SharePoint Reviews

We have a customized solution called TeamCenter. The technology behind it is SharePoint.

The use case is to distribute project mandates among team members, track and collaborate on the work that has been done. It creates the work breakdown, and assigns tasks, manages the workflow accordingly. We are able to check what is being done, who is been handling it, and where the workflow is at right now. It eases control, messaging, and provides a common view where we are at.

Now that this system has been put in place, we have email integration and a lot of work which we were doing manually is now done by Teamcentral, thanks to SharePoint, thanks to Microsoft.

The workflow feature is valuable because it enables us to cascade responsibilities. It cyclically keeps tabs on work and to what extent it has progressed, where it is stuck. That feature is really very helpful.

There is always room for improvement. Workflow is something that can become more intelligent. I can't say to what extent intelligence can added, but I think there is always a scope for making it more intelligent.

It's going to last until Microsoft revokes the license on which it is built.

Since scale is not challenging me right now, I haven't really paid attention to its scalability. We have 12 users on it. Their roles are primarily deployment, resource management, and fulfilling the technical mandates people are working on.

We did not have a previous solution, other than mail-messaging and Excel.

The initial setup was straightforward for sure. I didn't see any complexity in it. The implementation took about three-and-a-half months.

We used a consultant. He was technical enough to use the plug-ins and integrators that were required. He was a specialist.

The pricing works for us.

Workflow is helpful in the allocation of tasks in any close-knit teams, teams which are not sized beyond 20 to 25 at the most. If the workflow can be made more intelligent, adding value to the information rather than just pinging and cascading and shooting of alerts, that can really help with value-add and to save time.

There was one techy who designed and implemented this. Currently he continues looking at what is required, but in terms of continued support I don't have any staff on it. When any fixes are required, he handles them remotely. We don't have anyone on staff to manage it.

We expect the scale to go up and more business to pour in so we expect the number of users is going to increase. We would definitely be looking at a little more intelligent implementation of workflows so that we've got better control and better delegation of mandates.

I would rate it at seven out of ten. It works for me. I haven't seen anything parallel.

For intranet and file sharing and internal communications.

Yes, especially reducing the print paper and having a very quick response, and reducing the time between department and people.

Sharing and workflow.

Special implementation and development should be easy.

Stability is OK.

Scalability is OK.

Partner was not good. They did not have so much experience.

FileNet and Documentum.

Very hard.

Vendor and partner.

I did not measure, but it is useful.

Pricing is very high.

No.

No.

It is used to support Intranet. It has good content handling and MS Office integration, but poor user experience.

It has allowed documentation control and distribution through the organization, managed easily from the AD.

• The lists handling is perfect, and any kind of content linked to them very easy to publish.
• Creation of communities is very straightforward.

The user experience is very poor. Configuration for new aspect means usually buying add-ons or a very high level of customization.

• Shared document repository and communication tool for projects and teams
• I love SharePoint lists; they are pretty flexible and easy to create and export data from. 
• You can also restrict the view to customize to specific audiences. 
• It is also easy to create subsites, and security can be applied to individual pages.

It is a good tool that makes managing projects and teams much easier. All documents and calendars are in one central location.

• SharePoint lists
• Calendar
• Subsites
• Security
• Survey
• It is easy to administer as a business user.

The UI could be more flexible out of the box. With coding, you can customize the look and feel to your heart's content, but configuration without coding is limited.

Project management activities.

A central repository for artifacts, and planning for corporate projects.

Libraries, lists, and reporting.

Better wiki offerings.

To initially set up as part of a records management initiative. The company I was working for needed to better track and support how and where documents are located. 

While there were plenty of out-of-the-box solutions for records management projects, this probably under-utilized aspect of SharePoint can help better track documents and retention. 

Ease of implementation. Certainly, IT needs to give appropriate access to a sandbox, but learning is easy and quick.

Microsoft seems to always be making changes. Sometimes you will get a message saying some aspect of what they deliver is being discontinued and often you simply never had time to explore what it had to offer in the first place. 

Team place where sharing of documents and co-editing occurs.

Ease of access to shared documents.

Co-editing of documents. This enables teams to work on the same document and the work gets done faster.

Search integration across SharePoint, Yammer, Teams, and OneDrive.

Collaboration.

Single window information sharing.

Workflow.

It should have a lighter interface.