We performed a comparison between IBM FileNet and OpenText Extended ECM based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Enterprise Content Management solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."It has given us a whole new environment to do document management and document storage."
"We are able to find the proper documents which are needed for business processes."
"IBM FileNet has improved our organization with its single collaboration space."
"FileNet has the capabilities to meet compliance and regulatory requirements. It is very secure."
"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 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."
"It saves our customers time by 30 to 40 percent by eliminating the time to process paper."
"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."
"We also have a module on top of the Content Server called WebReports that has been one of the things that helped us facilitate the workflow and give managers good reporting and visibility into where everything is. Being able to use that on top of the Content Server was a big help."
"It's a very good solution."
"OpenText Extended ECM's most valuable features include permissions and security models. I also like the tool's ability to add metadata and use it to categorize information."
"An SAP user can store documents directly into OpenText without a connector."
"Most of our customers are very fond of the upgraded smart user interface."
"Being able to tag metadata on documents and being able to have different workspaces in there for our documents is valuable. We do loan documents, and different types of documents have different types of retentions. We are able to categorize based on that, and we are able to do tag searching to find what we are looking for."
"Retention is useful. I have been pleased with the search functionality and the extensibility for tying it into integrations with other systems and building workflows on top of it."
"The ability to add metadata and use that to categorize information is a valuable feature of OpenText Extended ECM."
"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 only downside is that it takes a dedicated staff to maintain it and the learning curve is pretty steep."
"It is stable as long as you create the right environment. We have had issues at times, but just because of configuration issues."
"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."
"I would like to see expanded search features, like content search."
"I would like to have an offline DR deployment. If that is doable, then it would be a big win."
"We'd like to use the docker, to have it containerized."
"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."
"The annotation tool needs improvement. In other tools, such as Hyland OnBase, you can easily do annotation. You can easily merge documents. You can easily compare documents, whereas with OpenText, it seems to be a challenge."
"The solution needs to improve the user interface."
"The solution's performance, stability, and consistency could be improved."
"The architecture needs improvement, as it's complex."
"User interface needs improvement (at least in the version we are using, desktop client)."
"I have not used it enough to start running into issues. Some of my technical guys could name a couple of things, but in terms of support, we did have challenges getting good responses from them."
"OpenText Extended ECM's user interface could be improved."
"When it comes to addressing complex use cases, three or four years ago, we ended up purchasing an additional OpenText product called AppWorks because we started to run into some limitations with the workflow that can be done in Extended ECM. It was a little limiting, so we ended up getting another product."
IBM FileNet is ranked 6th in Enterprise Content Management with 94 reviews while OpenText Extended ECM is ranked 3rd in Enterprise Content Management with 18 reviews. IBM FileNet is rated 8.2, while OpenText Extended ECM is rated 7.8. The top reviewer of IBM FileNet writes "A document management system that helps in document digitalization and workflow management". On the other hand, the top reviewer of OpenText Extended ECM writes "Serves as a single source of support for the company but has scalability issues". IBM FileNet is most compared with SharePoint, OpenText Documentum, IBM ECM, Alfresco and Hyland OnBase, whereas OpenText Extended ECM is most compared with OpenText Documentum, SharePoint, Hyland OnBase, Alfresco and OpenText Content Manager. See our IBM FileNet vs. OpenText Extended ECM report.
See our list of best Enterprise Content Management vendors.
We monitor all Enterprise Content Management reviews to prevent fraudulent reviews and keep review quality high. We do not post reviews by company employees or direct competitors. We validate each review for authenticity via cross-reference with LinkedIn, and personal follow-up with the reviewer when necessary.
