We just raised a $30M Series A: Read our story

Broadcom Agile Requirements Designer OverviewUNIXBusinessApplication

Broadcom Agile Requirements Designer is the #1 ranked solution in our list of top Test Design Automation tools. It is most often compared to Cognizant ADPART: Broadcom Agile Requirements Designer vs Cognizant ADPART

What is Broadcom Agile Requirements Designer?
CA Agile Requirements Designer is an end-to-end requirements gathering, test automation and test case design tool which drastically reduces manual testing effort and enables organizations to deliver quality software to market earlier and at less cost. The optimal set of manual or automated tests can be derived automatically from requirements modeled as unambiguous flowcharts and are linked to the right data and expected results. These tests are updated automatically when the requirements change, allowing organizations to deliver quality software which reflects changing user needs.

Broadcom Agile Requirements Designer is also known as Grid Tools Agile Designer, CA ARD, CA Agile Requirements Designer .

Broadcom Agile Requirements Designer Customers

Williams, Rabobank

Broadcom Agile Requirements Designer Video

Archived Broadcom Agile Requirements Designer Reviews (more than two years old)

Filter by:
Filter Reviews
Industry
Loading...
Filter Unavailable
Company Size
Loading...
Filter Unavailable
Job Level
Loading...
Filter Unavailable
Rating
Loading...
Filter Unavailable
Considered
Loading...
Filter Unavailable
Order by:
Loading...
  • Date
  • Highest Rating
  • Lowest Rating
  • Review Length
Search:
Showingreviews based on the current filters. Reset all filters
Shubham Jain
Test Engineer Senior Analyst at a tech services company with 10,001+ employees
Real User
Leaderboard
Enables us to restrict flows and remove them from test data, but needs better integration

Pros and Cons

  • "CA ARD has some beautiful features which I haven't found anywhere else. For example, when designing or creating our test cases and doing scenarios, we are able to restrict our flows. If we take a data link between two processes, we can actually restrict it, so that, in production, if our functionality breaks down, we can restrict that and all the flows related to it will be removed from the test data set."
  • "CA ARD doesn't provide integration with Tosca. The possibility of creating a test case and exporting it into Tosca is not available. Integration with end-to-end automation tools, like Worksoft or Tosca, is not provided by CA ARD as of now."

What is our primary use case?

Our primary use case for this tool is designing our manual test cases.

CA ARD is a shift-left tool for us, toward BA, business analysts, where we actually create our requirements. We use it for creating our test cases and QC. Once we get the requirements from a client, we design our flowcharts in CA ARD and then it automatically creates our test cases and QC, because there's an integration in between CA ARD and QC.

How has it helped my organization?

We used to provide RTMs to the technical team or the testing team, but now, CA ARD is an extra helping hand. We can provide the exact scope of testing or development to the technical team. That enhances things at the organizational level.

What is most valuable?

CA ARD has some beautiful features which I haven't found anywhere else. For example, when designing or creating our test cases and doing scenarios, we are able to restrict our flows. If we take a data link between two processes, we can actually restrict it, so that in production, if our functionality breaks down, we can restrict that, and all the flows related to it will be removed from the test data set. That is something we can actually do from CA ARD.

What needs improvement?

We are using many tools in our projects, like Tosca, but CA ARD is a very closed tool. It doesn't provide integration with Tosca. The possibility of creating a test case and exporting it into Tosca is not available. Integration with end-to-end automation tools, like Worksoft or Tosca, is not provided by CA ARD as of now.

Although there are many integrations which are already available, like Jenkins for automatic performance testing, where we can actually build batches and all, still, there's room for improvement here which the CA ARD team can work on.

For how long have I used the solution?

Less than one year.

What do I think about the stability of the solution?

In terms of designing, it is very stable, but we are still exploring automation. We just started using the automation feature of ARD.

How was the initial setup?

The initial setup depends on the kind of scenario you are working on. But I found it straightforward. I took about one-and-a-half weeks to study the tool and I'm fine working on it.

Deployment for our clients takes around 30 minutes. It's relatively quick. It generally takes one to two people for deployment. Once the system is up and running it takes two or three people to maintain it.

We have four to five people using the solution. We have an automation team of around 11 people. About half the team is using this tool.

What other advice do I have?

I have to become more familiar with the automation part of CA ARD, and then maybe I'll come to the point of saying that it is a good tool which enables you to take your automation, the testing and development, from deployment and designing of your test case, to pushing them into your testing module - whatever tool you are using; that it is an end-to-end solution.

I would rate this solution at six out of ten. I'm working on Tosca, which is also an end-to-end solution for testing, and I see Tosca as a better option to use, except that Tosca is very costly compared to CA ARD. There are other tools as well, like RPA for process automation. CA ARD is lagging in competing with these tools. As an automation tool, it might not be the strongest.

Disclosure: My company has a business relationship with this vendor other than being a customer: Partner.
GS
Assistant Manager Business Analyst at Ernst & Young
Real User
Leaderboard
Helps the development team to finish tasks within the required timeframe

Pros and Cons

  • "Defects can be traced in the solution."
  • "The solution could be more user-friendly. For example, attachments could be icon-based to make it easier for the user to notice them."

What is our primary use case?

I work in the insurance and tax domains. The purpose of my using the tool is for user story creation and to have a traceability matrix for our development team and testing team.

How has it helped my organization?

The team I am working with was never into Agile before. We have a daily scrum-call and before that, we have to define all the tasks that we are going to work on for a number of sprints. For example, there is a Product Increment Planning meeting where we put all the user requirements into the product backlog. Then we put them back to the respective sprints.

A product increment consists of about five iterations, or five sprints. And we pull each of these backlog items to these particular sprints or iterations, so that it is easy for the development team to pick up, based on the priority. The backlog is set, and it is pulled into particular sprints, based on business priority.

So it helps the development team to take up and finish tasks within the required timeframe. It helps in productivity, traceability, and saves time.

What is most valuable?

In the case of a big epic, we are able to create it. Then, based on backlog creation, we will be able to create the user stories under that particular feature.

Also, defects can be traced in the solution.

What needs improvement?

The solution could be more user-friendly. For example, attachments could be icon-based to make it easier for the user to notice them. Overall, it would be nice, from the user-interface point of view, for them to improve it.

In terms of testing or defects, we are able to track it currently, based on each task. But if the testing team could have different access rights, that would really help.

For how long have I used the solution?

Three to five years.

What do I think about the stability of the solution?

The stability is very nice. Up until now we haven't faced any issues.

What do I think about the scalability of the solution?

The scalability is good because access can be provided to multiple teams.

Which solution did I use previously and why did I switch?

This is our first such solution.

How was the initial setup?

The initial setup is straightforward. It usually takes two people to deploy. They work as administrators or on the development team. There will be one or two administrators on the client's side to maintain it.

What was our ROI?

I have seen ROI from implementing this solution in different organizations which I worked with. The return on investment was very good because it is less costly when compared to other tools on the market. For our current project, it might have saved some $2,000 to $3,000.

Which other solutions did I evaluate?

There are other tools in the market and our organization was using something, but I don't remember the name of the tool.

What other advice do I have?

For us, the process of implementing it starts with getting in touch with one of our internal teams and giving a business case for why we are going to use this tool and what the users' rights will be: for example, edit or delete or whatever functionalities we require. They will register us for the solution. Once this is completed, it will trigger an email so we can start using the tool. First, we create the backlog.

I work on it from a business analyst perspective and I help the project management team to understand what all the backlogs are that we are maintaining for the upcoming versions. As a business analyst, I note the requirements for the respective backlogs, based on business priorities. Then we pull them into the particular sprints. It will then move to the development team to start looking at each of the user stories. They will divide these user stories into particular, technical tasks.

From the testing team point of view, they create, under the same user story, their tasks and start giving their descriptions, including the defects.

Once it is completed, we have a UAT done and we update the status of each of these user stories as completed, or in progress, whichever is applicable.

Deployment depends on the complexity of the application.

We have 25 to 30 people using it in the current project. In my previous organizations, the same tool was used by more than 125 to 130 people. There are different types of users. Business people are also involved, as well as technical testing people, project managers, etc. Different stakeholders are involved.

We are implementing it in many projects now. It was not being used as much, in practice, in the organization where I am working, but we are now scaling it up to multiple teams, so that everyone will get the benefits. To scale up to different teams may take another year. There are different service lines in the organization and each of them has to adopt this technology. They are slowly picking it up.

Disclosure: I am a real user, and this review is based on my own experience and opinions.
PB
Front Line Manager at a energy/utilities company with 1,001-5,000 employees
Real User
Leaderboard
The optimization technique helps in giving us the minimum number of test cases with maximum coverage

Pros and Cons

  • "The optimization technique helps in giving us the minimum number of test cases with maximum coverage."
  • "It gives us an idea of creating the visual diagrams, which are quite easy to use. It is helpful in creating our business processes."
  • "Data flexibility is something which I would like to see, along with more integration with App Test."
  • "A template in App Test should be created in advance. This has proven to be time consuming. The process is not fully automated, because there is a lot of manual intervention is required."

What is our primary use case?

We are trying to create models, then get the maximum number of test coverage by getting the minimum number of tests. That is what we are looking for: Getting the minimum amount of test cases which provide the maximum coverage. We want to test the minimum amount of cases. 

As of now, we do not have a tool which can tell us this. We might end up overtesting, but we have no way of knowing. For this purpose, we use other tools as well, to show how well it integrates and contributes to the continuous testing process.

How has it helped my organization?

We are trying to establish a process. As of now, we have not come to a point where we are only using ARD with other tools. We are trying to find better ways of how to use it. We have just done a type of PoC, where we have some model and created a number of test cases, which gives us an idea of the test cases to be executed afterward. We wanted to use it digitally, in practice, but what we see is data integration points. This does not give us the flexibility of ramming the test with multiple sets of data at one time. Therefore, we are just trying to look into the aspect where it gives us more flexibility in terms of integration and using it in our continuous process.

Optimization is something which I like in the tool. It gives me an idea of what are the minimum number of cases which I can execute in order to complete my testing.

What is most valuable?

I like the optimization, because it gives me an idea of the minimum number of test cases. It also gives me an idea of coverage.

The integrations with other tools is very important for our continuous testing process.

What needs improvement?

I was looking into some pre-release testing on the integrations with CA Application Test, and when I exposed the test directly to App Test, I found that the tests which we directly exposed have one set of data that we can directly expose and run in App Test. Once we run it, we come to know whether the test has passed or failed. Currently, when we are running a test in App Test, we are running it with TDM data, so it helps my tests run with multiple sets of data at once. I feel that it is a more efficient process if we are running a test with different sets of TDM data. However, if you take data directly from ARD, it is one test with one set of data, which is getting executed. Therefore, data flexibility is something which I would like to see, along with more integration with App Test.

Also, a template in App Test should be created in advance. This has proven to be time consuming. The process is not fully automated, because there is a lot of manual intervention is required. I would like an enhancement or something from the tool that I can use in a more automated way than a manual process. 

For how long have I used the solution?

One to three years.

What do I think about the stability of the solution?

It is quite a stable product.

What do I think about the scalability of the solution?

We are fine in terms of scalability.

How are customer service and technical support?

The support team is good.

Which solution did I use previously and why did I switch?

I have not previously used a test case design tool.

The company was just using ALM for our test management: creating manual test cases, designing and planning, requirements, and traceability. 

How was the initial setup?

The initial setup was quite straightforward.

What other advice do I have?

I would advise to use this product, because it is a good way to create models and establish model-based process testing. The optimization technique with integrations is seamless, and a very good tool.

It gives us an idea of creating the visual diagrams, which are quite easy to use. It is helpful in creating our business processes. The optimization technique helps in giving us the minimum number of test cases with maximum coverage.

Disclosure: My company has a business relationship with this vendor other than being a customer: Partners.
Thiyagu Shanmugasundaram
Senior Consultant at a tech services company with 5,001-10,000 employees
Helped us to move from manual testing to automation testing

Pros and Cons

  • "It helped us to move from manual testing to automation testing."
  • "Technical support is excellent. They provide solutions quickly for issues encountered."
  • "Integration with Agile management tools can be improved, i.e., mainly test case maintenance and linking test cases to the automation script."

What is our primary use case?

We use CA Agile Requirements Designer for model-based testing, and also automate test case creation and generate test automation scripts.

How has it helped my organization?

It reduced the effort required for test case creation, test case review, automation script generation, and maintenance of test cases and automation scripts. We were able to reduce our QA team size by 50 percent. It helped resources without programming knowledge to create automation scripts. It enabled in-sprint automation and implement continuous testing.

It helped us to move from manual testing to automation testing. Application level SMEs without scripting knowledge were able to create automation scripts. Integration with Test Data Manager, reduced the effort required in synthetic data generation and finding the test data from a master testbed quickly. Integration with Rally helped us to upload test cases quickly.

What is most valuable?

  • Business flow creation
  • Test case optimization and generation
  • Risk-based testing
  • Automation test script creation
  • Test Data Manager integration

The product reduces the efforts required in documenting requirements, test case creation, and automation script generation. Test Case Review was quick and easy, by visually going over the flow. We were able to standardize the automation scripts.

What needs improvement?

ARD is constantly improving, and CA is always working on adding new features. Integration with Agile management tools can be improved, i.e., mainly test case maintenance and linking test cases to the automation script.

For how long have I used the solution?

Three to five years.

What do I think about the stability of the solution?

No stability issues.

What do I think about the scalability of the solution?

No scalability issues.

How are customer service and technical support?

Technical support is excellent. I have been using this product for nearly four years. They provide solutions quickly for issues encountered.

Which solution did I use previously and why did I switch?

We sought out this solution because we needed to automate our regression test cases. Application SMEs without automation scripting experience were our main challenge.

When we got introduced to ARD, we did a PoC and realized the benefits. Then, we implemented ARD in our projects.

How was the initial setup?

The initial setup was straightforward. Installation was quick. Then, we needed to activate the license by following the instruction provided.

What was our ROI?

This tool reduces the cost associated with test cases, automation script generation, and maintenance costs. So go for it. It will bring great savings to your organisation.

Which other solutions did I evaluate?

We did not evaluate any other solutions.

What other advice do I have?

If you are looking to implement model-based testing, reduce the effort required for documenting the requirements, test case creation, automation script generation, maintenance of test cases, and automation scripts, then go for it. It will bring great savings to your organisation.

Disclosure: My company has a business relationship with this vendor other than being a customer: Partner.
it_user797937
Automation Engineer at a comms service provider with 10,001+ employees
Video Review
Vendor
Helps communication between the testing organization and the requirements group

Pros and Cons

  • "Helps the communication between the testing organization and the requirements group. It helps us to simplify the work. Instead of dealing with individual test cases, you're working with a model."
  • "The modeling is a game-changer."
  • "I think it's already coming, but it needs more automation aspects. There is a tab for Automation, but I think it's not robust. I think that it's going to be a crucial element of the tool."

How has it helped my organization?

I think it helps the communication between the testing organization and the requirements group. It helps us to simplify the work. Instead of dealing with individual test cases, you're working with a model. And a lot of people - and I agree with that - like the visual aspect of the modeling.

What is most valuable?

The modeling, without question. The modeling is a game-changer.

What needs improvement?

I think it's already coming, but more automation aspects involved with it. There is a tab for Automation, but I think it's not robust. I think that it's going to be a crucial element of the tool.

For how long have I used the solution?

Less than one year.

What do I think about the stability of the solution?

I have been playing with the solution for a short timeframe, two weeks. So far very good. I haven't tested the scalability of the solution, but so far, I would say very good.

How are customer service and technical support?

I have not engaged technical support. As far as I have heard from other customers, the technical support is great.

Which solution did I use previously and why did I switch?

We're using BPT from HPE ALM. It was not from me, the direction, but I think my leadership saw the opportunity of shifting to the model-based testing, and to have a more connected way to work the requirements. So that was the driving force to the shift.

How was the initial setup?

It's a client install and we got it packaged very well within our company. So, I didn't have any problems at all with installing the client.

What other advice do I have?

I would say it's an eight out of 10. It's a great solution for its purpose, but I think there are going to be more things which need to be added to it to make it a full-scale solution for the problem that we're dealing with. So, I give it an eight, but a strong eight.

Disclosure: IT Central Station contacted the reviewer to collect the review and to validate authenticity. The reviewer was referred by the vendor, but the review is not subject to editing or approval by the vendor.
it_user778887
QA Group Manager at a financial services firm with 1,001-5,000 employees
Vendor
​The scale possibilities are endless, especially when combined with all the other products that CA has to offer

Pros and Cons

  • "It takes away all the time to construct test cases, so it is all automatic now, but it also levels the playing field."
  • "​The scale possibilities are endless, especially when combined with all the other products that CA has to offer."
  • "They do not have an engine to house test scripts to really pull together the testing pieces of it."

What is our primary use case?

We use CA ARD to accelerate our testing. Currently, we write manual test scripts, and if you bring new people onboard, they have a learning curve because they do not know the products as well as experienced people. So, one of the primary things that we use the ARD for is to erase that SME knowledge versus newbie mentality. Once you put the requirements into the model diagram, the tool does all the test cases for you. It takes away all the time to construct test cases, so it is all automatic now, but it also levels the playing field. 

What is most valuable?

  1. Now, we get automated test cases, where before we did not. It cuts out the construction time of testing, about 75%, is what we found. 
  2. It is a store that we keep all of our requirements in where, before projects would come in and we would not have a place where we keep the past requirements so there was always a fight between development, testing, and the business writers because they can't remember how functionality works. Now, there is a black and white copy of how the processes are flowing through the system, so there is not a fight anymore about what is happening and what is not happening.

What needs improvement?

The only thing CA does not have today is a testing engine. So they have got the requirements piece, SDLC lifecycle with Rally (or whatever it is called now), but they do not have an engine to house test scripts to really pull together the testing pieces of it like HPE does. Really that is the piece that I would love to see them either acquire, build, or figure out how to incorporate into their test suite, because they have got every other software that you can think of except for that one piece that really is essential for a QA organization.

For how long have I used the solution?

One to three years.

What do I think about the stability of the solution?

It is really stable. The learning curve depends on the talent of the people using it and their skills, but the stability is really good. CA has been great about helping if something goes wrong or breaks but there's not a whole lot of that. 

What do I think about the scalability of the solution?

The scale possibilities are endless, especially when combined with all the other products that CA has to offer. If it is a company that has the means to be able to purchase all the pieces together to build a full scale model, then the possibilities are endless.

Which solution did I use previously and why did I switch?

I was involved in the initial acquisition so I came to CA World two years ago and found the product and brought it back and then we piloted and then we rolled it out to the larger team.

How was the initial setup?

The initial setup was straightforward.

However, we are still not tapping into the full potential of the tool. We have only had the tool in-house for a year now, and we are getting ready to acquire or purchase more to make it a full scale rollout. I really think that the tool is getting ready to grow and to really expand its base at the company, so I am looking forward to growing with it.

What's my experience with pricing, setup cost, and licensing?

The cost of the tool was well worth the benefit that we saw on the back-end. We were able to scale down some resources to basically self-fund our ability to purchase the tool. It was a no brainer.

Which other solutions did I evaluate?

We, myself and someone who works for me, researched a lot of companies and a lot of software. This was the Taj Mahal of this particular ability to do model diagramming and automate test cases. 

We looked at HPE, Modius, CA, Conformiq, and TCS. The CA solution is so well-developed that it was really the forerunner due to the price and the use of it. 

I was involved in the initial acquisition. I came to CA World two years ago and found the product. I brought it back, then we piloted it, and rolled it out to the larger team.

Where I work there is a lot of red tape, because they are a financial company, not really a tech industry, so there are a lot of barriers internally. CA worked really well with us to kind of break down those barriers and find the solutions that we needed. 

What other advice do I have?

Start small. If you want to pilot the solution, because everybody starts with a pilot, pick something that is low complexity and low change, that way you can learn the tool and understand the full breadth of what it offers you, because we made the mistake of trying an agile transformation in one of our highly complex digital solutions. We only scratched the surface of what the tool was capable of because there were a lot of band-aids. There was a lot of, "Okay, let me go do this really quick," and not really understanding what the tool could fully bring and really learning about the tool. Really, just make sure you learn the tool before you start implementing and you will get a lot more use out of it. 

Most important criteria when selecting a vendor: price. For our company, it is price. We have to make sure the bucks are worth their bang. Then really, it is the people, like the sales team, the support team, their response times, how friendly they are, and how honest they are because we have found dealing with vendors for two years now and there have been some dishonest ones. So, we really value CA, their teams, and how they interact with their clients. 

Disclosure: I am a real user, and this review is based on my own experience and opinions.
it_user779175
Senior IT Manager at a manufacturing company with 10,001+ employees
Vendor
Creating the model is faster than trying to generate test cases, and provides a visual representation of our requirements

What is our primary use case?

We use it primarily to model our applications to automatically generate test cases.

It's great. It's preformed very well. It's very useful.

How has it helped my organization?

There are three major benefits. The first one is there is a time savings. It's much faster to create the model than it is to generate test cases. It's much faster to update the test cases in the model than it is to update them manually. 

The second benefit is really around organization. It helps you organize the different parts of your application and it really forces you to understand how they work well together. 

The third benefit is it's a visual representation of your requirements, which is very useful when communicating with a business partner or communicating with another person inside the company, to help them understand the application.

What is most valuable?

The most valuable feature for us is the automatic creation of the test cases, based on the models. And the impact analyzer that shows you where your change is impacting your test cases, and the ability to export that to our TFS Instance.

What needs improvement?

We're actually participating with CA to provide some enhancement requests on new features we'd like to see. I can't think of any specific ones off the top of my head, but I know they are evaluating, and they have already provided us features based on our feedback previously.

In terms of improvements, just licensing. That's a big area.

What do I think about the stability of the solution?

There are some opportunities to improve the stability. The application will often times, if you put your computer to sleep and you open it back up, not be responsive any longer. You'll have to kill it and open it back up. But the good thing is that I've talk with CA about that, and they're actually fixing the issue.

They're very receptive to fixing the product. It's a fairly new, young product.

What do I think about the scalability of the solution?

I don't see any concerns with scalability. It's really a local install. I don't have any concerns there.

How are customer service and technical support?

Tech support is one of their strongest features. The people that support the tool, know the tool. The product owner is here at the CA World conference. I've met him; I already knew him from interactions with support. So they're very, very good and responsive as it relates to support.

Which solution did I use previously and why did I switch?

My CA representative and I were talking about a problem I was having and he described to me how this tool could help with it.

This was a problem that we were having independent of CA products. It was a problem that we were having in our testing space. This was a tool that we weren't actively using but helped to resolve that issue.

How was the initial setup?

Everything but the licensing was straightforward. The licensing is extremely complex. It needs work. That's probably the biggest issue. I know they are redesigning the licensing model, but that was a royal pain, to be honest.

What other advice do I have?

When looking for a vendor, there are a few key things. 

  • The features of the tool - do we already have something that exists that has that capability today?
  • Cost, obviously - what's the cost? 

Those are the main areas.

I rate it a nine out of 10 based purely on the experience with licensing. If that were resolved it would absolutely be a 10.

Regarding advice to a colleague looking at this type of solution, I would say buy it. Start using it. I would give them an overview of what it does. There are great YouTube videos out there on ARD. That's how I initially learned about it, outside of the conversation with my CA rep. So go look at the YouTube videos, but then get your hands dirty. Get in there and start working with it, because it's really powerful once you learn it.

Disclosure: I am a real user, and this review is based on my own experience and opinions.
it_user779121
Chief Of Architecture & Industrialisation (Agile/Devops Prg Leader) at BNP Paribas
Vendor
Helps us design critical test cases and works well with Agile methodology

What is our primary use case?

Because we have a lot of applications, we test ARD on three use cases at the same time. I don't remember exactly, it was a Java-oriented application for our agency in Africa.

The added value is testing design. Also, it's very useful when you're working with the Agile methodology. It's a great tool within the CA catalog. 

What is most valuable?

Modeling how the application works, and then getting every use case we can test. Designing the right tests, what are the most critical tests we must do.

What needs improvement?

We are waiting for new features that we know that CA is working on. For example, to be able to deliver scripts directly from ARD, and then provide automatic testing. After that, with other tools we have, we could have a complete chain to test our application, beginning with ARD and then to Micro Focus UFT, for example. And without manual design.

There are another two issues, I don't remember them exactly, but CA is working on them, so it's okay.

What do I think about the scalability of the solution?

We have just started using it. It's simple, but we don't see any issue at this time.

How is customer service and technical support?

We are very satisfied with technical support.

How was the initial setup?

Technically, it was very simple. But the difficulty in starting to use it was more inside our company than a CA or a technical issue.

What other advice do I have?

Start using it now.

Disclosure: I am a real user, and this review is based on my own experience and opinions.
it_user778866
Director Of QA with 1,001-5,000 employees
Vendor
In the first year, we saw about a 70% reduction in our script creation time

What is our primary use case?

Primarily, we use it to convert our test process to model-based. It has actually changed our entire process from script-based to model-based.

How has it helped my organization?

It has been pretty dramatic. We have rolled it out across many of our digital teams. In the first year, we saw about a 70% reduction in our script creation time. So, we went from five days per sprint to one day, one to one and a half days per sprint in the script creation. So, it has been really effective.

What is most valuable?

  1. The co-monitorial modeling. It lets us reduce the amount of scripts that we need to execute to get complete coverage. That is really important to us. 
  2. Traceability from requirements through test cases.

What needs improvement?

  1. A better alignment to compliance-related requirements and being able to get visibility into those. It is really important for our industry. 
  2. Test data: There is Test Data On-Demand and there is the vTDM solution. We would like to see a nice integration between the data and the models. That is really going to help us in terms of CI/CD.

What do I think about the stability of the solution?

Stability is good. Any issues that we have had in terms of rollout, the CA team has been there to support us all along the way. All the solutions solved our problems so that has helped a lot to ensure we are using the product right. Where there were gaps, they closed them pretty quickly. We had the CA team and the whole group combined spent a lot of time with us, and they have been really responsive. From that perspective, where there were issues, we have solved them pretty fast.

What do I think about the scalability of the solution?

I am not seeing any real issues here. Early on, we had implemented in a way that was not very scalable. We quickly corrected the way we had it implemented. We would love to see it go to a SaaS solution. It is just easier from a procurement and onboarding perspective. However, so far, the scaling has been fine.

How are customer service and technical support?

Make sure CA is with you regarding the support.

Which solution did I use previously and why did I switch?

We are a large legacy company with a lot of legacy software. Converting to DevOps and agile, obviously, we had to get faster to the market. Our mind was already wrapped around how we enable teams. When we found the solution that fit nicely into where we are trying to go with our development process overall, it just kind of evolved. 

How was the initial setup?

I was involved in the initial setup. What is good is there were some consulting services to make the complex a little more simple. We have some real talented guys on our team that were more instrumental in that rollout than I was. So, it was not that difficult. One of the more difficult things is just getting people to think in terms of drawing models instead of writing scripts. Changing that mindset was something that we had to do, but CA helped us through that as well.

Which other solutions did I evaluate?

There is the open source community, then there is the traditional HPE product suite that we are already using. However, there were not a lot of products that did model-based solutions like this. Specific to this tool, probably just HPE.

What other advice do I have?

Most important criteria when selecting a vendor: 

The tool capability is important, but we also assess the risk of the company. For example:

  • How stable are they? 
  • Are they enterprise-wide? 
  • Do they understand a company of our scale? 
  • Can they scale with us? 

That is really important. 

The second thing I look for is support. It is really difficult to affect change if you are in it on your own trying to get it done. So, having a team there beside you which helps facilitate the change is really important. I think CA has done a good job with that.

Disclosure: I am a real user, and this review is based on my own experience and opinions.
it_user716553
Software Analyst Principal – Activation System Dev at a comms service provider with 10,001+ employees
Vendor
Provides Junior Developers Requirements To Write Code And Tech Support is Excellent

What is most valuable?

The ability to provide developers information on how to design the request.

How has it helped my organization?

By using ARD it allowed junior developers to write code because they had all of the requirements in the business flow.

What needs improvement?

It could be quicker to use. Because we do so many things with it, sometimes it takes a long time to create a flow.

For how long have I used the solution?

Two years.

What do I think about the stability of the solution?

At the beginning. I believe the stability issues have been addressed.

What do I think about the scalability of the solution?

At the beginning they did not have a cost effective way to get a viewer in front of our developers without giving them a copy. Now there is a viewer that addresses that issue.

How are customer service and technical support?

Techinical support is the best! Would give technical 10 out of 10.

Which solution did I use previously and why did I switch?

It was just user stories in an agile environment. Not very good.

How was the initial setup?

Moving the software between computers is challenging. We tend to get new PCs, or people leave our company and the migration to a new PC is not easy.

What's my experience with pricing, setup cost, and licensing?

If you can speed up productivity the price is good. If not, it is pricey.

Which other solutions did I evaluate?

Just manual processes, like Visio. Not a good solution when compared to ARD.

What other advice do I have?

Take a piece at a time. It can do a lot.

Disclosure: IT Central Station contacted the reviewer to collect the review and to validate authenticity. The reviewer was referred by the vendor, but the review is not subject to editing or approval by the vendor.
it_user631635
Quality Engineer at a financial services firm with 1,001-5,000 employees
Vendor
I like the model building for creating business process flows. Test case generation is manual or automated.

What is most valuable?

  • Model building: Creating business process flows
  • Test case generation: Manual or automated
  • Automation script creation and management

Test data management is coming at the end of March. That will be one of the biggest new leaps for us. We are very excited about adding TDM to the suite.

The new release CA Agile Requirements Designer 2.4 offers more flexibility when exploiting the APIs of test and defect management tools. CA has addressed this concern with release 2.4.

How has it helped my organization?

We deliver test cases ten times faster and automate in hours vs. days or weeks. We went from 90+ days behind in new automation to full, in-sprint automation with little to no technical debt.

Automation maintenance is now manageable. It reduced the number of people required for testing by 75%.

We deliver more stories faster.

What needs improvement?

Adding more connectivity to outside applications and the amount of detail we can export to systems of record could be improved. Otherwise, this is a very solid tool with tons of real valuable functionality.

The new release, CA Agile Requirements Designer 2.4, offers more flexibility when exploiting the APIs of test and defect management tools. CA has addressed this concern with release 2.4.

For how long have I used the solution?

Our group has been using CA ARD for two years. At our company, we have been using it for about three years.

What do I think about the stability of the solution?

Version 2.3 is very stable and reliable.

What do I think about the scalability of the solution?

We have not encountered any stability issues.

How are customer service and technical support?

CA support has been extremely helpful. Using the forum is a great way to get help, because the issues are usually user errors.

Which solution did I use previously and why did I switch?

We utilized HP UFT”. “We changed toll sets when we changed to a model based testing strategy”. In addition we moved away from HP UFT in favor of a Selenium, Java, TestNG framework. This allowed for more integration with addition toolsets and allows for a more open and flexible framework and test harness.”


How was the initial setup?

The setup is not hard at all. It is very simple, like any other desktop-type software installation.

What's my experience with pricing, setup cost, and licensing?

If you have a large group, don’t mess with nickel and diming the licensing. Just do your PoC. Then get the Enterprise agreement if you have the user base and roll it out. Otherwise, you could make the transition and cost painful.

Which other solutions did I evaluate?

We did evaluate other products. All of them had some good points and value. I chose CA Agile Requirements Designer because it would help us reach our goals and solve the most number of DevOps, CI/CD, testing issues, and future issues we would have.

What other advice do I have?

Kick it off with users who are excited and interested in making the change. Users who are not on-board with the transition will have a difficult time in making the adjustment to the change in process. Excited, interested users make the best implementers.

Disclosure: IT Central Station contacted the reviewer to collect the review and to validate authenticity. The reviewer was referred by the vendor, but the review is not subject to editing or approval by the vendor.
it_user602409
Test Manager with 1,001-5,000 employees
Vendor
For testing, it shows priorities of action so that the most important things are tested first.

What is most valuable?

It removes ambiguity in requirements, meaning that there are fewer demands for clarifications afterwards. We are using it to improve communication between business, tests and development.

For testing, it gives a very good view of the test cases and shows priorities of action so that the most important things are tested first. This helps us to save time as well.

How has it helped my organization?

The best example of improvement would be better communications available for my project.

What needs improvement?

When you have long flows or models, the display can be problematic, as it necessitates zooming in on the GUI and you lose the full display.

As your model grows in size, it becomes increasingly difficult to get a meaningfull view of the entire model. You might have a view with the whole model, but then the text and flow will be incomprehensible. Likewise, as you zoom in, you lose the entirity of the model. A workaround is zooming in as much as needed and scroll around from there, but one could wish for a better solution.

For how long have I used the solution?

I have been using the solution for about 10 months.

What do I think about the stability of the solution?

We haven't encountered issues with stability but we have experienced some problems with our JIRA project, which takes too long to load because of its size.

What do I think about the scalability of the solution?

Larger models do require significant time for analysis.

How are customer service and technical support?

I would rate the technical support as top notch. They are very responsive and they help us solve problems quickly with brainstorming discussions which is amazing.

Which solution did I use previously and why did I switch?

I didn't previously use another solution.

How was the initial setup?

I was involved in the setup and there were some security issues which proved to be complications because we are running it with VMware and there are some difficulties with offline registration and license revalidation.

Which other solutions did I evaluate?

We have Test Data Manager but didn't evaluate other solutions.

What other advice do I have?

You should have a detailed discussion with the vendor as to what your actual requirements are. Also, concerning test data management integrations, there are quite a few valuable features which require TDM so you should consider if you need the full value trail there.

Disclosure: IT Central Station contacted the reviewer to collect the review and to validate authenticity. The reviewer was referred by the vendor, but the review is not subject to editing or approval by the vendor.
it_user558099
Product Manager at a financial services firm with 1,001-5,000 employees
Vendor
It automates our processes, which facilitates our software delivery.

What is most valuable?

This tool improves our speed and automates our processes.

How has it helped my organization?

We can deliver software better and faster.

What needs improvement?

Most of our requests have been met, but I would like to see connection with RSS or maybe with Confluence.

What do I think about the stability of the solution?

It is pretty new, so together with CA, we improved it over the first half of the year. It was a partner deal, mostly to help them out.

What do I think about the scalability of the solution?

The scalability is okay.

How are customer service and technical support?

We worked with technical support in the development process. It has worked out very well.

Which solution did I use previously and why did I switch?

Previous to this solution, we just used manual processes.

How was the initial setup?

I was involved in the installation, which wasn’t so complex. Educating people is more of the problem. The education process is complex.

Which other solutions did I evaluate?

We were looking at HPE and we looked at homemade products. None came near to this solution. In this case, we didn't have any other alternatives. There was no other vendor which had these solutions, so there was no option to compare.

What other advice do I have?

I would suggest buying this solution.

Disclosure: I am a real user, and this review is based on my own experience and opinions.
it_user272643
Software Quality Assurance at a energy/utilities company with 1,001-5,000 employees
Vendor
We can automatically generate our test cases. They need to make it more user-friendly, so that you can navigate from one section to another.

What is most valuable?

One of the best features is that you can actually develop some of the business designs in the application and transfer that into scenarios if you don't go out of the detail level. And you can see the coverage. You can get your test cases automatically done for you.

How has it helped my organization?

I believe the best thing is that you can automatically generate your test cases.

What needs improvement?

Because of the way it is designed, all the boxes are displayed no matter how many there are. So, the more boxes you create the smaller and smaller they are displayed and you cannot even read it. So it's impossible to design your requirements. If you cannot read the boxes, what's the point?

Then, they need to make it more user-friendly, so that you can navigate from one section to another. Also, being able to automatically create stories. Some of the feedback I received from my team is that you cannot go out of the detail level. For example, if you want to create test cases from this level, it actually stays at a really high level unless you add a hundred steps. And then you have a huge process diagram that you have to maintain after that.

What do I think about the stability of the solution?

I haven't actually installed it, so I can’t give you much information about that. But, I've seen that its not able to do some things. For example, you cannot create user stories inside Agile Requirements Designer. We just saw another product where you could drill down to BBD and TDD. And you can actually transform that and create your user stories to be able to do that and this product is lacking that.

How are customer service and technical support?

We haven't actually used technical support yet.

Which solution did I use previously and why did I switch?

Well right now we use multiple systems. For example, if you want to build your business diagram, you have to use Visio. You can’t export the diagram into a format useable by Agile Requirements Designer. You need to go directly to an application lifecycle management system and build your steps, but you need follow the business diagram you created in Visio to be able to create those steps for those test cases.

So you have to upload all your requirements into an ALM system to be able to identify your metrics. But with this tool, I see the benefit that you can actually do it automatically. To be able to identify all scenarios, you need to test.

Which other solutions did I evaluate?

We just saw another product called Blueprint that is very similar to this. It was very user friendly and it has a lot of capabilities for where we're heading, which is agile. It’s very user friendly, the navigation is really good, and you can read the boxes.

What other advice do I have?

Because of the amount of time that you have to invest to maintain it and because its not simple, not user friendly, I would rate CA Agile Requirements Designer a 5/10.

Disclosure: I am a real user, and this review is based on my own experience and opinions.
it_user558567
Lead QA Analyst at a financial services firm with 1,001-5,000 employees
Real User
It will enhance and make the automation part for the testers a lot easier.

What is most valuable?

The most valuable features of this solution are the ease for creating test cases and the automation of the test cases from the user workflows.

It will enhance and make the automation part for the testers a lot easier.

How has it helped my organization?

It should allow the teams to create automated test cases a lot faster. They can do their testing within a two week sprint and then get the products released into production a lot sooner.

What needs improvement?

Since we're just beginning to use this application requirements tool, I'm not sure what exactly is missing in it.

The biggest thing for us is the effort required to create the workflows. There's a lot of initial work that goes in and if we could streamline that a bit more, it would be better.

What do I think about the stability of the solution?

The product is stable and reliable.

What do I think about the scalability of the solution?

It is very scalable. I know that it's used for both small and large projects.

How are customer service and technical support?

We have still not used technical support.

Which solution did I use previously and why did I switch?

We decided to use this solution to bring in automation and a tool to help the testers.

How was the initial setup?

It's easy to setup and get the license. Applying it to the different organizations that is the challenging part.

What other advice do I have?

Make sure that you have the right staff with at least some skill sets, if you are looking to purchase a similar solution.

We had already done several POCs in different parts of the organization. Since they were using this tool and we needed to a carry out similar efforts, we just brought it in. Once they select a vendor, other groups just follow since the POC has already been done.

This tool is new for us and it is just that we are still not taking full advantage of it yet.

Disclosure: I am a real user, and this review is based on my own experience and opinions.
it_user558630
Senior Manager Test Engineering with 1,001-5,000 employees
Vendor
Uses a simple method to build a workflow. Can be integrated with test automation tools.

What is most valuable?

There are tons of really valuable features. First of all, it's a model-based testing tool and the market of model-based testing is pretty narrow, and there are few offerings. I did extensive research in this area and at the moment CA Agile Requirements Designer is probably one of the best tools in the market. It allows you to utilize the full power of model-based testing using a simple method to build a workflow, which is more familiar to most software and test engineers than to business analysts or product managers.

It has a native engine that allows you to configure test coverage for your application model, and you can analyze this coverage by applying different optimizations. This really helps to make informed decisions when you're choosing the right amount of testing you need to apply. How not to over-test your application from one point of view, and from other point of view, how to guarantee 100% functional coverage in your testing. This is really crucial. Another great feature is that it can be integrated with test automation tools. This tool is agnostic can be integrated with a number of different products.

Another useful feature is the ability to integrate with a test data manager. For example, in my array, I don't have large databases from which I can get enough data for my testing. But other companies do have large data sets and they can integrate their testing tools with the databases to do sub-setting and masking. CA can also build synthetic data for testing. These are very powerful features that you can't find in other products. In this way, CA is in a unique position, because they offer these unique products with unique feature sets.

How has it helped my organization?

We have a number of challenges and one of the methods we use to solve these is model-based testing. That's what we're researching right now. We're doing a proof of concept with Agile Requirements Designer, which is pretty feature rich. ARD was a startup and CA bought it a little bit more than a year ago. Since then, the quality has greatly improved.

What needs improvement?

I don't know what improvements to make since we are not yet using this in production. We are still in the preliminary stages of testing. I plan to do more research on it. They're already doing the right thing. They're improving the integration with automation and that’s really important. However, the documentation is not clear regarding best practices, so that could be improved. Since it’s not likely that every automation framework can be easily integrated with CA ARD, it would be nice to have recommendations regarding what changes to make to the automation framework in order to successfully achieve that.

For how long have I used the solution?

I’ve used CA for approximately for two months.

What do I think about the stability of the solution?

I haven’t used it for a very long time. The first version I tried had a lot of bugs. The version I tried in June or July was much more stable.

What do I think about the scalability of the solution?

I think that it is scalable.

How are customer service and technical support?

We worked with several people from CA and they did a really great job helping us familiarize ourselves with the tool. At the conference, I spoke with maybe five or six representatives; technical guys, sales guys, even feature developers, people with strong technical backgrounds and I got a lot of new information. It's cool. They're doing awesome stuff.

Which solution did I use previously and why did I switch?

We hadn't used model-based testing tools before.

What about the implementation team?

I am not the person who approves the budgeting, but I am the person who'll do the research and present the results to the decision makers.

Which other solutions did I evaluate?

We didn’t evaluate any other alternatives for model-based testing.

What other advice do I have?

I think that this product is going to be very good, because of the team who develops it. They are trying to identify the important features the market wants and to implement them. They are also researching the best approaches to apply to particular cases.

If you're looking for model-based testing, I would advice to first to take a look at CA ARD. It's not a very complicated solution, so your learning curve will not be too steep. You’ll be able to quickly identify the core functionality. First, limit yourself to just model-based testing, then you can dive deeper and research different integration capabilities, such as how to integrate with automation and data management.

Disclosure: I am a real user, and this review is based on my own experience and opinions.