• Skip to primary navigation
  • Skip to main content
  • Skip to primary sidebar
  • Skip to footer
TSB Alfresco Cobrand White tagline

Technology Services Group

  • Home
  • Products
    • Alfresco Enterprise Viewer
    • OpenContent Search
    • OpenContent Case
    • OpenContent Forms
    • OpenMigrate
    • OpenContent Web Services
    • OpenCapture
    • OpenOverlay
  • Solutions
    • Alfresco Content Accelerator for Claims Management
      • Claims Demo Series
    • Alfresco Content Accelerator for Policy & Procedure Management
      • Compliance Demo Series
    • OpenContent Accounts Payable
    • OpenContent Contract Management
    • OpenContent Batch Records
    • OpenContent Government
    • OpenContent Corporate Forms
    • OpenContent Construction Management
    • OpenContent Digital Archive
    • OpenContent Human Resources
    • OpenContent Patient Records
  • Platforms
    • Alfresco Consulting
      • Alfresco Case Study – Canadian Museum of Human Rights
      • Alfresco Case Study – New York Philharmonic
      • Alfresco Case Study – New York Property Insurance Underwriting Association
      • Alfresco Case Study – American Society for Clinical Pathology
      • Alfresco Case Study – American Association of Insurance Services
      • Alfresco Case Study – United Cerebral Palsy
    • HBase
    • DynamoDB
    • OpenText & Documentum Consulting
      • Upgrades – A Well Documented Approach
      • Life Science Solutions
        • Life Sciences Project Sampling
    • Veeva Consulting
    • Ephesoft
    • Workshare
  • Case Studies
    • White Papers
    • 11 Billion Document Migration
    • Learning Zone
    • Digital Asset Collection – Canadian Museum of Human Rights
    • Digital Archive and Retrieval – ASCP
    • Digital Archives – New York Philharmonic
    • Insurance Claim Processing – New York Property Insurance
    • Policy Forms Management with Machine Learning – AAIS
    • Liferay and Alfresco Portal – United Cerebral Palsy of Greater Chicago
  • About
    • Contact Us
  • Blog

FileNet – Will IBM Sell It? Follow-up comments from Linked-In

You are here: Home / Documentum / FileNet – Will IBM Sell It? Follow-up comments from Linked-In

August 1, 2017

Back in May, based on some insight from analysts and ex-FileNet/IBM employees, we posted our analysis around if IBM might consider selling FileNet.  While we didn’t receive any comments within the blog post, the posting on Linked-In was pretty active.  This post will present the relevant comments unedited (without some of the more biased promotion posts for other products) for readers thoughts.

Update 10/13/17 – Gartner removes IBM from “leader” quadrant for first time in 20+ years

Feri Clayton (Director, ECM Products – IBM)

Not true at all! IBM ECM products including FileNet platform have a very healthy growth and we are investing in their roadmap. Next major version of FileNet Content Manager and Content Foundation (5.5) planned for release in 4Q 2017, with more coming in 2018.

Trent Leonard (Technical Architect – BCBS North Carolina)

Let’s face it, the market has passed the traditional ECM products by. It takes far more time and money to develop a solution on FileNet than on most other more nimble and simple solutions. Plus, FileNet is expensive. An overly complex expensive system equals market decline.

Renato Duarte – ECM Solutions Knowledge Leader – Everis

If the IBM strategy continues (Director board) IBM will be split in two companies. But the board is changing…

Joseph Angarola – Technical Program Manager – ECM – Anthem

I would prefer to hear what Gartner or Forrester has to say about this.

Reply – Dave Giordano – TSG

Joseph – I blogged my thought on Gartner ECM review in a previous post – https://tsgrp.wpengine.com/2016/11/21/gartner-ecm-2016-magic-quadrant-change-hype-and-rigged/ I commented that Gartner seems overly biased toward IBM – specifically Watson and Box relationship. Not sure it (Gartner analysis) is relevant anymore.

Barten Broeke – CEO – NovaDoc (IBM ECM Business Partner)

You took old news from EMC Documentum and did a find-and-replace?

Reply – Dave Giordano – TSG

I tried to do an analysis based on several analysts and ex-FileNet in regards to the similarities between FileNet at IBM and Documentum at EMC. Comparisons are very similar…..was not saying they would sell it (I mentioned in the post that inside sources said IBM said “not yet”). Wanted to do an analysis of why they might sell it.

Yannis Nakos – ECM Content Services Sales Leader – Belgium and Luxembourg – IBM

The lack of strong sources here is demonstrating a poor investigative approach. Starting by saying you’re not for spreading rumours…but “an ex-Filenet guy said that…”. Come on! IBM acquired Filenet 11 years ago. Someone who didn’t make it in the merger may have opinions. But these can’t be seriously taken as a foundation for such a post unless there’s an agenda behind. Filenet has been re-written about 2-3 years ago by IBM, who incorporated tons of new embedded features no one else has proposed. Every commercial organisation has a goal for reaching financial targets and hence is by nature open to options. “Not yet” be willing to sell is as close as the best answer you may get from any realistic business organisation. That’s what IBM was saying for the PC’s and SOHO systems until it became commodity and has been sold to Lenovo. However the latest evolution of Filenet, IBM Case Manager, is doing great and at very large Documentum and Sharepoint accounts. I don’t think IBM is any close to ready yet to join the ECM graveyard as many have done. Your post is not very well documented. Anyways, as Warhol was saying, anyone may have her/his 15min of glory…but to my humble opinion it’s a pity to achieve it that way.

Reply – Dave Giordano – TSG

Yannis – I clearly posted this as an opinion. I am very confident that finding documented sources on why a public company would sell off a business unit are non-existent and borderline illegal here in the US. After talking with one ex-FileNet employee that talked to a current employee as well as multiple analysts and other FileNet partners, I thought it warranted a post. Our posts are ment to start a conversation so thank you for contributing. I haven’t seen as you mentioned “Case Manager doing great” (can you share documentation?). With the Documentum sale, EMC had provided separate income statements for the division so it was easier to judge.

Reply – Yannis Nokas – IBM

Dear Dave….Thanks for sharing this “opinion”, and taking the time with Photoshop to even create a spontaneous logo appearing clearly as a statement and eye catcher for these allegations. I guess that your company being specialised in Alfresco and DOCUMENTUM (who’s future is somehow less secure than when it was the sole ECM offering of its owner) has nothing to do with that “opinion” being carefully expressed out loud with no obvious disclaimers. Let’s agree we disagree !:-)

Reply – Dave Giordano – TSG

Yannis – Agree with your point that Documentum is much less secure in the OpenText world than FileNet is with IBM. The article came about after talking to an ex-FileNet employee and multiple other sources. We posted a similar article about Documentum in 2015 that turned out to be true. Again, appreciate your passion and contribution to the conversation.

Reply – Yannis Nokas – IBM

Dave, the situations ain’t the same at all.

  1. IBM has a software portfolio broader by far compared to Documentum’s or EMC’s. The strategy isn’t about ECM, is much larger as a landscape in terms of analytics, AI and cloud solutions.
  2. In 2015 Documentum was already for sale for years.

When (if I remember well, in 2009 in Momentum Athens) Documentum’s management team announced that EMC Documentum’s sales people would act directly on the market on top accounts, it was signing the end of the channel’s/partners support and advocacy. As IBM ECM regional sales lead, most of my deals are sold FOR our partners to ensure customer’s support on the market.

The management of EMC were no longer injecting cash in Documentum since years:

  • Organically it was very hard to develop and release new versions and functionality,
  • the strategy wasn’t clear about mobility and many other trendy and commodity (to others) themes,
  • sync and share was dead with the reselling of EMC’s in-house baby: Syncplicity in 2015…announcing the loss of the last innovation EMC had built in their ECM portfolio,
  • the strategy wasn’t clear and the lack of innovation organically or  through acquisition was building  a pretty mad customer base.

I was selling and implementing Documentum from 1999 (EDMS98 and then 4i version) until 2013 when the market for Documentum was stretching day after day.

You can’t compare the 2 situations. Honestly.

  • IBM has new releases fueled with innovations constantly
  • Acquisitions are expending the ECM portfolio year over year
  • Watson (IBM’s AI) is delivering cognitive processing in more and more ECM products/platforms of IBM every year as well.

Of course the huge strategic shift of IBM might leave some people angry…

Summary Thoughts

We appreciate the enthusiasm of the IBM folks defending their product.  Will leave it to the readers to determine how similar Documentum embedded within EMC or OpenText is with FileNet at IBM but we stand by our analysis based on discussions with others that are no longer with IBM or independent analysts.

Free FileNet Migration Case Study

Filed Under: Documentum, FileNet

Reader Interactions

Trackbacks

  1. FileNet and CMOD – Will IBM finally sell them and potentially buy Box? says:
    February 20, 2019 at 7:08 am

    […] – Is IBM Planning on Selling it”.  We had some interesting follow-up – particularly on LinkedIn from some folks at IBM that were not to happy with our analysis.  At the time we stated that “we […]

    Reply
  2. FileNet Migration to Amazon Web Services – Why now more than ever? says:
    March 28, 2019 at 7:01 am

    […] IBM might sell off FileNet but, at that time we thought “not yet”.  While the post got lots of activity from the IBM community, we haven’t really seen anything change for the reasons IBM would keep FileNet.  Additional […]

    Reply

Leave a Reply Cancel reply

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

Primary Sidebar

Search

Related Posts

  • The Deep Analysis Podcast – The 11 Billion File Benchmark
  • Migrating to Alfresco – Reducing Risk, Stress and Cost with a Rolling Migration
  • Federated Search and Content Services – Is a Publishing Approach better?
  • Alfresco and Amazon Web Services – Disrupting Legacy Content Services – Alfresco Day London – Keynote
  • Alfresco – The Importance of being Cloud Native compared to Legacy ECM vendors
  • FileNet – Adding a Modern Interface to a Legacy ECM
  • Alfresco Guest Contributor – Documentum, FileNet & OpenText – should I stay or should I go?
  • EFFS Promises and Legacy ECM Vendors – ECM Article Roundup
  • ECM Roadmap – Thoughts on Planning for the Future
  • 2017 ECM Thoughts and Predictions as well as recap of 2016 postings

Recent Posts

  • Alfresco Content Accelerator and Alfresco Enterprise Viewer – Improving User Collaboration Efficiency
  • Alfresco Content Accelerator – Document Notification Distribution Lists
  • Alfresco Webinar – Productivity Anywhere: How modern claim and policy document processing can help the new work-from-home normal succeed
  • Alfresco – Viewing Annotations on Versions
  • Alfresco Content Accelerator – Collaboration Enhancements
stacks-of-paper

11 BILLION DOCUMENT
BENCHMARK
OVERVIEW

Learn how TSG was able to leverage DynamoDB, S3, ElasticSearch & AWS to successfully migrate 11 Billion documents.

Download White Paper

Footer

Search

Contact

22 West Washington St
5th Floor
Chicago, IL 60602

inquiry@tsgrp.com

312.372.7777

Copyright © 2023 · Technology Services Group, Inc. · Log in

This website uses cookies to improve your experience. Please accept this site's cookies, but you can opt-out if you wish. Privacy Policy ACCEPT | Cookie settings
Privacy & Cookies Policy

Privacy Overview

This website uses cookies to improve your experience while you navigate through the website. Out of these cookies, the cookies that are categorized as necessary are stored on your browser as they are essential for the working of basic functionalities of the website. We also use third-party cookies that help us analyze and understand how you use this website. These cookies will be stored in your browser only with your consent. You also have the option to opt-out of these cookies. But opting out of some of these cookies may have an effect on your browsing experience.
Necessary
Always Enabled
Necessary cookies are absolutely essential for the website to function properly. This category only includes cookies that ensures basic functionalities and security features of the website. These cookies do not store any personal information.
Non-necessary
Any cookies that may not be particularly necessary for the website to function and is used specifically to collect user personal data via analytics, ads, other embedded contents are termed as non-necessary cookies. It is mandatory to procure user consent prior to running these cookies on your website.
SAVE & ACCEPT