Item: IBM FileNet Content Manager
Rating: 7
Author: Verified User

Ease of Integration

Not 100 % in use. It looks good but still way to go for us. As I’m not really familiar with all the details and technical steps I cannot provide a real feedback.

Use Cases and Deployment Scope

Initially to save time and interact, collaborate with low code tools and especially content search. Integration of external file shares was a real challenge as well as payments. I think we are using at the end of the day only a little part. Next step would be the migration of the ecm.

Pros and Cons

MS Word Integration
File share
Content search

Payment integration
Migration szenarios

Return on Investment

Less data errors
Less time consuming process

Alternatives Considered

Attribution in Google Analytics

More integration and collaboration possible. Overall userfriendly and the acceptance is great. A lot of functionality to streamline processes and save time consuming evaluations. At the end of the day way more use cases and interaction which is always great for global acting teams. In my opinion, UX is better, but costs higher

Key Insights

Do you think IBM FileNet Content Manager delivers good value for the price?

Yes

Are you happy with IBM FileNet Content Manager's feature set?

Yes

Did IBM FileNet Content Manager live up to sales and marketing promises?

Did implementation of IBM FileNet Content Manager go as expected?

I wasn't involved with the implementation phase

Would you buy IBM FileNet Content Manager again?

Yes

Other Software Used

DocsApp, OpenText Digital Asset Management for SAP Solutions

Likelihood to Recommend

Well the real time integration of Word and the external file share looks good to me. I think there’s room for improvement when it comes to migration and integration of previously used sources. Overall we did expect a little more ‚flexibility‘. Governance is always a hot topic that can be improved, too.

Finally with it

Overall Satisfaction with IBM FileNet Content Manager