Compare IBM Rational DOORS vs. Polarion Requirements

Cancel
You must select at least 2 products to compare!
Most Helpful Review
Find out what your peers are saying about IBM Rational DOORS vs. Polarion Requirements and other solutions. Updated: January 2021.
455,301 professionals have used our research since 2012.
Quotes From Members

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

Pros
"The most valuable feature for me is the ability to enter data into one table, or context, and link it across modules.""The solution is stable.""The program is very stable.""I really like the customization that can be done using the DOORS Extension Language (DXL).""It is very customizable and easy to scale.""The most valuable feature is the management verification and login.""This product can help improve how your organization proceeds through solution development.""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."

More IBM Rational DOORS Pros »

"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 like the way this solution is structured.""A valuable feature from my side would be the comparison corporization.""Its flexibility and APIs are the most valuable."

More Polarion Requirements Pros »

Cons
"It would have been ok ten years ago, but we are used to having better tools now.""It's difficult to set the code on the solution.""The kind of dashboard is not very convenient.""There are problems with communicating between DOORS and Microsoft Office.""The interface is not very user-friendly and has not evolved in a long time.""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.""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.""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."

More IBM Rational DOORS Cons »

"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.""If we have more than one thousand work items in one live-book then it becomes almost unusable.""It is stable enough but if you would like to work with more requirement objects, then you will get timeouts.""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."

More Polarion Requirements Cons »

Pricing and Cost Advice
"Licensing fees are billed annually and there is no support included with what I pay.""Pricing can vary depending on the size of the organization and how contracts are negotiated.""IBM is a bit too expensive in terms of pricing. Customers are paying a lot for the license, and the price is quite high for this kind of environment. It is quite high as compared to what we can get today with other solutions.""It is expensive to onboard additional users."

More IBM Rational DOORS Pricing and Cost Advice »

"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."

More Polarion Requirements Pricing and Cost Advice »

report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Application Requirements Management solutions are best for your needs.
455,301 professionals have used our research since 2012.
Questions from the Community
Top Answer: The most valuable feature is the management verification and login.
Top Answer: This is an expensive solution. Licensing fees are billed annually and there is no support included with what I pay.
Top Answer: The user interface is old and clunky and in need of some improvement. In order for DOORS to be as good as it needs to be, you have to be able to get normal people using it. The problem is that because… more »
Ask a question

Earn 20 points

Ranking
Views
8,542
Comparisons
5,715
Reviews
13
Average Words per Review
686
Rating
7.2
Views
2,864
Comparisons
2,370
Reviews
4
Average Words per Review
472
Rating
6.0
Popular Comparisons
Compared 37% of the time.
Compared 10% of the time.
Compared 6% of the time.
Compared 32% of the time.
Compared 2% of the time.
Learn
IBM
Siemens
Overview
IBM Rational DOORS is a requirements management application for optimizing requirements communication, collaboration and verification throughout your organization and supply chain. This scalable solution can help you meet business goals by managing project scope and cost. Rational DOORS lets you capture, trace, analyze and manage changes to information while maintaining compliance to regulations and standards. Rational DOORS provides requirements management in a centralized location for better team collaboration, and traceability by linking requirements to design items, test plans, test cases and other requirements. It also provides scalability to address your changing requirements management needs, test tracking toolkit for manual test environments to link requirements to test cases, and integrations to help manage changes to requirements with either a simple pre-defined change proposal system or a more thorough, customizable change control workflow with Rational change management solutions.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.
Offer
Learn more about IBM Rational DOORS
Learn more about Polarion Requirements
Sample Customers
Infosys, Chevrolet VoltNetSuite, Ottobock, Zumtobel Group, Kªster Automotive GmbH, Sirona Dental Systems, LifeWatch, U.S. Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), PHOENIX CONTACT Electronics GmbH, Metso Corporation
Top Industries
REVIEWERS
Aerospace/Defense Firm26%
Manufacturing Company22%
Individual & Family Service7%
Comms Service Provider7%
VISITORS READING REVIEWS
Computer Software Company24%
Manufacturing Company16%
Comms Service Provider14%
Government8%
VISITORS READING REVIEWS
Manufacturing Company26%
Computer Software Company19%
Comms Service Provider19%
Healthcare Company5%
Company Size
REVIEWERS
Small Business24%
Midsize Enterprise16%
Large Enterprise61%
No Data Available
Find out what your peers are saying about IBM Rational DOORS vs. Polarion Requirements and other solutions. Updated: January 2021.
455,301 professionals have used our research since 2012.

IBM Rational DOORS is ranked 2nd in Application Requirements Management with 13 reviews while Polarion Requirements is ranked 7th in Application Requirements Management with 4 reviews. IBM Rational DOORS is rated 7.2, while Polarion Requirements is rated 6.0. The top reviewer of IBM Rational DOORS writes "Has given us a means for improving the way we proceed through solution development". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Polarion Requirements writes "Well-structured, but the import feature and the dashboards need to be improved". IBM Rational DOORS is most compared with Jira, PTC Integrity Requirements Connector, IBM Rational DOORS Next Generation, Jama Connect and 3SL Cradle, whereas Polarion Requirements is most compared with Jira, Jama Connect, IBM Rational DOORS Next Generation, Helix ALM and PTC Integrity Requirements Connector. See our IBM Rational DOORS 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.