Hyland OnBase

I was a vendor managing Hyland OnBase  for Hyland, not as a direct user but as a business partner. We managed the solution and were a partner with Hyland.

Hyland OnBase  is valued for its security, especially for those in the finance domain who require data confidentiality. Furthermore, the solution offers a variety of integrations with other tools, such as Epic in the UK. This integration ensures seamless data access and management. Lastly, Hyland OnBase is available in a desktop version, a cloud version preferred by healthcare teams due to public data requirement, and a mobile version which is akin to healthcare applications like Practo in India. It is widely used in healthcare due to these facets.

I believe the reporting features need improvement, as other competitors in the market provide better analytics. Hyland is working on a new platform (HXP) to integrate features from all products, addressing some concerns. Additionally, there could be more integration points with products Hyland has acquired, such as Alfresco  and Nuxeo . Offering a trial version with basic features would allow users to experience the product before purchasing. I find OnBase's monolithic architecture to be expensive, and adopting microservices could be beneficial.

I worked with it last year until approximately March 2024.

I find Hyland OnBase to be a stable product. I would rate it eight out of ten.

While I believe scalability is achievable due to integration possibilities, it comes at a high cost due to the extensive setup currently required. Transitioning to cloud-based services may reduce these costs in the future.

I find technical support from Hyland to be good. I would rate it eight out of ten.

I found the initial setup to be complex. A trial version with a simpler setup could be beneficial, similar to how games offer a level to try before fully installing.

I find pricing to be on the higher side due to its monolithic architecture. I would rate it six out of ten. Transitioning to microservices, allowing users to pay for only what they use, could reduce costs.

Currently, I find OnBase's architecture adds to the cost, and the setup process is expensive and complex. Additionally, its advantages lie in its security and integration capabilities, although more integration points are needed to incorporate Hyland's acquired products without loss. I would rate the overall solution six out of ten.

Hyland OnBase  was used as our primary document and image repository, and we extensively utilized the workflow module within it. It was used to store all of our customer documents, system-generated reports, operational items we needed, and check images. We built out a workflow module, including one specific for accounts payable.

Integrating Hyland OnBase  with our systems enabled us to automate document designs and templates, which was extremely helpful in the finance and banking industry.

The application allowed integration of front-end customer onboarding processes to create, route, ingest documents, and route them for approval within the application, enhancing audit traceability.

Hyland OnBase offered robust system features ranging from configuring indexing fields to building auto-import routines for regular file imports.

It provided data security features, allowing restrictions on sensitive documents, such as who could view or modify them.

The user interface was intuitive, and the product integrated well with other applications like Outlook and Salesforce , enabling easy document indexing and access.

We found the size of images to be a restriction, though this may have been due to the API used rather than the Hyland application. The application could potentially be more open-source, allowing integration with more solutions.

I used Hyland OnBase for approximately eight years, starting around 2015.

Hyland OnBase was a stable solution that worked effectively for us, providing traceability and data security.

We had an enterprise license, which allowed unlimited users and a number of workflow licenses. We never crossed the threshold of workflow licenses, as the workflow was executed via system licenses, not directly through user licensing.

We primarily worked with Fiserv for technical support and not directly with Hyland. The Fiserv team was helpful, although instances existed where their database was tricky to manage.

Our vendor relationship facilitated integration with our system and offered additional service beyond the Hyland OnBase product.

We transitioned from a document image repository to Hyland OnBase.

The initial setup was complex, particularly building a custom accounts payable workflow module. This task was supported and guided by the vendor, Fiserv.

Our implementation was managed by Fiserv, who served as the vendor and reseller, providing key insights and support during the complex integration process.

As we had an enterprise license, we were not limited in terms of user access. We also paid for workflow licenses, which allowed up to 250 concurrent users.

Alfresco  was an alternative used within the organization, but I only engaged with it as a generic user.

Hyland OnBase appeared more robust compared to Alfresco , but this perception might be influenced by deployment and configuration differences. Users appreciated the user interface and extensive integration capabilities.

I'd rate the solution eight out of ten.

We use the solution for document management and process management.

The solution interconnects areas and allows for real-time information.

The solution's most valuable features are integration and flexibility. Allows you to manage all types of organizational information content

The solution’s initial setup is a little complex. The look and feel need improvement as well.

I have been using Hyland OnBase  for eight years.

Th stability is okay.

The solution’s scalability is excellent. Around 80 users are using the solution in our organization.

The technical support team takes time to resolve a ticket.

We previously used SharePoint  and knowledge tree. We switched to Hyland OnBase  because SharePoint  doesn't provide much flexibility.

The solution’s initial setup is a little complex. The deployment took around six months. Three people, including an administrator, were involved in the solution's deployment. The solution is deployed on the Hyland cloud.

A vendor team implemented the solution and I would rate them an eight.

The solution costs around $5,000 per month. It is very relative.

I valuated other options.

The solution helps with compliance and data security. I would recommend the solution to other users because of its stability, flexibility, and security.

Overall, I rate the solution an eight out of ten.

It's the enterprise document storage utility, handling everything from member statements to reports and checks written against member accounts.

Its most valuable aspect is its flexibility. You can apply any keyword to search for anything within a document. This flexibility is also its biggest drawback: If you overuse the number of keywords, you can run into performance issues.

Software malfunctioning usually occurs when we receive documents from external sources. The incidents are related to the source not providing the correct accompanying metadata or keywords, which then requires manual adjustments.

I have been using Hyland OnBase for a year.

Eight people are using this solution. We have over a billion documents in our repository, it scales pretty well.

We wanted to implement a stored procedure against their database instead of using their internal or provided APIs. To get permission, you have to go through an entire legal process.

They bear some liability if a document gets lost, destroyed, or leaked, so they don't want to give customers unrestricted access to write anything against their database. Even after we demonstrated the performance issues, they kept suggesting alternatives. They agreed only after we proved that their APIs couldn't deliver the performance we needed. We had to go through a legal negotiation to amend the contract to allow the stored procedure.

They provide a SOAP-based API, which has been difficult to integrate with our MuleSoft Service Bus. We're considering moving to their more modern REST API, which has better security hooks that we can leverage more effectively with MuleSoft.

A typical system deployment can happen overnight. We don't have an automated pipeline for the application; everything is done manually. If it's strictly an update to the configuration, and barring testing, it's an overnight process.

Everyone involved in development, configuration, business analysis, and management is part of one team. A separate team of about four people is responsible for administration tasks such as patching the servers and installing the updates developed by the development group.

The product does what you need to do if you have a regulatory need to retain a document for X number of months or X number of years. It allows you to set that expiration date, and once it hits that retention period, assuming you put one, it will handle the removal. For example, financial institutions must keep checks and images on hand for two years. After two years, checks older than that are automatically removed from the database and the repository.

They have AI offerings, but we have not yet investigated them.

Overall, I rate the solution a nine out of ten.