Crowdbase (discontinued) vs. Thomson Reuters HighQ

I wouldn't suggest Crowdbasefor smaller companies, even for bigger companies a more integrated solution would be desirable. It may suit companies that want their collaboration separate from project management and CRM, but at least for our organisation it seems to make more sense to have most of our work tools in one place

HighQ Collaborate is well suited to situations where a law firm maintains numerous documents for a client and the client needs access to them on a regular basis. For example, we may store the client's minute book (which is relatively common for a large corporate law firm to do), but the client may need access to documents in that minute book on a regular basis. Likewise, we have an internal system at the firm for hosting digital versions of closing books, however, many clients would not have a similar system because they would only receive closing books irregularly. USBs get lost and the client might not want to put the closing book on the main server where anyone can access it. By putting the closing book on the extranet site, the individuals in the client's organization who should be able to access the closing book can do so.

• Collaboration
• Interaction with staff
• Great way to engage staff and support each other

• Document sharing. This product makes it easy to upload, review and organize documents related to a particular project or matter.
• Permissions. Collaborate allows very granular permissions to be assigned for shared documents and administrative activities such as workflows.
• Reliability. The product is cloud-based and rarely, if ever, unavailable.

• It is very limited
• Although it has an API it doesn't link to the services we use.
• It isn't customisable like podio.

• It is just not that exciting. We host documents on there for clients but the extranet sites have ultimately turned out to not be a product that our clients are clamoring for or that we are regularly pushing.

The interface is easy to use and overall the software seems pretty robust (I haven't had any crashes yet), so I haven't had to use the support very often. Likewise, I don't think I've ever had a client e-mail me with questions or issues - the software is pretty idiot-proof.

Crowdbase's strength may lie in its ability to do just one main thing well, but for us this was a massive limitation. I know that it is not trying to be Podio and it is therefore unfair to compare the two but there are features that overlap. for us Podio was better suited.

I feel that HighQ does not really have any real competition in this space because it simply accomplishes its goals far better than the competition at lower cost, while requiring less training and administration.

• Encourages communication
• Easy to use
• Before crowdbase we never though of collaborating this way

• Permits fairly simple administration by a single person for hundreds of Extranets
• One shop stopping for reliable, secure document sharing and signing with external parties
• Simple enough to use that internal and external users do not need training to take advantage of the product.