is to upgrade our server to version 9.x (and all of our clients) and we have that scheduled for the spring.

In 8.x and earlier, Records Manager stored emails in a VBX format and the native format (optional). When you do a super-copy of the folder, for distribution on a cd, it extracted the emails always in the VBX format. Most people do not have VBX readers installed on their machines so our customers (or the lawyers who request the CDs) could not read any of the emails. Today we have a process of super-copying all of the appropriate records and then manually opening up and re-saving all of the email messages in an Outlook format.

It would be nice if Records Manager had a way to extract for offline reading and distribution, like ImageWrite, but we have managed to work around that requirement.

View full review »

IDOL integration: With as much as 180 million records and 80 TB of data and 18,000 users, I can see IDOL not behaving as expected, and I work with IDOL experts to seek workarounds to issues. IDOL is a good product, but more careful planning could have been done to see some more robust outcomes. Performance across 40 content engines is poor, as some CE’s don’t work compared to others in the engine layer.

View full review »

Perhaps:

• Cloud computing could be added.
• The ability to substantiate adherence to Australian security standards.
• Better ways in managing extraction of metadata.

In the case of SharePoint you rely on user selection but vendors should try to alleviate human intervention where possible.

View full review »

• Having a workflow tool that is a little bit smarter. This means being able to leverage the metadata entered about a record in order to make workflow decisions.
• Having a workflow template designer that didn’t require adding in a whole lot of steps in order to make the circuit work.
• The retention tool is probably fine. It just needs a lot of trial and error to get more comfortable. That is probably a user issue on my end with me.
• The reporting tool is very clunky and it is hard to make it do what I want it to do.
• There is very little information in the online help. Just this week I was trying to build a report that would have a simple signature line at the report end with some standard text. I was limited to how much text each box could have. I couldn’t find a simple way to set a margin for the report that wouldn’t have the signature line drop off the page.
• Trying to figure out which versions of which fields to add to the report.
• Tying everything to the “bands” isn’t that intuitive either.

View full review »

Currently in development is a web client version of the software, doing away with the need to deploy full software clients to staff PCs. This web client requires more refinement to be viable as a desktop client replacement.

View full review »

• Easier to set security/access at all levels.
• Make the job of the administrator managing the system easier (client setup, position setup, org changes).
• The system options > Permissions tab for each user type: There are too many permissions with our recent upgrade that were ‘clumped together’ that make it difficult to manage what people in the system can do (e.g., Records Coordinators’ vs Records Managers’ ability for document deletion and removal).
• Copying datasets is difficult and time-consuming
• Enhancement requests that have been submitted are either not implemented or take a very long time to be implemented (we’ve stopped submitting them because of this).
• Emails used to be stored in VMBX format (now it is MSG format): This is problematic when trying to pull the emails out of HPE RM.
• Compound/linked files (e.g., InDesign, Dreamweaver, AutoCAD, linked Excel): When filed in HPE RM, the links are broken. This means that several departments at my organization cannot use HPE RM for their documents.
• Help file is not very helpful and has room for improvement.

View full review »

The ease of use should be addressed. If one is skillful then this will not present a problem, but a person who is not will be forced to struggle. 

Mobility, as it relates to the ability to have access, should also be addressed. 

View full review »

I would like to see an improvement in the licensing process. It is very complicated and it seems to involve many different people throughout the entire process.

View full review »

It has extensive configuration restrictions for administrators and file extension limitations.

Clunky in look and feel.

View full review »