We performed a comparison between IBM Rational DOORS and Jira based on our users’ reviews in five categories. After reading all of the collected data, you can find our conclusion below.
Comparison Results: Jira is the clear winner in this comparison. According to its users, it is very stable and user friendly. Based on reviews, it is more reasonably priced and has better support than Rational DOORS. In addition, Jira has a proven ROI.
"I really like the customization that can be done using the DOORS Extension Language (DXL)."
"The data logs are ver conveneint."
"It is very customizable and easy to scale."
"The most valuable feature of this solution is traceability. We can track every requirement, including what the stakeholder must do and component-level requirements."
"We have different generations of all products. It lets us select and see unique attributes for each release or generation. You can use attributes to define a selection area to see which equipments are for the old versions and which ones are for the new versions. This inbuilt view is what I like in IBM Rational DOORS. So, for a database and a set of requirements, it will select and show unique attributes for a release or a generation."
"The shell scripting is the solution's most valuable aspect."
"I like the user interface with regard to creating links between requirements and tracing links to requirements."
"I like being able to sort and categorize the requirements and the exporting functions."
"I think one of the most powerful features in Jira is the customization of fields and workflow."
"In terms of scrum teams, I find that usually, the product backlog depends on charts and especially reports like Sprint Reports. I find the reports to be very useful."
"No other platform can compete on speed or search."
"I have found Jira to be stable."
"The way we can define and customize the search queries for the tickets in Jira is most valuable."
"The dashboard and reports tracking and the setup updates quickly, I am very impressed with those features. Additionally, it is user-friendly."
"Issue linking has enabled teams to trace issues."
"We use it for capacity planning. We need to gauge and assess whatever is coming to our pipeline and then everything comes to the pipeline, appears as a pic, and then based on that, we create the story points and we take it from there."
"It would be helpful if Microsoft provided a more user-friendly interface for updating and querying updates. Additionally, if there was a way for users to notify developers of any changes in requirements, it would allow for faster and more efficient updates to the solution's architecture. This could be in the form of a notification system that alerts developers of any changes that need to be made. Additionally, the solution is document-driven and it should be more digital."
"It would be nice if it could be scaled-down so that it could be installed and implemented without much learning or training."
"It's difficult to set the code on the solution."
"The images are not clear. We have to use them as OLE objects. And in the testing part, I'm not sure how to link it with it. This is my main concern."
"The software and GUI is very outdated."
"One of the things that many people complain about is it's hard to manage attributes. For example, tables or figures. This is something that can be improved."
"IBM should integrate some solutions they already own toenhance the utility of the product further. Specifically import and export to Office products is more difficult than it needs to be."
"The interface needs an area to be able to type your query and actually be able to find them."
"In Jira, sometimes developers are not getting alerts when Jira is moving out of the SLA to the product development team."
"A lot of the user interface could be updated."
"It would be very useful to have drag and drop time tracking."
"While it's very powerful, it's very complex sometimes."
"The integration of Jira could improve. The solution should be able to integrate easily with other solutions, such as ERPs. There are times the solution can be slow and we have to reset it over and over again."
"Reporting is something Jira could work on. The reporting capabilities should have the same flexibility we see in Excel, including the ability to manipulate data and create graphs. They need to have that, so we don't need to export to a spreadsheet."
"Whenever you edit a story, whatever you have changed takes a bit of time to save."
"The Jira dashboards could be more useful. The dashboards have good widgets but the comparison of data over time or extraction of trends from the data is not easy."
IBM Rational DOORS is ranked 1st in Application Requirements Management with 51 reviews while Jira is ranked 2nd in Application Requirements Management with 266 reviews. IBM Rational DOORS is rated 8.0, while Jira is rated 8.2. The top reviewer of IBM Rational DOORS writes " 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 ". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Jira writes "A great centralized tool that has a good agile framework and is useful for day-to-day planning, task management, and work log efficacy". IBM Rational DOORS is most compared with Polarion Requirements, Jama Connect, Helix ALM, IBM Rational DOORS Next Generation and PTC Integrity Requirements Connector, whereas Jira is most compared with Microsoft Azure DevOps, OpenText ALM Octane, Rally Software, Polarion ALM and TFS. See our IBM Rational DOORS vs. Jira 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.