IBM FileNet Reviews

We use the product for document digitalization and workflow management. It is our document management system. 

We chose IBM FileNet primarily for its scalability and interoperability. Additionally, we appreciate the mobile app, which allows us to access documents using smartphones from anywhere. We also utilize various other IBM products for security purposes, creating a cohesive environment that works well together. The transition from a paper-based to a digital environment has significantly impacted our workflow systems and document management practices.

The standout feature for us is undoubtedly the Google-like search functionality, which allows us to search for documents within the system effortlessly. Instead of just querying the document database, this feature retrieves all relevant documents, akin to searching on the internet. It is very easy to use. 

Implementing the product has brought about significant positive changes within our company, especially in how we archive and access documents. The availability of documents on the go via the mobile app has brought positive impact. As a result, adoption rates have been very high. 

Currently, our primary ERP system is SAP S/4HANA. Despite this, we have encountered difficulties integrating the solution with it, which remains an unresolved challenge for our team. The renewal cost has significantly increased since we adopted the solution, posing a considerable challenge. Previously, we paid an annual maintenance fee of 22 percent, but now the renewals have become expensive. This cost escalation may prompt us to consider replacing the solution in the future due to pricing concerns.

We need training programs for the solution by IBM here. My team could benefit from getting certified and improving their skills. It's something we haven't seen much of in our country. So, if IBM could provide training, it would be helpful.

I have been working with the product for four years. 

I rate the product's stability a ten out of ten. 

My company has 200 users. I rate the solution's scalability an eight out of ten. 

Support for IBM FileNet is really tough. Finding skilled consultants is a challenge even with IBM partners like platinum or gold partners. And even if we find someone, they often lack the needed experience.

The solution's deployment is easy. I rate it a five to six out of ten. 
The challenge lies in the limited availability of IBM FileNet consultants through partners, compounded by a scarcity of expertise due to the relatively low adoption of the solution in Pakistan. As a result, finding quality resources with the requisite skills poses a significant challenge.

Deployment takes a couple of weeks to complete. 

The tool is expensive, and I rate its pricing a ten out of ten. 

The tool has proven robust without any notable functionality or performance issues. Currently deployed on the primary side, we plan to implement it in a high-availability environment on a DR site. This implementation will provide insights into the ease or difficulty of setup and management in such configurations. I rate it a seven out of ten. 

We use IBM FileNet for content management purposes.

The application's processing engineer needs to be more advanced.

We have been using IBM FileNet for two years.

I rate the platform's stability a nine out of ten.

We have more than 500 IBM FileNet users in our organization. It is a scalable platform, and I rate the scalability a seven out of ten.

A third-party services vendor, a gold partner certified by IBM, helps us communicate with the technical support team.

We are working with many products for content management, including SharePoint.

Our team didn't encounter any difficulties in implementing the product. The installation process takes a week to complete, whereas it takes around six months to create the content. We have a team of four technical engineers to work on deployment.

We take assistance from a third-party vendor for implementation.

The product generates around 30% benefit.

The platform is inexpensive. I rate the pricing a seven out of ten.

The operations management team primarily utilizes IBM FileNet as the foundational tool for content management. It offers a range of modules with additional functionalities for tasks such as daily maintenance, yearly maintenance, and quarterly maintenance. It has broader capabilities, and the team has tailored its usage to meet specific content management needs.

The platform efficiently streamlines the handling of documents and content in our organization. It is a user-friendly system and easy to manage for anyone with basic knowledge.

It has been leveraged effectively in our existing workflow, particularly concerning third-party components and directory services.

The security features work effectively in managing sensitive information and ensuring confidentiality.

I rate it an eight out of ten.

We have created document types for various types of documents, such as invoices (both incoming and outgoing), and normal posts in German. This involves automatic content detection, where the content itself goes via scanner to the content store. Links are then sent to the user, where they can find the documents.

IBM FileNet as a solution is very good for midsized companies and offers a compact solution where content can be stored in an IBM DB2 database. It requires minimal management effort, provides alerts when the database exceeds a certain capacity, and offers a control center over the ECM system.

FileNet provides a compact solution for midsized companies. It allows content to be stored in IBM DB2 database blocks with minimal management effort. Additionally, there are alerts to monitor the database capacity and ensure a manageable space. FileNet also provides a control center over the ECM system to monitor states and transcripts.

IBM does not do very good marketing for FileNet. Initially, after IBM acquired the product, there was good marketing support, but this has dwindled as IBM has lost personnel. More could be done to highlight the benefits to customers. Additionally, there are no visually appealing interfaces or apps for the product, which can influence customer buying decisions.

We have used IBM content management solutions since the year 2000.

We have not experienced stability issues with IBM FileNet. The database and the product itself have been stable for our needs.

Most of our customers do not want to move their sensitive internal data to the cloud. However, the solution's scalability within the IBM cloud has been very well maintained, and clients do not face issues.

Customer service is very good. I would rate it between eight and nine out of ten.

Positive

The setup process of IBM FileNet is straightforward and well-documented. There is a good online interface to configure parameters.

As IBM partners, we typically handle the deployment process for our customers as they may not have the required expertise.

Content management has been a cornerstone of our company since we started with IBM solutions, making it difficult to quantify the direct return on investment given its integral role.

It depends on the business partner providing the solution to the customer. We have an ESA contract with IBM which allows us to offer the solution at a competitive price, providing added value when combined with our expertise.

In anticipation of AI solutions becoming more prevalent, it is necessary to manage content storage efficiently to enable effective use of such technologies. We advise customers to consider a consolidated content store approach.

IBM FileNet is an enterprise content management solution. We use the solution for document management in the legal, insurance, and banking sectors.

We're implementing an on-premise solution. We're handling the installation of the product and customizing it to build a customized application addressing specific use cases. We use all kinds of documents including audio, text, images, and office documents.

The product is robust and can process a lot of documents for enterprise content management.

The user interface of IBM content management, including the ability to customize screens without the need for coding, could be improved. Customers can use it to split the screen, enhancing its suitability for office use cases.

I have been using IBM FileNet for 20 years.

The product is stable.

I rate the solution’s stability an eight out of ten.

The product is one of the best products that can handle high availability. It can work with distributed content and servers around the globe on the same cluster of content engines. We cater the solution to medium-sized businesses.

I rate the solution’s scalability a ten out of ten.

The professional services are not familiar with the product. They take too much time to handle a case. They need more knowledge.

Negative

The initial setup is very easy if it is containerized. It takes a few days to complete.

I rate the initial setup an eight out of ten for containerized installation and six out of ten for standard installation, where one is difficult, and ten is easy.

The product is expensive. The price was 30% higher than what we needed to pay for IBM.

I rate the product’s pricing a ten out of ten, where one is cheap and ten is expensive.

Overall, I rate the solution an eight out of ten.

We use the platform for the automation of business digitalizing documents. We can turn the digital content into workflows for automation and monitoring processes.

It is a superior product based on Gartner's classification. It provides good stability and scalability for huge enterprises as well. One of the valuable features is the ability to digitalize documents, including enterprise content. We can store the information in video and audio formats. It provides efficient security. Only authorized users can view and edit the stored documents in a role-based user group. Another form of security is redacting documents, where one can view only selected parts of the document. It allows us to share crucial documents like contracts by ensuring that confidential information is redacted.

The platform's price could be better than other products in the market. It could be simpler to use, considering multiple use cases. We could deploy it easily with some training as well.

IBM offers distinct features through different products, such as IBM Enterprise Records for record management, IBM Datacap for document scanning, and IBM Business Automation Workflow for complex workflows. They could include all the features into one application, similar to other vendors.

We have been using IBM FileNet for eight years.

IBM FileNet can add and manage processes for a minimum of five and 1000 users.

The initial setup and maintenance are complicated. It requires authentication to be able to deploy and maintain the certificate. We need to configure different protocols for different user groups. We require an administrator to conduct the deployment as large enterprises involve several roles and lengthy processes. We first deploy it in a test environment. Once approved, we implement it in a production environment. It requires a month to complete.

The product generates a return on investment.

We evaluated Alfresco. It offers a community edition free of charge.

I rate IBM FileNet an eight out of ten. I recommend the product. I advise others to go for it if they have the budget. It is a mature product with enough resources and support partners in various regions.

I have been working remotely for an insurance client and I use IBM File Manager.

The most valuable features of IBM File Manager are workflow, content, and process capabilities.

IBM File Manager should improve the UI. There should be more customization based on the user.

I have been using IBM File Manager for eight years.

I have found IBM File Manager to be stable.

IBM File Manager is scalable and it is easy to do.

We have approximately 100 users using this solution.

I rate the technical support of IBM File Manager a three out of five. They could improve by being more responsive.

The rate of initial setup complexity of IBM File Manager a two out of five. Whereas five is complex.

We have two people for the maintenance and support of the solution.

I rate the technical support from IBM File Manager a three out of five.

I rate IBM File Manager a seven out of ten.

Our client is using it for search and retrieval and for archiving. From the very onset, it was deployed for archiving of their legacy records. We did not implement any workflow for them. We use the FileNet Content Engine Web Services to retrieve documents. We use high-end production scanners to scan the records. After that, users can use FileNet to search for these records.

There is automation involved in the process. At the point of scanning, the scanner dispatches the records to a particular folder. In each folder, there is an application that has been designed by us, which files the records in FileNet. We are not using any FileNet application to do the filing. We have an application which renames the XML to FileNet to do that.

We mainly use it for inactive documents. These are records they don't need to edit any longer. They are still necessary for their day-to-day operations; they provide evidence about their operations so they cannot be deleted.

 Our client is using version 4.2 on-prem.

We implemented it, per our client's request, as an archival solution. FileNet has given us what we needed.

FileNet has helped our client implement a retention policy for their inactive records.

We mainly use the Metadata, we don't use content, as such, for the retrieval. It has been robust because that's how we designed it. The application, in terms of durability, has been able to withstand the usage, given that it was installed in 2003 and it's still working. The version installed back then was 3.6. In about 2009, it was upgraded to 4.2.

For us, the back-end has been good. The system is so robust that we've never had problems, in terms of system administration. We've never had any challenges.

Our client feels FileNet does not provide them with content searchability. They feel it's cumbersome. They're only using Metadata. If the Metadata is not well-populated, it becomes a problem to retrieve a document.

Aside from that, they feel the interface — when they look at modern interfaces — is not robust enough for them. However, they're on an old version and I wouldn't know what the current interface looks like.

For non-technical users, with what we currently have on the ground, which is the web services, the only challenge we have is that content searchability is not available, because it is an old installation.

From a technical point of view, FileNet is very stable.

We have never had to contact FileNet support.

I was part of the team that set up the FileNet installation we are currently using. I don't remember how long it took to implement, as that goes back to 2003.

The installation has been going on for a long time. I believe they have seen value for their money. They've been using this application for over 15 years and it's still delivering.

FileNet is quite expensive, although Documentum is expensive too. There are several other content service platforms with a very low price, and they deliver as much as FileNet and Documentum do.

Our client is trying to move away from the FileNet to Documentum and that has been difficult. The migration from FileNet to Documentum was started sometime in 2013 but, unfortunately, they have not been successful with it. I believe the vendor they used did not have enough knowledge to be able to deploy it, so they're having challenges with it.

They decided to move away from FileNet back because there was no clear direction as to where FileNet was going. They wanted to do content, and there was an option to go with FileNet P8, but they got direction from industry reviews and decided to go with Documentum because of the content functionality. Aside from that, ideally, they need to bring in workflow, as well as content searchability — full-text search. Those are some of the things they desire.

When they began with FileNet it was started as an archiving solution. That is what it was conceived for initially. But the need arose to get into content and workflow and they felt they needed a new platform.

I do believe FileNet has such capabilities. We are trying to propose to them to go for FileNet P8. Unfortunately for them, they have spent so much time trying to implement Documentum and have not made headway. They have yet to look at P8. We are the ones supporting FileNet for them. We have told them that the functionality they're looking for is available in FileNet P8. I would love to use FileNet P8 to see what it can deliver. However, whether they want to implement FileNet P8 or Documentum, the procedure is cumbersome.

I'm very familiar with Documentum. I've gone for Documentum training in Germany. But I would still go with FileNet because it delivered for me. It has been stable for many years. That is a strong point for me.

My advice would be, before you go for any DMS, don't get stuck on looking for solutions that rate highly in industry reviews. For some of my clients, that is important, but others aren't concerned about that. They say, "Does the solution address my problem? Is it cost-effective? Can I scale up? If yes, good." Those are all things my clients are looking for.

The primary use case for IBM FileNet involves document automation.

Using IBM FileNet allows for easy and fast access to documentation, which supports compliance and regulatory requirements.

The integration feature of IBM FileNet is most effective for document management.

The setup process is very complex, and I would prefer if it were easier. A modern interface would also be an enhancement.

I have been working with IBM FileNet for about ten years.

I would rate the stability of IBM FileNet as ten out of ten.

IBM FileNet is very scalable, deserving a ten out of ten rating.

The customer service and support from IBM are rated as six out of ten. They often lack the necessary knowledge to provide adequate support.

Neutral

Before using IBM FileNet, I used other IBM products. It seems some Robotic Process Automation products were used prior.

The initial setup of IBM FileNet is very hard. It took around five days to complete.

The deployment typically requires two people: one for installation and another for setup, particularly covering configuration.

IBM FileNet provides financial benefits through easy and fast access to documentation. However, the speaker did not mention a specific return on investment.

I recommend IBM FileNet due to its excellent integration capabilities.

I'd rate the solution ten out of ten.