Try our new research platform with insights from 80,000+ expert users

IBM DOORS Next vs Jama Connect comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive Summary
 

Categories and Ranking

IBM DOORS Next
Ranking in Application Requirements Management
5th
Average Rating
7.8
Reviews Sentiment
6.2
Number of Reviews
12
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
Jama Connect
Ranking in Application Requirements Management
4th
Average Rating
7.6
Reviews Sentiment
6.6
Number of Reviews
14
Ranking in other categories
Application Lifecycle Management (ALM) Suites (11th)
 

Mindshare comparison

As of December 2024, in the Application Requirements Management category, the mindshare of IBM DOORS Next is 8.2%, up from 7.7% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Jama Connect is 13.6%, up from 11.5% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Application Requirements Management
 

Featured Reviews

Roger Trackwell - PeerSpot reviewer
An industry-leading tool to demonstrate traceability between requirements, with valuable features for tailoring modules and managing several thousand requirements
The biggest thing is that it shows cradle to grave traceability between the initial parent requirement and the lowest level, or what we call a CID, a critical item development spec. You can establish your verification plans in DOORS, and then as you get test results, you can put them in DOORS as a link or as a pointer to where that specific test resides on a company database. Then you can also write compliance rationale and add a column for coding, like pass, fail, green, yellow, red, meets, does not meet, partially meets, or whatever scoring criteria you want to use. Like I said, the best thing about it is that it provides you that visibility of your verification, allowing you to know how close you are to your pre-production activities, prototyping, go ahead, or whatever it is.
David Wilson - PeerSpot reviewer
Mainly used for requirements management, but its validation piece is not time-efficient at all
Like anything, Jama Connect relies highly on the company's culture because I found the whole review process to sound good, but it does not work in reality. Companies that use the tool are all pretty immature with requirements management, and therefore, they don't have the culture of doing that. You're always chasing them up and end up having review meetings, and no one pays attention to those review notices. The solution is very software-centric, and its validation piece is not time-efficient at all. It's very desktop verification and validation. You need to have it running and loading, which is not efficient. It's very cumbersome and overhead-intensive for verification management.

Quotes from Members

We asked business professionals to review the solutions they use. Here are some excerpts of what they said:
 

Pros

"The tool's most valuable feature is displaying requirements in a tabular format. This means you can see everything laid out in columns and rows. It is more aesthetic compared to other tools. The traceability matrix helps to view things better. It comes with different linking rules."
"It's web-based, so you don't have anything to install."
"There are many good features with DOORS. The solution has a concept of streams and baselines, as well as a concept of components. A component is a subproject inside a project."
"The most valuable features are the baselines and links."
"The "Link by Attribute" feature is useful for making links without needing to use the web interface manually."
"IBM Rational DOORS Next Generation is easier to expand to build a backend with several servers, so you can also use it to scale up to several hundreds of users without major problems."
"My company contacts the solution's technical support, and they are good and responsive."
"The most valuable features are the versioning of requirements and the possibility to reuse them."
"In Jama Connect, users have the capability to view and manage all test cases directly within the platform and execute them. The entire product specification, spanning various domains such as electrical, mechanical, software, and testing, is consolidated within Jama Connect."
"It is good at requirements management and test management."
"Provides suitable tools for managing regulatory requirements."
"You can get full traceability with any other system. It also includes a test module, and you build the traceability matrix incrementally throughout the development process."
"Jama Connect is a good tool for the entire software development cycle."
"Technical support answers fairly quickly compared to others like IBM or Atlassian. They also offer quite a good knowledge base for advanced cases and how to plan it, etc. via videos that they provide. They are quite useful."
"The relationship mapping feature is especially helpful, as it allows us to connect different requirements and compliance-related documentation."
"We use Jama Connect mainly for requirements management."
 

Cons

"I have come to the conclusion that if you are considering migrating from DOORS to DNG, don't! Instead of spending 100's to 1000's of hours doing migrations, invest those hours in a DXL programmer to make DOORS do what it isn't doing for you now."
"As a web tool, DNG can be difficult to use if the server is loaded or your network connection to it is saturated."
"When you are not working on it every day it is not very intuitive."
"It does have a tendency to condense the requirements. It kind of puts them in a tree format. Sometimes those trees are a little difficult."
"It offers a bad user experience and the usability is poor."
"Both the data storage and reporting for this solution need improvement."
"Be very careful how you load your DNG server. There are limits to the number of artifacts a server can handle."
"IBM Rational DOORS Next Generation is not a very user-friendly product."
"There are a few areas where Jama Connect can improve. One suggestion is to enhance the built-in feature of profile generation."
"There are delays sometimes from the Jama Connect team in resolving issues."
"The solution is expensive."
"The user interface could be modernized and the product lacks project management functionalities."
"Test management can be improved. It's not so scalable. The user interface needs to split things into small projects."
"There are some security concerns with Jama Connect, including two-factor enablement."
"More automation could speed up workflows, flag errors more timely, and eliminate manual steps."
"I have inquired about pricing for this solution but have not yet heard anything, so their response time in this regard is something that should be improved."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"The cost of maintenance is €20,000 to €30,000 ($22,000 to $33,000 USD) and there are no additional fees."
"If the product price were not reasonable enough, our company would not use IBM Rational DOORS Next Generation."
"You are going to need a beefy server and a fat network pipe to it in order to make DNG and its companion tools work well for users."
"The price of this solution is very high, and it increases year after year."
"Users can buy a three-year license for about 12,000 Euros."
"To have a single source for all the requirements and all the change requests our company gets is the most valuable feature. It has also helped us to keep track of reviews."
"The cost seems very competitive with other offerings."
"If you want to have creative licenses, pricing may be an issue with the licenses, as it can become quite expensive over time to serve many people."
"Jama Connect is a little pricy."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Application Requirements Management solutions are best for your needs.
824,053 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Manufacturing Company
23%
Computer Software Company
9%
Aerospace/Defense Firm
8%
Government
7%
Manufacturing Company
26%
Healthcare Company
9%
Computer Software Company
8%
Aerospace/Defense Firm
7%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
 

Questions from the Community

What do you like most about IBM Rational DOORS Next Generation?
The tool's most valuable feature is displaying requirements in a tabular format. This means you can see everything laid out in columns and rows. It is more aesthetic compared to other tools. The tr...
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for IBM Rational DOORS Next Generation?
I cannot discuss the product's price since it is meant to be confidential and kept between our company and IBM. If the product price were not reasonable enough, our company would not use IBM Ration...
What needs improvement with IBM Rational DOORS Next Generation?
IBM Rational DOORS Next Generation has room for improvement compared to other tools like Polaris and Jama Connect. These tools offer more flexibility and options for developers, which IBM Rational ...
What do you like most about Jama Connect?
I like Jama Connect because it's easy to use and understand. The widgets are great, and linking is straightforward. The solution is not complex compared to its competitors.
What needs improvement with Jama Connect?
There are delays sometimes from the Jama Connect team in resolving issues. It's important to maintain and educate customers about the solutions they have.
What is your primary use case for Jama Connect?
Jama Connect is used to integrate solutions such as the Google App Store and Microsoft Azure. It provides single identity provider access, enabling Gmail access or Google access for users.
 

Comparisons

 

Also Known As

Rational DOORS Next Generation, RDNG, Rational Requirements Composer and IBM RRC
No data available
 

Learn More

 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Major health insurer
Deloitte, SpaceX, Omnigon, Delft University
Find out what your peers are saying about IBM DOORS Next vs. Jama Connect and other solutions. Updated: December 2024.
824,053 professionals have used our research since 2012.