We performed a comparison between Box and IBM FileNet 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."The interface is very good."
"It is really easy to load files to and from this solution."
"File sharing with collaborators not on the same domain with offline access from multiple devices: I work on many projects that are multi-organizational, such as with customers, suppliers, or acquisitions."
"Simple file sharing and sync for internal and external customers."
"The ability to collaborate around data anywhere, anytime is the most powerful features of Box."
"Governance and ease of use are why I think a lot of people like Box, including ourselves. Basically, we're concerned about what information is being sent to Box, so we use a lot of the Box governance features to make sure that what is being sent to Box is appropriate. If it is not appropriate, it is not allowed to be sent. It is also pretty easy to use. It is the easiest to use for customers and for technologists."
"The collaboration of the solution is good."
"I like the ease of use."
"The most useful feature is its persistent storage. Also, the full-text search and attribute searching are valuable."
"IBM FileNet has improved our organization with its single collaboration space."
"The ability to manage the content well."
"It has a straightforward approach to the install."
"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."
"The most valuable features for us are Wex (Watson) for search, Datacap for OCR/ICR, and Automation Anywhere for RPA."
"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."
"The product is robust and can process a lot of documents for enterprise content management."
"I recommend doing the trial first, because it's not cheap ware. It's not overly expensive, but it's not cheap ware, and enterprise has a minimum number of users."
"I don't like the low level of role-based security it provides – it's very cumbersome, and the support is ordinary at times."
"I find their API to be quite complex and it could be more straightforward."
"Working on documents in real-time is sometimes faulty and could be improved."
"It could be cheaper."
"The search features and role permissions are not very user friendly. It only searches the first few pages of a document, which is quite a problem."
"The room for improvement is in the area of integrations. They need to establish more integrations, especially with Office 365 and Outlook."
"The UI should be faster. Sometimes it lags when switching between documents."
"I would like to see it able to capture NLP in an advanced search. It would also be good if it could capture images and segregate them in categories within a span of seconds."
"The analytics in FileNet are too complicated and they consume too much infrastructure, memory, and CPU. They're too expensive to work with."
"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 know it took them seven months to convert, so the initial setup was, probably to some degree, complex."
"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."
"I would like to see expanded search features, like content search."
"IBM doesn't offer new technologies every year, they offer new technologies after five years, for each release of the product."
"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."
Box is ranked 4th in Enterprise Content Management with 39 reviews while IBM FileNet is ranked 6th in Enterprise Content Management with 94 reviews. Box is rated 8.4, while IBM FileNet is rated 8.2. The top reviewer of Box writes "Allows you to upload and download files quickly but lacks integration with Office 365". On the other hand, the top reviewer of IBM FileNet writes "A document management system that helps in document digitalization and workflow management". Box is most compared with SharePoint, Microsoft OneDrive, Citrix ShareFile, Office 365 and Google Workspace, whereas IBM FileNet is most compared with SharePoint, OpenText Documentum, OpenText Extended ECM, IBM ECM and Newgen OmniDocs. See our Box vs. IBM FileNet 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.
