SharePoint Reviews

The most valuable features are the high number of ready-made snippets, easy basic process automation functionality, security model, and good integration with other Microsoft products.

Knowledge management has improved a lot.

Analytics and reporting is an area with room for improvement.

It should provide more complex-process automation out of the box.

We've been using it in production since early 2015 for both document management and as Project Server 2013.

We have spent some time reconfiguring the farm in order to overcome performance degradation.

We have not encountered any scalability issues.

We haven't issued any tickets to Microsoft support because we have dedicated SharePoint admins.

We have used no other tool prior to SharePoint.

Installation and configuration were somewhat complex.

You can always start off with the free SharePoint Foundation version in order to evaluate the platform.

Before choosing this product, we did not evaluate any other options.

Look at the spec list and try to find out if (almost) all of the features you request are covered by SharePoint.

Collaboration & DMS are the most valuable features of the product, to me.

It is also easy to use and provides valuable integration options.

We are a service provider of SharePoint and SCOM to our clients. And we can see the change, how efficiently they are able to carry out their regular productivity works through SP, while the IT team is able to have control and adapt quickly with SCOM.

There are multiple areas with room for improvement:

1. Scanning engine driver
2. Mobile integration (just launched by MS, yet to be seen)
3. Stability

We recommend this product with the following two main points:

1. Cost of investment is quite low, while the ROI is quite high.
2. Plan a proper approach, and look for a capable team for implementation

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. 

Less than one year.

It is very expensive.

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.

One to three years.

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.

• Ability to be used from a .NET programming environment

We were able to introduce a CMS, which had never been implemented before.

For sure, it should offer customisation of data grids, which is not possible, as it seems to use some proprietary OCX control.

I have used it for three years.

I have not encountered that many stability issues.

I have not encountered any scalability issues so far.

I did not previously use a different solution.

As with any other product, initial setup is a bit complex to understand how/what is happening, but with a good background and understanding, how it works it is very easy.

For simple solutions, I recommend this solution. But going large scale, you might consider going with an open-source solution.

Before choosing this product, I did not evaluate other options.

Look at alternatives, and understand your goals and possible future implementations.

Compared to other products, SharePoint is not only a content manager, but a wider product, like enterprise content management. You can use multiple components in SharePoint. Moreover, SharePoint is already moving to cloud, if you are using SharePoint online, which is cloud-based technology, it is more accessible. 

• Data classification
• Search

These two elements are cheap.

We would like more security features, like automating. 

More than five years.

There are some limitations on storage. 

The product and technical support teams are really good.

The initial setup is straightforward.

The replacement costs for it are cheaper if you use only SharePoint.

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.

Still implementing.

Alerts and co-authoring

So far our HR department has seen the benefits in terms of having a central calendar where everybody in the department can be updated regarding meetings and appointments, creating discussion forums regarding important topics affecting the agency or the department. Having a central repository for documents (rather than at different locations creating storage issues)

Co-authoring needs to be real time.

2 months

no

no

no

Customer Service: okTechnical Support: ok

In-house

I would recommend it. Good software to help:

• Centralized management and editing of documents
• Team brainstorming and exchange through discussion forums
• Synchronization and centralization of appointments and meetings
• The provision of one portal or web site to access documents, calendars, forums etc.