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

IBM DOORS vs Jama Connect comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive Summary
 

Categories and Ranking

IBM DOORS
Ranking in Application Requirements Management
1st
Average Rating
8.0
Reviews Sentiment
6.9
Number of Reviews
53
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
Jama Connect
Ranking in Application Requirements Management
4th
Average Rating
7.6
Number of Reviews
14
Ranking in other categories
Application Lifecycle Management (ALM) Suites (11th)
 

Mindshare comparison

As of November 2024, in the Application Requirements Management category, the mindshare of IBM DOORS is 34.7%, up from 34.1% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Jama Connect is 13.3%, up from 11.4% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Application Requirements Management
 

Featured Reviews

MarioCataldi - PeerSpot reviewer
Offers ability to automate tasks and to track changes within documents and compare different versions of requirements but modeling capabilities could benefit from a web-based tool
The biggest improvement for me is definitely the ability to use DOORS in a web environment through Rational DOORS Next Generation. Integrating with Rational Team Concert via the web interface has also been beneficial. However, not all Rational Team Concert operations are available from the web client. Certain operations, like creating streams or components, still require using the desktop application. They're not accessible through the web interface. And in my opinion, this limitation should be removed. Creating streams, components, etc. We still need the desktop app for those. DOORS has enabled flexibility in mapping requirements to the software. Tracking changes over time due to team meetings and other factors is important. Additionally, I've been using DOORS Next Generation, the web-based tool, especially in the last year.
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 data logs are ver conveneint."
"Rational DOORS' most valuable feature is that you can write any kind of requirement you want."
"The most valuable feature is the management verification and login."
"The traceability matrix in DOORS improved our project outcomes. It helps ensure coverage of requirements at different levels, from user requirements to software requirements to test requirements."
"Traceability on requirements for a huge project in an organization is a big gain."
"I like being able to sort and categorize the requirements and the exporting functions."
"The program is very stable."
"The solution is stable."
"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."
"Provides suitable tools for managing regulatory requirements."
"The most valuable feature is the single identity provider capability, which simplifies the integration with various platforms, like Google App Store and Microsoft Azure, for providing user access."
"It is good at requirements management and test management."
"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 most valuable feature is the user-friendly interface."
"Jama Connect is a good tool for the entire software development cycle."
"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."
 

Cons

"It would be nice if it could be scaled-down so that it could be installed and implemented without much learning or training."
"Complexity, performance, openness are the three areas that can be improved. The IBM architecture and specifically Jazz looks more complex. There are a lot of servers. It's quite complicated. The search capabilities lack in IBM Rational DOORS Classic for customers who have a database with a requirement of more than 25,000 records. For example, you can search easily for a module, but it's really difficult to look for keywords through the whole database because all the modules are separated into small components, which makes the search quite complex. This is something that's really annoying because when we want to make an impact analysis, we would like to analyze the product globally. It's quite difficult to manage. The fact that you can interact externally with data makes it complex. The approach is complex and doesn't work as expected. For example, when I tried to experiment with exporting some records, the tool crashed, but I couldn't find out the root cause, that is, whether it happened because of Rational Windows or lack of memory. It was just crashing. Logs weren't very clear. IBM can try to use more recent technology for different aspects and make it easy. They can also provide free integration from DOORS Classic to DOORS. Currently, all the customization in Excel is lost, which makes it very complex. It would be a feature to make new versions compatible with features in the past versions."
"The interface is not very user-friendly and has not evolved in a long time."
"There needs to be quicker access to tech support. When I have a two minute question that takes two minutes to answer, it shouldn't take me 45 minutes and/or a few days of callbacks to get to the right technical support person. It's unnecessary and frustrating for the user."
"The performance could be improved. It doesn't run as smoothly as it could."
"The problem is that because the GUI is so bad, you either have to spend a lot of money customizing the interface yourself, or a lot of money on training."
"Overall, the user experience should be enhanced."
"The solution should be more compatible with thin clients"
"The initial setup could be better, it's complicated."
"I believe one of the weak points is the reporting side. You must export inter-readable reports from Jama if you do not use the system as a repository for your design history file. Jama is great if you keep it in Jama, but reporting out requires some customization to get it right."
"I think there's room for improvement, especially with the review process. Reviews should be integrated with requirement evaluation instead of being separate from it. The review should not run parallel to the requirement."
"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."
"The solution is expensive."
"The user interface could be modernized and the product lacks project management functionalities."
"More automation could speed up workflows, flag errors more timely, and eliminate manual steps."
"t is rather slow, so the speed of the process and consuming information should be improved. It doesn't have a nice way of viewing information. We would like to see better interfaces for consuming information."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"I don't personally know what the numbers are. I just know that one of the reasons we've limited it to three seats is a function of cost."
"The licensing cost is too high."
"I think it's expensive because you have to pay for the licenses to IBM and all that and maintain them."
"It is expensive to onboard additional users."
"We have to pay for a license. I think it's a one-time payment as my company hasn't notified me about more charges. I don't think it's expensive for large corporations, but it will be costly for an average person."
"It's expensive."
"The licensing costs for the product are quite high."
"I am not sure why it is so expensive, but one license will cost approximately $15,000 in US dollars."
"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."
"Jama Connect is a little pricy."
"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."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Application Requirements Management solutions are best for your needs.
816,406 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Manufacturing Company
25%
Computer Software Company
13%
Aerospace/Defense Firm
8%
Government
6%
Manufacturing Company
26%
Healthcare Company
9%
Computer Software Company
9%
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?
The traceability matrix in DOORS improved our project outcomes. It helps ensure coverage of requirements at different levels, from user requirements to software requirements to test requirements.
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for IBM Rational DOORS?
The price of IBM DOORS depends upon the pricing models and the licenses the user selects. The product, on average, starts at $134/month. IBM DOORS is available at a reasonable price.
What needs improvement with IBM Rational DOORS?
IBM DOORS effectively synchronizes with Polarion. But suppose when Polarion is running on Linux and you want to integrate with IBM DOORS on Windows, that is when compatibility issues arise. For the...
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?
More automation could speed up workflows, flag errors more timely, and eliminate manual steps. It would also be beneficial to be leaner and more efficient and reduce unnecessary tasks.
What is your primary use case for Jama Connect?
We are using Jama Connect for both requirements, test reviews, and design input reviews. We utilize the review module to create a great overview and keep tracing. The tool helps to shorten the time...
 

Comparisons

 

Also Known As

Rational DOORS
No data available
 

Learn More

 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Infosys, Chevrolet Volt
Deloitte, SpaceX, Omnigon, Delft University
Find out what your peers are saying about IBM DOORS vs. Jama Connect and other solutions. Updated: October 2024.
816,406 professionals have used our research since 2012.