Esker is a global cloud platform built to unlock strategic value for finance and customer service professionals and strengthen collaboration between companies by automating the cash conversion cycle. Esker’s mission is to build a foundation that promotes positive-sum growth, increased productivity, improved employee engagement, and greater trust between organizations.
N/A
OpenText Documentum
Score 8.4 out of 10
N/A
OpenText acquired Documentum from Dell EMC in 2017, and now supports the enterprise content management (ECM) system. The vendor says users can build content-centric applications and solutions from collaborating on business documents to delivering case-based applications to managing highly precise processes in the most regulated business environments.
N/A
Pricing
Esker
OpenText Documentum
Editions & Modules
No answers on this topic
No answers on this topic
Offerings
Pricing Offerings
Esker
OpenText Documentum
Free Trial
No
No
Free/Freemium Version
No
No
Premium Consulting/Integration Services
No
No
Entry-level Setup Fee
No setup fee
Optional
Additional Details
—
—
More Pricing Information
Community Pulse
Esker
OpenText Documentum
Considered Both Products
Esker
Verified User
Anonymous
Chose Esker
I have listed a few that we considered but there were many more in the initial assessment, Esker was priced well and had the best user interface. Was really easy to use and the implementation process was well designed. It was a system that could handle a two tiered delegations …
We investigated Readsoft early in our exploration of upgrade options. We were on Esker DeliveryWare, but the UI for Readsoft, at the time, seemed to be a little convoluted and geared towards exception handling and required tiered users. Also, ReadSoft was more cost prohibitive …
Kofax is very similar to Esker in terms of functionality as well as ease of use. I feel that both programs work well, but neither is very user-friendly. Kofax is more expensive, which is why Esker wins.
TermSync was a little more difficult to learn but has become much better in the end. Once the universal search bar feature was implemented, it became so much easier to navigate and find accounts.
Technical Analyst / Technical SME / Tech Lead / Business Analyst
Chose OpenText Documentum
Sharepoint and others are a bit late to the party -- they have some nice features, but are leaders in the suite spot areas that we found OpenText helping us with.
Features and underlying technology and development roadmap are much better for both Docushare and Confluence. OpenText product was preselected when I came into the implementation of the project. It should not have been.
Subjective but here's how I see it: Heavy duty (in order of how much they can do and how much they can handle): 1)Documentum, 2)FileNet 3)OpenText Middle duty: 1)WCC-WebCenter Content, 2)Alfresco, 3)M-Files (3rd b/c it is Windows only), 4)Nuxeo (only b/c of its newish approach …
We have evaluated IBM Filenet, Alfresco and Oracle WCM. Documentum has a very strong business process management system, security and scalability. It's not just a web content management system, it's an enterprise content management system with very good capabilities for …
While Livelink has many more modules out of the box and provide some more functionality which can be applied to document lifecycle without writing any customizations, from the support perspective Documentum is much cheaper to support and it is much more stable than Opentext ECM …
There are numerous other products available including SharePoint, Stellent, FileNet, etc. Most offer many of the same solutions and modules that Documentum provides, however some, such as SharePoint, still have significant shortcomings when it comes to true, enterprise-level …
I would recommend Esker based on the automation of invoice sending - it is very nice to have a tool that not only stores all of the contact info, but sends the invoices out as well. The tracking feature is great to have to see if the submission was successful. I do think that overall it could be much more user-friendly, but once you know what you're doing, it is not hard software to use.
What are the document volume, the throughput - currently and expected in year, 3 years etc.? Is the company doing content management on international level, where access from multiple locations is needed - then Documentum can be good investment. What ECM system will be used for - document storage, document lifecycle or retention? Or all of the above? - Documentum works very well if all 3 items are combined, yet for storage there must be cheaper and more easily adaptable solutions available.
Everything is electronic and every manager receives an email each morning telling them how many invoices they need to approve.
It has completely removed paper form the Accounts payable process and automatically archives invoices for the mandatory period required by Inland Revenue.
For monthly reporting there is visibility over what has not yet been included in the accounts and staff can follow with the tardy managers.
It's good at integration with external systems through standard industry supported APIs, including but not limited to web services integration and file system integration.
Good support from major up and downstream technologies such as image capturing and back end ERP, Database, and HR.
We can't enter credit memos in Esker. Need to enter in SAP and then link.
PO invoices that were trained to go into the PO bucket, route into the non-PO buckets.
Freight invoices that have had hundreds going into the non-PO bucket have a tendency to route to the PO-bucket because a PO number is referenced on page 7.
Expense. If Documentum costs less it would penetrate more markets. This is often the reason a lighter weight solution is chosen.
Web Publishing. Documentum is not a great solution for replacing CMSs like SiteCore or Drupal. Probably better as an archiving target for parallel publishing to both web and Documentum. Documentum is also not a web hosting solution like some other systems, it is possible to try and consume directly from the repository in real time but it is better to push web content out and consume from another platform.
Development. The price of broad functionality is complexity. Arguably, Documentum drank the kool-aid and tried to become like other enterprise solutions by adapting Java, Windows, etc. in the late '90s and it made them slower, more complex in design, and less stable. They recovered from that but it still requires developers with a few years of experience in Documentum to safely develop in Documentum. The issue is not knowing Java but knowing what to do or not do in an ECM system. This is even more important in regulated ECM/RM systems.
Stability is a key factor as well as its flexibility. Also, any organization that deploys Documentum will have made a significant investment in terms of time and money, so not renewing its commitment can come with a significant cost. That said, the decision to deploy Documentum initially should come only after extensive evaluation, knowing that once deployed it will likely remain the platform of choice.
Esker does everything that it promises to do, but it is very hard to figure out. I am a very tech-savvy person, but I needed extensive training to be able to use the basic functions of Esker. Once you know what you're doing, it's not too hard, but I don't understand why they couldn't make it easier to use.
They have been very helpful and the online support site is awesome. They keep the site up to date with the latest changes and present challenges to keep learning the new updates to keep things entertaining. They are overall a great crew to work with
We investigated Readsoft early in our exploration of upgrade options. We were on Esker DeliveryWare, but the UI for Readsoft, at the time, seemed to be a little convoluted and geared towards exception handling and required tiered users. Also, Readsoft was more cost prohibitive and did not have a solution for our faxing. Though, as I understand it, they may have since found a solution for this issue
Subjective but here's how I see it: Heavy duty (in order of how much they can do and how much they can handle): 1)Documentum, 2)FileNet 3)OpenText Middle duty: 1)WCC-WebCenter Content, 2)Alfresco, 3)M-Files (3rd b/c it is Windows only), 4)Nuxeo (only b/c of its newish approach that may lead somewhere) Light duty: 1) BOX (not an ECM but it says it is), 2) EFSS (pick your poison, BOX is an enhanced EFSS), 3) CMSs (some have some ECM capability, none have much)
We now have reporting available down to the individual field level (changes, errors, etc) and can calculate cost to serve.
It replaced on-premise hardware with cloud SaaS that is more cost effective and risk adverse.
It is more intuitive; we can put new hires on order entry and experience less user errors. As a solution owner who fixes problems and answers questions, I don't find myself having to "think" about Esker and it has become a smaller part of my job now that end-users are more self-sufficient.
After this product, the client is able to manage content security and due to it, the client is able to use the business process, and this really reduces effort and increases the profit in business.
It provides integration with SAP easily which really helps the client to manage this effectively and with minimum effort system is ready to use.
Also searching, automated flows also create a bigger impact and reduce a lot manual effort.