IBM DOORS Next vs Polarion Requirements comparison

IBM and Siemens are both solutions in the Application Requirements Management category. IBM is ranked #5 with an average rating of 7.8, while Siemens is ranked #3 with an average rating of 8.1. IBM holds a 8.0% mindshare in ARM, compared to Siemens’s 15.7% mindshare. Additionally, 91% of IBM users are willing to recommend the solution, compared to 84% of Siemens users who would recommend it.

IBM DOORS Next

Read 12 IBM DOORS Next reviews

4,502 Views
1,416 Comparison Views

91% willing to recommend

Polarion Requirements

Read 13 Polarion Requirements reviews

3,280 Views
2,743 Comparison Views

84% willing to recommend

IBM DOORS Next

Polarion Requirements

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Download the report

Executive Summary

We performed a comparison between IBM DOORS Next and Polarion Requirements based on real PeerSpot user reviews.

Find out in this report how the two Application Requirements Management solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI.

To learn more, read our detailed IBM DOORS Next vs. Polarion Requirements Report (Updated: September 2024).

Buyer's Guide

IBM DOORS Next vs. Polarion Requirements

September 2024

Download the complete report

Helped 806,786 peers since 2012

Categories and Ranking

IBM DOORS Next

Ranking in Application Requirements Management

5th

Average Rating

7.8

Number of Reviews

Ranking in other categories

No ranking in other categories

Polarion Requirements

Ranking in Application Requirements Management

3rd

Average Rating

7.4

Number of Reviews

Ranking in other categories

No ranking in other categories

Mindshare comparison

As of September 2024, in the Application Requirements Management category, the mindshare of IBM DOORS Next is 8.0%, up from 7.8% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Polarion Requirements is 15.7%, up from 14.7% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.

Application Requirements Management

Featured Reviews

reviewer2325642

Senior Technical Product Manager at a engineering company with 10,001+ employees

Dec 26, 2023

A quite scalable requirement management tool that offers good performance

IBM Rational DOORS Next Generation is not that difficult to maintain, but it definitely needs a team that can continuously be involved in the maintenance part, do upgrades, and implement whatever patches are released. If there is growth in the product's user base, then there is a need to revalidate the infrastructure and see whether it is adequate because you need the tool to offer more performance, which is very important. There is a six-member team in our company to maintain the product. To others who plan to use the solution, I suggest that they involve experts to take care of the installation part and involve IBM from the time the product's usage starts. It is not recommended that you explore the solution by yourself. I rate the overall tool an eight out of ten.

Read full review

NareshKumar 1

System Engineer at a tech services company with 11-50 employees

Mar 7, 2024

Flexible tool and give top management an easy view of the product status or how the requirements process is going

One of the important functions of tracking progress is the workflow process. Also, there's the planning aspect. With planning, we can manage requirements based on releases or versions and easily track them. Another important function is Work Items. Electronic signatures are also valuable. Stakeholders can sign directly without hard copies, and you can always access approved versions. It's easy to see how many times something was approved and the entire history of changes to enterprise requirements for each version. It's easy to integrate with workflows and with other requirements tools, like IBM DOORS or Jira. We can exchange data between applications seamlessly. We use REST APIs and open APIs, so it's easy to integrate modifications. Knowing how to use the APIs and web services is key. And recently, they introduced SaaS API. That means we can easily connect to the data and create custom setups based on our needs. We can easily customize it because of the web services and open APIs. Also, the APIs are available. We integrated Polarion with one of Siemens' products, Teamcenter, which is especially useful for automotive industries. There is an open API for integration with Jira as well, so for me, customization is a strong point.

Read full review

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"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."

"One of the most valuable features is how you can tailor the modules."

"The most valuable features are the baselines and links."

"My company contacts the solution's technical support, and they are good and responsive."

"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."

"As far as maintaining our requirements so that we can have copies of them, it's good. I can print it out if necessary."

"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."

More IBM DOORS Next pros

"A valuable feature from my side would be the comparison corporization."

"The solution is especially great for organizing folders effectively."

"We worked with the web interface."

"The biggest improvement would be in the transparency we have now. We have very complex products. We make whole systems with difficult and diverse areas such as hardware, software, mechanical and printing, etc. To get the overview of all the requirements into a system, at that sizing, is the main advantage we have in the organization now."

"I would say there is value in how powerful, configurable, and user-friendly it is."

"It is easier to produce documents using the platform."

"I like the way this solution is structured."

"In my opinion, Polarion Requirements' most beneficial feature is the ability to manage specifications within a work-like document that functions as a work item. Its collaboration features have worked very well and have been very useful. We can easily exchange information with the testing team, the business, and with DevOps."

More Polarion Requirements pros

Cons

"The only additional feature would be if it had dynamic linking to other MBSE tool sets or industry-leading tools."

"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."

"Be very careful how you load your DNG server. There are limits to the number of artifacts a server can handle."

"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."

"When you are not working on it every day it is not very intuitive."

"It offers a bad user experience and the usability is poor."

"When you are in Jira or Confluence, you have some freedom in how you type in text. That's also a weakness of Confluence, however, as it opens the doors to sloppy work. In DOS Next Generation, the text is very rigorous, but it might be difficult for people who don't have the discipline. Having a way to quickly enter requirements could help. It might already be in there, but I don't know. I don't have enough experience with the tool yet."

"IBM Rational DOORS Next Generation is not a very user-friendly product."

More IBM DOORS Next cons

"If we have more than one thousand work items in one live-book then it becomes almost unusable."

"Integration can be a little tricky if you're not aware of basic computer science or programming language."

"The risk assessment functionality needs improvement, like FMEA risk management."

"We encountered numerous challenges, such as issues with requirements, project management, timing, and planning. The main problem with Polarion at the outset, I believe, was our limited understanding of the planning phase. During that time, we were more focused on change management related to requirements. Recognizing the importance of planning has been a key realization for us. Another mistake we made was not comprehending the need to document these requirements to manage all the work items effectively. Now, we understand the significance of this documentation. As a result of these insights, we have started to see a growing number of competitors from Polarion in this field. One potential improvement could be enabling Polarion to export work items not just to Microsoft Office but also to other office tools."

"Its user interface could be more user friendly. In addition, a lot of features are missing for test management. It should have the test case ordering feature."

"The one thing I would mention is the license policy is a little bit difficult. For different roles, you will need different license models. That seems a little bit difficult for us. Especially when you introduce such a complex system, you want to know the right way is to do licensing. It's not clear what that best way would be. The solution will be here for a long time, and I just think it could be more clear."

"It is not a stable solution, as we had issues with shared licenses."

"One thing to consider is increased flexibility in terms of workflow configuration."

More Polarion Requirements cons

Pricing and Cost Advice

"If the product price were not reasonable enough, our company would not use IBM Rational DOORS Next Generation."

"The price of this solution is very high, and it increases year after year."

"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."

"Users can buy a three-year license for about 12,000 Euros."

"The cost of maintenance is €20,000 to €30,000 ($22,000 to $33,000 USD) and there are no additional fees."

"The pricing model is flexible. You don't have to pay for the full functionalities. And it's a one-time investment for the licenses. You purchase what you need and then can work with that."

"I rate the solution's pricing a seven out of ten."

"I believe the cost is subjective. It seems a bit pricey, but it depends on your perspective. To provide some context, I compared the prices with GitLab and Jira. Unfortunately, I couldn't find Jira's prices. However, GitLab costs around 40 euros, and DeepLab, which I recently discovered, also falls in a similar price range. I'm not sure about DeepLab's features or interface improvements, as they might have been implementing requirements management over the past six months. In contrast, Polarion costs around 50 to 60 euros based on the 2021 prices I have. While it may seem a bit expensive, it's worth considering whether the additional investment, perhaps around 68 euros per user, is justified. It might appear costly at first glance, but it's essential to acknowledge that it can greatly streamline your work processes."

"Polarion Requirements is a little pricey."

"The product's price is high."

"It is expensive but not for what it is. It is just the right price for what it is. Its price is also similar to other solutions."

See which vendors are best for you

Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Application Requirements Management solutions are best for your needs.

See recommendations

806,786 professionals have used our research since 2012.

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews

Manufacturing Company

23%

Computer Software Company

Aerospace/Defense Firm

Government

Manufacturing Company

29%

Computer Software Company

14%

Healthcare Company

Educational Organization

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...

See all answers

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...

See all answers

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 ...

See all answers

What do you like most about Polarion Requirements?

In my opinion, Polarion Requirements' most beneficial feature is the ability to manage specifications within a work-like document that functions as a work item. Its collaboration features have work...

See all answers

What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Polarion Requirements?

I rate the solution's pricing a seven out of ten.

See all answers

What needs improvement with Polarion Requirements?

In my opinion, the main area for improvement in Polarion Requirements is its user interface. It should be easier for engineers to understand how it works, as many features are not very easily under...

See all answers

Comparisons

IBM DOORS vs IBM DOORS Next

Compared 41% of the time

Jama Connect vs IBM DOORS Next

Compared 21% of the time

Jira vs IBM DOORS Next

Compared 14% of the time

Helix ALM vs IBM DOORS Next

Compared 4% of the time

PTC Integrity Requirements Connector vs IBM DOORS Next

Compared 3% of the time

More IBM DOORS Next Competitors

IBM DOORS vs Polarion Requirements

Compared 63% of the time

Jama Connect vs Polarion Requirements

Compared 21% of the time

Jira vs Polarion Requirements

Compared 7% of the time

Helix ALM vs Polarion Requirements

Compared 1% of the time

More Polarion Requirements Competitors

Product Reports

Buyer's Guide

IBM DOORS Next

September 2024

Download IBM DOORS Next product report

Buyer's Guide

Polarion Requirements

September 2024

Download Polarion Requirements product report

Also Known As

Rational DOORS Next Generation, RDNG, Rational Requirements Composer and IBM RRC

No data available

Learn More

IBM

Siemens

Overview

IBM Engineering Requirements Management DOORS Next (DOORS Next) is a requirements management (RM) software designed to help organizations manage engineering project requirements throughout the development lifecycle. It offers a central location for capturing, defining, and organizing project requirements, facilitating collaboration among stakeholders like engineers, system designers, and customers. Key features include requirements traceability, version control, and impact analysis. DOORS Next improves efficiency, enhances communication, reduces risks, and aids in better decision-making through clear traceability and version control. Compared to its predecessor, DOORS 9, DOORS Next is a web-based version with a modern interface that integrates with other IBM Engineering Lifecycle Management (ELM) tools, while DOORS 9 offers a wider range of features in a non-web-based format.

Polarion REQUIREMENTS is designed from the ground for highly effective, transparent and secure collaboration, while teams have the option to work in their familiar environments.

Sample Customers

Major health insurer

NetSuite, Ottobock, Zumtobel Group, Kªster Automotive GmbH, Sirona Dental Systems, LifeWatch, U.S. Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), PHOENIX CONTACT Electronics GmbH, Metso Corporation

Buyer's Guide

IBM DOORS Next vs. Polarion Requirements

September 2024

Free Report: IBM DOORS Next vs. Polarion Requirements

Find out what your peers are saying about IBM DOORS Next vs. Polarion Requirements and other solutions. Updated: September 2024.

DOWNLOAD NOW

806,786 professionals have used our research since 2012.

See our IBM DOORS Next vs. Polarion Requirements report.

See our list of best Application Requirements Management vendors.

We monitor all Application Requirements Management reviews to prevent fraudulent reviews and keep review quality high. We do not post reviews by company employees or direct competitors. We validate each review for authenticity via cross-reference with LinkedIn, and personal follow-up with the reviewer when necessary.