Microsoft Teams vs. Thomson Reuters HighQ

Overview
ProductRatingMost Used ByProduct SummaryStarting Price
Microsoft Teams
Score 8.0 out of 10
N/A
Microsoft Teams combines video conferencing software with team collaboration tools. The communications platform allows MS Office users to conduct conference calls and share files via SharePoint, and join or initiate a group chat.
$5
per month
HighQ
Score 7.6 out of 10
N/A
HighQ Collaborate, now from Thomson Reuters (acquired 2019) is a cloud-based enterprise collaboration platform, featuring secure file sharing but also means for sharing documents with users outside the enterprise, as well as a user-interface optimized for mobile devices and intuitive interface, with real-time communication.N/A
Pricing
Microsoft TeamsThomson Reuters HighQ
Editions & Modules
Free
$0.00
per user/per month
Microsoft 365 Business Basic
$5.00
per user/per month
Microsoft 365 Business Standard
$12.50
per user/per month
Office 365 E3
$20.00
per user/per month
No answers on this topic
Offerings
Pricing Offerings
Microsoft TeamsHighQ
Free Trial
NoNo
Free/Freemium Version
YesNo
Premium Consulting/Integration Services
NoNo
Entry-level Setup FeeNo setup feeNo setup fee
Additional DetailsDiscounts are available for non profit organizations.
More Pricing Information
Community Pulse
Microsoft TeamsThomson Reuters HighQ
Top Pros
Top Cons
Features
Microsoft TeamsThomson Reuters HighQ
Project Management
Comparison of Project Management features of Product A and Product B
Microsoft Teams
7.2
182 Ratings
9% below category average
Thomson Reuters HighQ
8.2
2 Ratings
4% above category average
Task Management7.5137 Ratings8.01 Ratings
Gantt Charts6.270 Ratings00 Ratings
Scheduling7.9153 Ratings8.01 Ratings
Workflow Automation6.795 Ratings9.01 Ratings
Mobile Access7.9174 Ratings9.32 Ratings
Search7.3160 Ratings9.62 Ratings
Visual planning tools6.6111 Ratings5.01 Ratings
Communication
Comparison of Communication features of Product A and Product B
Microsoft Teams
7.7
191 Ratings
4% below category average
Thomson Reuters HighQ
8.6
2 Ratings
7% above category average
Chat8.8190 Ratings9.01 Ratings
Notifications8.0189 Ratings9.02 Ratings
Discussions8.5177 Ratings9.01 Ratings
Surveys7.2104 Ratings6.01 Ratings
Internal knowledgebase7.0117 Ratings10.01 Ratings
Integrates with GoToMeeting7.047 Ratings00 Ratings
Integrates with Gmail and Google Hangouts6.243 Ratings00 Ratings
Integrates with Outlook8.8156 Ratings00 Ratings
File Sharing & Management
Comparison of File Sharing & Management features of Product A and Product B
Microsoft Teams
7.4
177 Ratings
9% below category average
Thomson Reuters HighQ
9.4
2 Ratings
15% above category average
Versioning7.1122 Ratings10.01 Ratings
Video files7.4150 Ratings9.01 Ratings
Audio files7.6152 Ratings9.01 Ratings
Document collaboration8.1164 Ratings9.22 Ratings
Access control7.5148 Ratings9.22 Ratings
Advanced security features7.0110 Ratings10.02 Ratings
Integrates with Google Drive6.353 Ratings00 Ratings
Device sync8.0124 Ratings00 Ratings
Best Alternatives
Microsoft TeamsThomson Reuters HighQ
Small Businesses
Stackby
Stackby
Score 9.8 out of 10
Stackby
Stackby
Score 9.8 out of 10
Medium-sized Companies
Troop Messenger
Troop Messenger
Score 9.7 out of 10
Troop Messenger
Troop Messenger
Score 9.7 out of 10
Enterprises
HCL Connections
HCL Connections
Score 9.0 out of 10
HCL Connections
HCL Connections
Score 9.0 out of 10
All AlternativesView all alternativesView all alternatives
User Ratings
Microsoft TeamsThomson Reuters HighQ
Likelihood to Recommend
8.0
(269 ratings)
9.2
(2 ratings)
Likelihood to Renew
5.8
(9 ratings)
-
(0 ratings)
Usability
7.1
(52 ratings)
-
(0 ratings)
Availability
9.0
(1 ratings)
-
(0 ratings)
Performance
8.0
(1 ratings)
-
(0 ratings)
Support Rating
8.3
(113 ratings)
10.0
(1 ratings)
Implementation Rating
10.0
(1 ratings)
-
(0 ratings)
Contract Terms and Pricing Model
6.2
(7 ratings)
-
(0 ratings)
Product Scalability
10.0
(1 ratings)
-
(0 ratings)
Professional Services
6.9
(7 ratings)
-
(0 ratings)
User Testimonials
Microsoft TeamsThomson Reuters HighQ
Likelihood to Recommend
Microsoft
Positive: The virtual workspace created for a work team within the same company, for the resemblance of information and communications in one place.Negative: The access for members of a non-profit organization who have external emails from the host but need the same access as an internal person since their volunteer work is part of the very core of the federation.
Read full review
Thomson Reuters
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.
Read full review
Pros
Microsoft
  • Virtual meetings - ease of set up and execution
  • File sharing! We build channels for projects, and being able to invite only project members is huge!
  • Peer-to-peer communications - being able to "ping" one of my colleagues, either text, video or call-only, on-demand, is what runs our business.
Read full review
Thomson Reuters
  • 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.
Read full review
Cons
Microsoft
  • The feature of notifications in the mobile application could be improved. Sometimes notifications of different teams are not visible and are only visible when the application is opened.
  • It uses lots of computational resources while running and thus, slows down the system sometimes.
  • It allows a few channels per team. The number of channels could be increased for better productivity.
Read full review
Thomson Reuters
  • 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.
Read full review
Likelihood to Renew
Microsoft
Microsoft Teams is included with our Office 365 subscription and we have no intention of migrating off of Office 365 and Microsoft products. Since Microsoft Teams is included for free with our Office 365 subscription, and since we enjoy all the features, benefits, and functionality, there is no question that our team will continue to use the product
Read full review
Thomson Reuters
No answers on this topic
Usability
Microsoft
User experience has been much better than the previous Skype for Business app. It has an easy-to-use interface with persistent chats. The search feature is very fast and useful. MS Teams has mostly focused on Collaboration and team building features which are very useful for organizational communications. Since Teams is accessible from multiple platforms like Laptop, Desktop, Mobile phones, etc it has been very convenient from a Mobility perspective.
Read full review
Thomson Reuters
No answers on this topic
Reliability and Availability
Microsoft
Rare, but outages do happen
Read full review
Thomson Reuters
No answers on this topic
Performance
Microsoft
Sometimes about once a week I get a message that says "Sorry, there seems to be something wrong". But it goes away in a few minutes.
Read full review
Thomson Reuters
No answers on this topic
Support Rating
Microsoft
Using Microsoft Teams has resulted in much faster business communications with both co-workers and consultants. There has been little need for support with this software as the interface is very intuitive and the product is overall very well designed. We did encounter an issue with the built-in phone service, however, this was quickly resolved by the support team.
Read full review
Thomson Reuters
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.
Read full review
Implementation Rating
Microsoft
I find everything I need for my day-to-day work.
Read full review
Thomson Reuters
No answers on this topic
Alternatives Considered
Microsoft
Our company and IT department previously used Skype for our communication needs. Skype was not dependable in my opinion, because it seems each time I used it during a call and/or a meeting, I and several other team members would get disconnected more than once. This caused a great interruption of our meeting, caused team members to have to ask others to repeat themselves and caused a general lack of interest in employee attendance during meetings.
Read full review
Thomson Reuters
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.
Read full review
Contract Terms and Pricing Model
Microsoft
Honestly, this tool is worth every penny. Yes, it's not free and you pay for the quality of services and the license. But the ROI and the benefits are all there. Also, the renewal, negotiation, and contract terms are all very well explained by our Microsoft account manager, and she's a charm.
Read full review
Thomson Reuters
No answers on this topic
Scalability
Microsoft
It does not appear to have a limit to how many teams and employees we can have using it
Read full review
Thomson Reuters
No answers on this topic
Professional Services
Microsoft
I used Skype for Business to take calls, hold conferences, and provide remote assistance to users. Microsoft Teams, on the other hand, is superior to Skype for Business in my opinion. My job entails a lot of screen sharing.
Read full review
Thomson Reuters
No answers on this topic
Return on Investment
Microsoft
  • I'm not sure I can point to a specific ROI, but it has improved our ability to communicate and work more effectively together.
  • It's also nice to have records of every interaction, photo, and document that has been shared. Less chance of something completely disappearing.
Read full review
Thomson Reuters
  • 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.
Read full review
ScreenShots