2.8 out of 5 (6 Ratings)
Mar 1, 2017
Better overall collaboration between the stakeholders and the 3rd party vendor up front would have resulted in better adoption of the new technology by the users. A partnership type relationship should have been the goal between us and the vendor before starting the implementation.
Jan 25, 2017
Implementation was slapdash and we are still having multiple problems. Part of the vendor team refused to even come onsite as requested.
Jan 19, 2017
Efficient and cooperative
Dec 9, 2016
During the initial implementation, the product performed as expected. As the complexity of the use cases grew and the number documents increased, the system's performance declined.
Nov 21, 2016
Basic content management has been reliable. We have experienced several bugs with advanced features. These seem to be due to new modules or features not being tested with the full product. There are also overlapping products which causes confusion about which technology is the long-term supported technology. Support is segmented. For example if you open a support ticket, you might be sent back and forth between the Content Management group and the Archive group. OpenText support is also very strick about the scope of their tickets. When you describe a problem, there is an initial assessment as to what the problem is. If they determin the issue is not with the initially identified module, they will close the ticket noting that the product works. Customers must then open a new ticket. Bugs are logged, but support does not follow up if the bug is fixed.
Nov 17, 2016
Fine. Work with OT VE team very efficiently