Hyland OnBase delivers depth through customisation. TeamSync delivers the same depth through composition.
Hyland's footprint is real. OnBase has been the system-of-record for a meaningful share of healthcare provider organisations, public-sector agencies, financial institutions, and higher-education institutions. The vertical depth is genuine — most OnBase deployments have 10 years of customisation that encodes the organisation's specific workflows.
That depth is also the constraint. The customisation depth is what makes OnBase upgrades multi-year projects. The customisation depth is why the AI copilot is bolted on. The customisation depth is why the cryptographic-audit conversation is hard to get to.
TeamSync's bet is that the same depth can be delivered through composition rather than customisation. The platform provides the records-of-record discipline. The capabilities compose without the per-product integration tax. The vertical surfaces carry the industry-specific patterns. The customisation budget that used to fund OnBase deployments funds outcome workflows instead.
Talk to a solutions engineer · See the platform overview · Read the consolidation pillar
Where Hyland OnBase is the right answer.
| If your situation is | OnBase is probably the right answer |
|---|---|
| You have 10 years of OnBase customisation that encodes mission-critical workflows | Migration cost is real |
| Your industry's OnBase vertical solution is mature and the support is responsive | Don't rebuild what's working |
| Your records-of-record story is genuinely working | The replacement risk doesn't pay back |
| Your AI ambitions are limited to what Hyland Aviator covers in M365-resident scope | The Aviator path may be sufficient |
If any of these describe you, stay on OnBase.
Where TeamSync is the right answer.
The conversation tilts the other way when:
| If your situation is | TeamSync is the more defensible answer |
|---|---|
| The customisation depth has become an upgrade-blocker | TeamSync's composition pattern is structurally simpler to maintain |
| The AI copilot has to extend beyond Hyland Aviator into the regulated estate | TeamSync's AI copilot is platform-native and cross-source |
| The CISO needs cryptographically-anchored audit | TeamSync's Merkle chain is third-party verifiable |
| The CFO needs per-cluster transparent pricing | TeamSync's pricing model is structurally simpler |
| You need to ship in months, not the multi-quarter typical of OnBase deployments | TeamSync's deployment cadence is materially faster |
| The vertical depth needs to extend across multiple verticals (holding companies, conglomerates) | TeamSync's 7 vertical surfaces compose without customisation |
Dimension-by-dimension comparison.
| Dimension | Hyland OnBase | TeamSync |
|---|---|---|
| Vertical depth | Through customisation | Through composition |
| Records platform | Mature, customisation-driven | Federation-first; same coverage with less customisation |
| AI copilot | Hyland Aviator (M365-resident scope) | platform-native, cross-source |
| Cryptographic audit | Standard log; immutable storage tier | Merkle hash chain; third-party verifiable |
| Workflow engine | OnBase Workflow + WorkView | platform-native BPA |
| Capture / IDP | Brainware + ABBYY OEM | platform-native capture |
| eDiscovery | OnBase Records Management | platform-native eDiscovery |
| Crypto-shred | Procedural | Cryptographic; per-tenant envelope encryption |
| Compliance overlay model | Per-product configuration | platform-level overlay catalogue |
| Pricing model | Per-product, per-seat, per-feature | Per-cluster, transparent |
| Deployment cadence | 12–24 months typical | 3–6 months typical |
| Upgrade complexity | High due to customisation | Low; platform-native |
The realistic coexistence pattern.
OnBase replacements rarely happen overnight. The realistic pattern is co-existence for 12–24 months while the records-of-record story migrates document-type by document-type.
| Document type | Typical migration timing |
|---|---|
| Active workflows (claims, applications, requests) | Months 0–6 |
| Active eDiscovery matters and holds | Months 0–3 (hold bridge) |
| Hot-tier records | Months 6–12 |
| Warm-tier records | Months 12–18 |
| Cold-tier archive | Months 18+ — often left in place with read-only federation |
OnBase becomes a federated source for the cold tier indefinitely. The hot and warm tiers move. The customisation overhead goes away in the order the modules retire.
Read further.
- Why TeamSync — consolidate document sprawl — the architectural pillar
- CIO post-M&A page — the eighteen-month consolidation programme
- TeamSync vs OpenText — the related comparison
- Capabilities — the 16 capability briefs
- Pricing — per-cluster, transparent