iManage Work is a document management solution formerly known as HP Worksite. iManage was divested from Hewlett-Packard in 2015 and is now an independent company, headquartered in Chicago.
N/A
Tungsten Capture
Score 8.0 out of 10
N/A
Tungsten Capture (formerly Kofax Capture) is a suite of multichannel document capture applications.
$3,500
per year
Pricing
iManage Work
Tungsten Capture
Editions & Modules
No answers on this topic
Kofax Capture
$3,500
per year
Offerings
Pricing Offerings
iManage Work
Tungsten Capture
Free Trial
No
No
Free/Freemium Version
No
No
Premium Consulting/Integration Services
No
No
Entry-level Setup Fee
No setup fee
No setup fee
Additional Details
—
—
More Pricing Information
Community Pulse
iManage Work
Tungsten Capture
Considered Both Products
iManage Work
Verified User
Anonymous
Chose iManage Work
Truthfully I have never used another filing software. Each firm I have been with has used iManage.
MS Sharepoint requires a lot of time to integrate and efforts are expensive compared to iManage product. iManage is quick setup and well integrates with existing on-premise environments and integrates well with major iDP systems for authentications and manage RBAC systems for …
There are a couple of different types of Alternatives:
In terms of e-mail, the default is just to leave everything in Outlook and archive them when the total inbox size gets too large. This doesn't work for our organisation because the emails are not sufficiently backed up and …
Worldox and Worldox Enterprise do a superb job for document management. iManage Work has the edge in that it's cloud hosted, but so is Worldox Enterprise. Worldox forces assimilation by integrating with Office applications and controlling where items are saved to. iManage Work …
I have viewed several other document management system software, but iManage was already installed at my company before I started working here. For us, I think this is the right solution. Companies with a smaller number of employees or smaller document collections could find …
Kofax Capture was less expensive than the IBM product and was easier to use than both IBM and Amazon in my opinion. The unlimited scripting of Kofax Capture allowed us to fully integrate the tool into our business processes to improve our automation and reduce errors. We …
Kofax Capture is a very extensible platform that is a swiss army knife for data extraction. The other platforms handle standard forms and tables well but does not allow for the customizations needed for more complex documents that Kofax Capture is able to do with ease.
Kofax is quicker when searching mass amounts of documents and data. Any filters would bring up immediate information, whereas in Access the database is slower.
iManage is well suited to managing the large volume of documents and emails that are created on a daily basis. Lawyers can get dozens if not hundreds of e-mails a day, and we need something to do with them. Deleting them is often not practical, because you may require the information a year from now. Leaving them in Outlook is also impractical, because a large Inbox will slow Outlook down. Outlook has an archiving feature, but this doesn't really help for collaboration (and your colleagues are likely out of luck if you end up unavailable due to emergency). iManage is less well suited to small organizations (ex: sole practitioners and small firms) because it is does require a significant investment in implementing and maintaining the software. iManage Work is well suited for large law firms, because it is great for collaboration, including between different offices.
If there is a desire to extract text from emails, documents, spreadsheets, and faxes this is the perfect platform for that. The only thing it does, extracting information, it does well. External information in terms of flat files, databases, and web services can be tied into the platform as well to allow line item matching, address validation, and other features that make it just an overall great ingestion system.
One of the things we relied on Kofax was its connector with Oracle UCM and Filenet. It was easy to configure batch classes and set up release scripts to UCM or Filent
One other aspect of it was validation scripts based on external Oracle databases. It was very helpful.
After removal of dongle, it became easier to maintain the software.
The system can be fairly buggy. I have issues with freezing, and a lack of responsiveness each time I use it ( although not for long and does not prevent me from getting what I need to be done, it's just annoying).
It has a slightly larger learning curve to use than other more simplistic records managers
Kofax Capture's interface is antiquated and could use a refresh. An attempt was made two versions back to add ribbons and modernize the interface but anything below the first level looks and feels like a tired application.
Bugs that have existed in the platform for years are still prevalent and there is no priority to fix them. Features and critical bugs are regularly fixed but simple nagging ones that can cause a development project to close and lose all work is commonplace.
Licensing, while reasonable for lower volume solutions, becomes expensive once a project reaches a certain threshold. Ensure future planning capacity is done before purchasing to make sure it's a cost effective solution.
It has been what our firm has always used, and overall everyone seems to be pleased with it. It is user friendly and intuitive and it doesn't appear we have any intention of changing what we use for our purposes.
To me iManage is very intuitive and user friendly. The switch from the application vs the Outlook extension was an adjustment, but it was one I made pretty easily once it happened.
We had an issue a few years ago where a plug-in of some sort which allowed the viewing of PDFs got updated and then whenever some people previewed PDFs in iManage then Outlook would crash. My outlook crashed over 20 times in a single day once. It was a pretty bad time. I know one of our information technology professionals in another office worked non-stop with iManage to get it resolved, and it seemed like they did take the issue pretty seriously.
MS SharePoint requires a lot of time to integrate and efforts are expensive compared to iManage product. iManage is quick setup and well integrates with existing on-premise environments and integrates well with major iDP systems for authentications and manage RBAC systems for permissions via API calls.
Kofax Capture was less expensive than the IBM product and was easier to use than both IBM and Amazon in my opinion. The unlimited scripting of Kofax Capture allowed us to fully integrate the tool into our business processes to improve our automation and reduce errors. We also looked at a product from Nuance but at the time decided to eliminate it from our evaluation.
Since our policy is that all client documents are saved into iManage, we have been able to keep an email retention policy for Exchange to 90days to delete. This has saved us significant resources in both Exchange management and hardware to support excessive email storage for archived databases or extremely large databases.
The ability to search documents quickly by text inside the documents allows to review previously created contracts and use similar language that is well suited to a new project over again without having to spend time manually opening and searching ourselves. The software does it for us.
We used to store old files at an offsite storage facility for a monthly fee. We have implemented a new procedure, where we now scan these old paper files into our iManage system, making them text searchable PDFs. Since the software has such robust searching capabilities, this makes the documents much more accessible when needed than requesting an offsite storage delivery and having to manually pull paper files. In addition, we have saved thousands of dollars a month by not storing paper files offsite any longer. If the searching were not so powerful, we would not done this because our old paper storage system worked well for us previously.
We were able to decrease personnel expenditures as there was not a need for individuals to index documents prior to incorporating them into the record.
