Coda vs. iManage Share

My organization considers Coda for a variety of business and organizational projects. Using Coda, my organization keeps a lot of data and different types of data in one place. The user interface of Coda is very fluid and easy to use. My organization has benefitted from using the efficient and effective operational functionality of Coda.

Incentivized

Legal team using this product helps the team to better access documents securely within their email app (Outlook) and the user experience to control the document is excellent and being able to make it private and isolate confidential documents during a court session is very important and iManage has met our requirements. Also, being able to access instantly from users' workstation/laptop devices is very important and iManage plugin for outlook has satisfied our Business requirements.

Incentivized

• Flexibility. It's easy to get started on a small scale, but add more complex organization strategies as needed.
• Integrations. It's simple to ingest data from sources like Zapier for time-saving automations.
• Useful components. View table data across different formats like cards or custom detail views.

Incentivized

• Uploads documents.
• Share documents with only permitted users/managers.
• Managers have superior access to the document repository for iManage.
• Easy to integrate with Outlook client using an Plug-in to share, upload and download documents from iManage.

Incentivized

• It takes getting used to in terms of how the formulas per column is implemented, in contrast to how we build tables in Excel. For organization/team purchase, it would be worth considering having a training for the core team of users. Right now, we do a lot of self-learning.
• Inability to email charts or image without these objects being hosted on a third party. The community has been great in providing workarounds but it would be much more convenient to be able to have such ability natively.
• APAC Support. I'm based in Malaysia, due to timezone differences, even with a livechat implemented, the support for each step and conversation takes up to 24 hours per response. Having some hours covered in our timezone would greatly improve customer support experience.

Incentivized

• More APIs calls needed to automate image documents automations for our claims team.
• Mobile app (Outlook mobile app) plugin integration to mimic the same UX.
• Monitoring user activity logs needs to be integrated with any CLM systems.

Incentivized

Coda is definitely something that has been proven to drive positive impact in our organization. We have many divisions that can benefit from this that we have yet to explore. It would definitely be worth renewing.

Incentivized

Coda can seem either really useful or really useless. The extremes of both ends is driven by what our own understanding of what we want to implement. If we lack this understanding, it will be easy to misunderstand Coda's usability especially in the wrong context.

Incentivized

So far in the past year, we haven't had situations that Coda has gone down for us which is great.

Incentivized

We haven't done any integrations - the initial part of our experience we found that for docs with complex formulas, the page tends to load slowly but in recent months, Coda has improved and optimized the loading times in general and we generally don't find any problems in terms of speed anymore.

Incentivized

Mainly due to timezone differences. I think Coda's support in general is well implemented and executed. They know their stuff and are helpful. But since I'm not in the same timezone, solution rates are slower for me, and that's not something I prefer. I work in customer service, too, and more often than not, time is important. Shortening the solution time would be a much greater experience.

Incentivized

I'm relatively inexperienced but this experience is meaningful. It would have been nice to have some guidance from Coda so that we understood more on Coda's purpose and potential.

Incentivized

While all of the products listed have great features and platforms, there was always one thing missing from them that I would need to get from another application. Coda was the first one we used that really combined some of the best parts of those products and allowed us to use it in one place. I also appreciate the flexibility of creating your own framework and workflow, unlike in other tools where you have to follow how they capture data and organize projects.

Incentivized

MS SharePoint requires a lot of time to integrate and efforts are expensive compared to iManage product. iManage is quick setup and well integrates with existing on-premise environments and integrates well with major iDP systems for authentications and manage RBAC systems for permissions via API calls.

Incentivized

I think scalability is definitely good here since it's based on number of doc makers. Implementation into each dept becomes simpler. That being said, due to the nature of our work, we find it easier that we have a "super user" and then a team of other doc makers. This would make the doc creation and management more efficient.

Incentivized

• Increased insight for all stakeholders involved--both in terms of overview and details
• Better grip on issues and escalations--reduced friction, confusion, and higher clarity on status, next actions, and ownership.
• Reduced time required by those who need to maintain all information. Record (a detail) once and use multiple times.

Incentivized

• The amount of time needed in searching is reduced to few seconds and organizing the documents by case numbers has been the best ROI for our Legal team.
• The Automation for index searching and AI of relating to the case numbers increases the productivity for the users within our legal team where error is minimum.
• Less efforts are required to manage Permissions and granting permissions. Applying APIs for granting permissions has been automated.

Incentivized