We performed a comparison between OpenText Content Manager and SharePoint 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 product can be integrated with different solutions."
"The tool's implementation has made life easier for customers. It is sold by SAP. The integration between SAP and the solution is good, making it easy to access the documents. It is widely recognized as a market leader in enterprise document management."
"An advantage is integration with your IP directory."
"I did not face issues with the product's scalability...The solution's technical support is good."
"It has a robust search but has often been difficult for people to learn."
"We like how the solution allows us to have retention of records and workflows, as well as its fire plan."
"Tech support tops off as excellent."
"It keeps our company organized and everything is in one place."
"Its functionality is enormous."
"It offers ease of use, which is crucial."
"The product makes it easy to manage lists, forms, searching, and security. One of the most valuable features is its integration with Active Directory."
"SharePoint is easy to collaborate with."
"The workflow feature is valuable because it enables us to cascade responsibilities."
"It has good integration with other MS products."
"The product could improve its scalability."
"Due to very limited use in the industry, vendor and contract support are hard to find."
"The ease of use should be addressed."
"The stability of the solution is an area of concern where improvements can be made."
"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."
"OpenText Content Manager needs to improve its user interface. Its installation process is difficult and can be made easier."
"No good process to import emails from several users into a single comprehensive SP repository."
"It should have a Google-caliber search ability and a model-based GUI."
"Search can be improved a lot because we are always trying to compare it with Google Search. Beyond that, it would be helpful to tag the documents."
"The solution's support services and GenAI could be improved and made faster and more knowledgeable."
"The limitations and boundaries must be extended."
"It is too heavy. MS should not have paid foreign coders dollars per each row of code. They wasted the stability and reliability in the end."
"It should have more user-friendly customization, as it still requires developers to get engaged and build sites."
"Document management and the ability to easily integrate single sign-on (SSO) are areas for improvement in SharePoint."
OpenText Content Manager is ranked 10th in Enterprise Content Management with 21 reviews while SharePoint is ranked 1st in Enterprise Content Management with 150 reviews. OpenText Content Manager is rated 7.6, while SharePoint is rated 7.8. The top reviewer of OpenText Content Manager writes "A document management system that integrates well with SAP, Salesforce and Oracle ". On the other hand, the top reviewer of SharePoint writes "Good integrations, helps with collaboration, and increases visibility". OpenText Content Manager is most compared with OpenText Extended ECM, OpenText Documentum, IBM FileNet, Microsoft Purview Records Management and Box, whereas SharePoint is most compared with Citrix ShareFile, Microsoft OneDrive, Dropbox, WordPress and Atlassian Confluence. See our OpenText Content Manager vs. SharePoint 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.
What are the records management requirements that you are using to vet and determine the best capability?
Should there be requirements to maintain temporary and/or permanent records?
Not if you are managing physical records in CM. You would need an add-in for M365 such as AvePoint Cloud Records or RecordPoint Records365.
Both help another important issue - M365 Compliance and SharePoint Online are complex user interfaces.
In a lot of organizations, records management staff don't have direct access to RM functions, with IT doing the administration based on service requests from IM. Both add-ins hand usability and RM functions back to the IM team.