SharePoint Reviews

We are a middle-sized company with around 200 users. 

We use SharePoint for some basic business processes: CRM, ECM, etc. Our maturity reached a certain level and it allowed for some further improvement.

Company portal was finally set up. The CRM system for the commercial department went into production and opened the door for further improvements, KPIs, and metrics.

• Its functionality is enormous. 
• It looks nice. 
• It has good integration with other MS products. 
• It is well supported by Microsoft.

It is too heavy. MS should not have paid foreign coders dollars per each row of code. They wasted the stability and reliability in the end.

It is a whole package solution:

• Document management
• Workflows
• Requests
• Sites
• Permissions
• Integration.

It keeps our company organized and everything is in one place. It integrates well with the whole Microsoft production. It is flexible, but still structured.

There is not just one valuable feature; it is all of them working together: 

• Document libraries
• Lists
• Workflows
• Sites
• Integration.

The product could be improved in a lot of way. It is so frustrating to get things to work as advertised.  

The support is the worst. It is bad when Microsoft support does not even know what to do and you have to tell them. Also, they take too long to solve a problem.

Our primary use of SharePoint is document management and collaboration from our team. It is very important for us.

We can arrange all our documents on one platform and see the document's changes and edits. We can arrange all the document archives.

Office 365 integration is most valuable thing in SharePoint. It is so much easier to create documents. 

Using SharePoint is difficult. It will fully use your system resources. 

It is very expensive.

Majority of our employees (around 800) all have Office 365 E3 Enterprise licences. Using at first purely email and Skype, we have now created a SharePoint Intranet and all users now use OneDrive.

Teams are now being linked to SharePoint document libraries and embraced by many of our departments. Yammer is now the centre communication tool for company-wide information. We are starting to find the benefits of Power BI, Forms, and Stream.

It has allowed improved auditing and opened up the cloud. Considerable in-house savings. We are able to add IRM and DLP to company information. This has made the auditors happy.

We have given users a common platform and increased reporting. Information is now available instantly to managers on all devices. 

The ability to take Excel files and make them dynamic SharePoint lists with instant reporting capabilities has been a major benefit. Teams are now heavily used in how all our departments work.

Skype/Teams are now the main way our company communicates internally. OneDrive and SharePoint provide a secure, fully auditable way of storing information.

You still need a bit of expertise to add branding. It is still important to have Super Users to keep moving sites forward. 

The company needs to make sure that their policies are dictating how information is stored and used, instead of letting SharePoint take control. 

Annoyingly, many new Office 365 apps always end up being only US locale for the first year of their life. Microsoft needs to realise that most of their customers are not in the USA. 

Digitizing the document flow, storage, exchange and backups along with integration of Epicor. Also, it provided a direct interface with third-parties.

• Moved from papers to digital. 
• Removed the need of paper storage and people flow into the office.

Document flows, storage, and numbering take off the actions for checking and assigning the numbering and running around with approvals and pre-approvals. 

• Improve the user-friendliness.
• Make it more intuitive.
• Make it more like a flow/BPM view style.
• More hints and make it more user-customizable.

We use SharePoint as a document management solution.  It has allowed us to centralise and more efficiently manage our templates, letterheads and other company-branded elements.  Our Document Library is a central repository for our user manuals making it easy for consultants to access the right information for each implementation.  We also use SharePoint to manage our policies and procedures. 

SharePoint has streamlined our documentation management process by allowing us to automate several functions. The version control function has been particularly useful, helping us keep detailed records of changes to documentation. This has removed the risk of human error and streamlined the process.  The ability to review the notes for each version has and to easily revert to a previous version has proven useful.

SharePoint has also helped us improve the accessibility of official company documentation across our different teams.

In conjunction with SharePoint Designer, we’ve also been able to create a social hub on our SharePoint homepage where we can share news, photos, and company announcements.

SharePoint's document management and workflow features have proven to be the valuable. We have been able to implement a reliable, easily accessible document library with version control (previously managed manually) and an announcements workflow that allows us to communicate site specific news easily.

I find the search feature in SharePoint foundation to be limited to the basic document properties. This is at odds to the type of customization that you can apply in the library. For example, we added a field to specify the department but found that the field had little or no bearing on the search results. We found it hard to determine how SharePoint uses the document properties in the search, and whether it uses anything beyond the document title.
Once we had a better understanding of Foundation's limitations, we updated our properties accordingly, with a strong focus on the document title property as a search term. This involved an extensive rework of our existing documentation structure and naming conventions to better suit SharePoint. Despite these changes, we still can't seem to get our version of SharePoint to return meaningful results, even when searching an exact document title.
I realize that this is a limitation of the version that we are using but I would like the Foundation search criteria to be more clearly defined so that document managers know what they are working with from the start.

We have had no stability issues that I am aware of.

So far, we have not had any issues with scalability. We are investigating upgrading to the Enterprise edition in the future, so this may change.

Our technical support is all in-house, so I can’t really supply a meaningful response.

I have found a wealth of support information (on SharePoint blogs and forums) which has helped me troubleshoot a variety of issues.

As already mentioned, our previous documentation solution was manual, using a folder structure accessible through Windows Explorer.

The switch to SharePoint was motivated by the desire to improve availability of our documentation and to streamline our document management processes.

Initially, I was only involved in the setup of the document management portion of our site. I found it very user-friendly and easy to configure.

Since then, I have been involved in the setup and maintenance of a second site from scratch. Although certain aspects have been quite easy to configure, I experienced a lot of difficulty when working with user permissions and content types.

The content types were difficult to configure initially. When I need to edit or update certain properties, I could not determine where, or how, to change them. We eventually decided to remove them from our implementation.

I’m not able to offer an informed opinion about pricing, but if you are looking for a robust document management system, the Enterprise edition might be the better choice.

The metadata features promise to improve the document search function. The built-in document management workflows seem very promising. These are the features motivating our desire to upgrade.

We considered replacing our SharePoint system with Atlassian Confluence. Although it does offer basic document management, it is not robust enough to meet our document management needs.

SharePoint has built in document management functionality, while Confluence relies on macros and third-party apps. We felt that the risk of relying on potentially unsupported apps outweighed any other benefits.

We still use Confluence as a collaborative work space and will be using the Confluence wikis as our knowledge base solution.

Our implementation could have been improved by a more detailed implementation plan that mapped out the exact use of each area and how to use it.

With this in mind, I would recommend that anyone who is considering SharePoint plan their implementation thoroughly before beginning.

Small process tracking for in-house requirements investigations, which are shared across several departments.

• Combined reports and data with timeline tracking.
• Better than looking into three systems to find the full picture.

• Metadata store
• Cascade dropdowns for selection of data sets.  

• Links to Outlook and native storage of emails. 
• Emails stored now do not display metadata in native format.
• No good process to import emails from several users into a single comprehensive SP repository.
• The linkages to external record stores could be beefed up.

Some solutions have been implemented in the company that I work for. Most of them are based on workflows and team collaboration.

It has made us faster and more efficient. Users just like working in this environment, as an MS Office desktop.

• Team collaboration
• Unique permissions
• MS Office web access 
• Quantity and variety of partners with solution development ability on the platform.

Allow more functionalities for the on-premise version. Do not force the move of content to a non-private cloud.