Box vs Hyland OnBase comparison

Box and Hyland OnBase are prominent contenders in the content management and collaboration sector. Box stands out for its user-friendly interface and collaboration features, while Hyland OnBase is favored for handling complex business processes with robust customization.

Features: Box provides collaboration tools, robust security, and extensive third-party integrations, making it ideal for diverse environments. It's recognized for being device agnostic and simplifies file sharing. In contrast, Hyland OnBase is known for its comprehensive content management solutions, adaptable to various industries, with a strong focus on security, stability, and growth capabilities.

Room for Improvement: Box users desire enhanced search capabilities, better integration, and improved role management, noting performance issues linked to security settings. Hyland OnBase users suggest improving the usability of its interface, expanding both localization and OCR capabilities, and simplifying workflows and migration processes. Concerns regarding pricing models and regional pricing inconsistency are also highlighted.

Ease of Deployment and Customer Service: Box offers flexible deployment in both public and cloud environments, with responsive customer support, though accessing higher-tier assistance can be difficult. It is noted for positive user experiences. Hyland OnBase focuses on on-premises deployments with room for extensive customization but can require additional training to address deployment complexity.

Pricing and ROI: Box appears cost-efficient, particularly for educational bodies, with perceived high initial costs offset by its feature-rich offering. It provides notable ROI through operational efficiency and compliance risk reduction. Although perceived as expensive, Hyland OnBase's modular nature allows for detailed customization to optimize business processes, with recognized ROI in workflow efficiencies despite regional pricing disparities.