We performed a comparison between IBM Engineering Workflow Management and Rally Software based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Enterprise Agile Planning Tools solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."Good for managing stories, sprints, hydration and releases."
"Work distribution among team members and accountability for completion with a clearer picture."
"All of the features work together to provide a powerful holistic solution - from the dashboard all the way through to security."
"We can track the status of test cases (passed or saved) in a single view. Based on releases and other attributes, we generate various reports and extract metrics from the data."
"Agile templates give us a standard methodology for every Agile project. Also, the ability to create our own object types and linkages to features/epics allows us to enhance the verification of feature readiness."
"Traceability reporting is inbuilt and includes all your requirements."
"We use the roadmap features, and we're getting better at using dates to use the roadmap so that we can see if we're on target for work."
"Rally Software provides the capability to accurately estimate the time required for building large software projects, which can be challenging to predict...Rally Software enables us to schedule tasks better, allocate resources, and meet project deadlines."
"It is very stable. It has been on the market a long time."
"The configurable Portfolio Management and parent-child relationships."
"When we went into Scaled Agile Framework, we could not have done it without the use of Agile Central. It allows us to scale our Scrum teams, and it also enables us when we do our remote big room plannings."
"It allows us to work in a more dynamic fashion and track more of the development lifecycle."
"It documents stories in a way where we do not have to be heavy on front-end requirements, front-end documentation, and front-end workflows."
"What I like the most about Agile Central is that it is the only system I need to have full control and visibility of our entire body of work plus the activities and processes required to deliver it."
"We have encountered issues with stability. We have seen where the entire system kind of goes for a toss when certain people use certain types of queries, which are very costly. Then the system kind of slows down a bit, and we have to monitor it."
"The solution is very heavily vendor dependent."
"Teams need clearer pictures of resource availability in charts and dashboards along with plans."
"Some administrative tasks are difficult to perform. These could be simplified."
"Lacks ability to customize and reporting can be slow."
"More importantly, we are seeing internal challenges from Atlassian because of their highly integrated suite that enables further automation and centralization of activities that are also highly necessary – messaging notifications cued off builds, collaboration on Solution Architecture Documentation, etc."
"I'd like to be able to color code timeboxes, so I have an easy visual way to track the success of sprints."
"It could improve by being self-organizing: user stories, different hierarchies, and different perspectives. Not just as a single hierarchical structure, but something that can be multidimensional."
"It is hard to track the changes. For example, we're in sprint 25, and then we have 26, 27, 28, and 29. Throughout that whole time, we're developing pipelines in Azure, moving to GitHub, creating pipelines, and working with teams. But sometimes, we need to revisit specific decisions made in previous sprints, like pipeline details. Maybe it's in our Azure Wiki, GitHub, or Teams, but it's not always consistent. I wish I could search for all tasks or stories related to that particular effort without needing to know everyone's individual stories or features."
"In terms of improvement, perhaps some more metrics. If they could add some additional, that would be cool."
"In Rally Software, the connection with GitLab and GitHub needs improvement."
"We want Rally to generate OKRs, to allow teams to record the OKRs, and then the OKRs can be mapped to the epics and there is organizational alignment."
"I would like to see more Kanban support. As it stands, it doesn't seem to have the features or the layouts that the teams really need to be able to execute their tasks. It almost tries to force you into more of a Scrum style."
More IBM Engineering Workflow Management Pricing and Cost Advice →
IBM Engineering Workflow Management is ranked 10th in Enterprise Agile Planning Tools with 14 reviews while Rally Software is ranked 6th in Enterprise Agile Planning Tools with 116 reviews. IBM Engineering Workflow Management is rated 6.8, while Rally Software is rated 8.2. The top reviewer of IBM Engineering Workflow Management writes "Offers good traceability elements but UI needs improvement ". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Rally Software writes "Good discussion and note-taking capabilities but hard to track the changes". IBM Engineering Workflow Management is most compared with Jira, Codebeamer, Microsoft Azure DevOps, GitLab and Polarion ALM, whereas Rally Software is most compared with Microsoft Azure DevOps, Jira, TFS, Jira Align and OpenText ALM / Quality Center. See our IBM Engineering Workflow Management vs. Rally Software report.
See our list of best Enterprise Agile Planning Tools vendors.
We monitor all Enterprise Agile Planning Tools 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.