Compare IBM Rational System Architect vs. iServer

Cancel
You must select at least 2 products to compare!
Most Helpful Review
Find out what your peers are saying about IBM Rational System Architect vs. iServer and other solutions. Updated: July 2021.
523,230 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
"We've brought our portfolio altogether. We have had multiple ways of reporting out what our portfolio is, whether it's in Excel, Word, or in different places. We brought all of our projects together in one place. That has worked out well for us. We've been able to manage the work on Gantt charts and our resources better. The big thing for us on research and development is around managing people's time, on which projects they are working on, and how much effort does it take to launch our projects.""With the lifecycles, it helps us step through our processes easier. We'll take a process and create it in Visio, then we'll go and implemented in Planview. Anytime that we have to do a new process, this is what we use. We just step it through the lifecycles and the configure screens are very easy to use. The fields that you need are easy to use.""Planview has helped connect funding and strategic outcomes with work execution. That is the key use that we have for it. We use it to validate the work that we're doing and the funding that we need. The difference between the previous version and current version for us would be the ICPM and the way it gives us different scenarios. We can go in and build that out.""I like that everyone is able to see the same data. All of our users who aren't just time reporters have read access to all the data that is out there. So, it is one source of truth where everybody can go in and see the exact same data that everybody else sees. It is transparent.""The portfolio management gives you a view of all the projects as well as all the information about the total amount of effort, time, and cost being spent on the projects. It gives the organization how much money and effort should be spent towards projects so they can budget and do better capacity planning in the next fiscal year. It gives them visibility into their resources and if they have capacity.""The biggest impact for using Planview currently would be to understand the true costs of projects. We are trying to get to a point where not only do we take into account technical costs, but what the business cost is. Trying to integrate our business right now into Planview is helping us identify the true cost of the investments that we make so we can try and understand their value.""We have a fairly good picture of time tracking.""The look and feel of it is pretty clean."

More Planview Enterprise One Pros »

"The user interface is good. It's both clear and comprehensible. It's easy to work with.""We have seen ROI with this solution over the years that we have used it.""The solution is pretty stable."

More IBM Rational System Architect Pros »

"I have to think less with this solution. It's simple.""This is a flexible tool compared to some other solutions.""The solution has wide use within Microsoft products. The integration with Microsoft products, and, in particular, Microsoft Office, is great."

More iServer Pros »

Cons
"Recently, we have gotten on a newer version. We're currently on version 15. Some of the things that we've been running into roadblocks on, it looks like the solutions will be coming out in versions 17 or 18. So, we have to upgrade before somethings can get completed.""I would suggest for the request module that they open up the fields and columns so it's like we are doing our work in the work module. You can't do that with today. We also have to make sure that the fields can go both ways with the request and work modules. Including fields in the column sets would be helpful, because today they only use attributes.""We have required more time from our resource managers to spend time in the tool. The adoption has been slower than we would have hoped. So, I would think from a rollout perspective, if Planview could help us with material which gets non-Planview users or previously light Planview users to become more heavy users of the system, then this would help us with the rollout.""There can be improvement on the sense of urgency because a lot of times we've exhausted everything that we can, and now, we're reaching out. So, it isn't a, "Well, have you tried to reboot this?" We've already done everything. Once we put in a ticket, there should be more of a sense of urgency on it.""I would like to see more documentation pieces. Right now, they do have the content repository. I would like to see more out-of-the-box features with document repository capabilities.""I would like to be able to copy and paste from Excel into work and assignments along with roles and hours, as opposed to having to type it out one by one.""There's still a lot of reluctance within the organization. We're not using all of the capabilities that we have today. We're still doing our strategic and capital investment planning on spreadsheets rather than using the capabilities that exist within Enterprise One. I definitely need to leverage the experts here at Planview to help drive a culture change. There's just a lot of reluctance on behalf of people within the company to put data into the tool.""Our version is definitely set up a bit more waterfall world. It would be better if some of the agile features were more in the standard product."

More Planview Enterprise One Cons »

"There needs to be more information at the outset about how to use the solution and how to deploy it. The deployment process needs improvement.""This solution can be more user-friendly and easier to use, with better dashboards.""The solution needs to better integrate with other products, like Microsoft."

More IBM Rational System Architect Cons »

"The one issue is that if you want to import predefined work, you need to put the licensing model in. So if you wanted to import work that was done before, you then need to buy a separate product for that.""The performance is slow, which is something that should be improved.""The migration tool needs to be included in the main package, and not as a separate license."

More iServer Cons »

Pricing and Cost Advice
"We are on the Flex licenses.""We have unlimited licenses for all of our functionalities. Since we went global, we went with that model.""The cost of other pieces and integrating them in needs improvement.""We have portfolio managers, resource managers, project managers, and time reporting licenses. These are the licenses that we have.""I don't think we have necessarily purchased everything that I would have liked to have seen.""We have several hundred licenses. It costs us several hundred thousand dollars a year.""We overbought our licenses. We looked at our needs three to four years down the road and tried based our contract on that. However, we were over aggressive. We use about a third of the licenses that we have. We're looking to adjust the makeup so we can start utilizing the amount of money that we are spending. Right now, we're overspending, and my organization is not seeing the value in Planview because we are paying so much for licenses that we're not using.""Our licensing costs are probably $150,000 to $180,000 a year with 270 licenses total."

More Planview Enterprise One Pricing and Cost Advice »

Information Not Available
Information Not Available
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Architecture Management solutions are best for your needs.
523,230 professionals have used our research since 2012.
Questions from the Community
Top Answer: Enterprise One provides a variety of types of resource assignments for assigning work to people. It's very easy and… more »
Top Answer: It would be nice if all of the licenses were FLEX. They've been fairly stable with their pricing over the years.
Top Answer: The resource area needs improvement. The improvements that have been made recently in the later versions have been good… more »
Top Answer: I didn't use the solution for very long, so it's hard to go too in-depth with what the solution may have been lacking… more »
Top Answer: When we selected this product, we were in an implementation of our ERC, and in that context, we had a lot of information… more »
Ask a question

Earn 20 points

Popular Comparisons
Also Known As
Troux
Rational System Architect
Learn More
Overview
Planview Enterprise, Planview's performance management platform, combines project and portfolio management software with adaptive best practices. By integrating the business process management of strategies, services, and projects within a single, Web-based solution, Planview empowers organizations to achieve greater levels of control over their ever-changing environment by dynamically managing money, resources, and capacities.
IBM Rational System Architect is an enterprise architecture solution for visualizing, analyzing, and communicating enterprise architecture and business process analysis. This solution provides decision support, process optimization, and integration into solution delivery. Rational System Architect addresses all aspects of your organization's enterprise architecture, including modeling, publishing, analysis, and execution.

iServer is a unified software platform and enterprise modeling environment that extends and enhances the familiar, market leading Microsoft Visio and Office products. Core capabilities provided by iServer include an enhanced Microsoft Visio diagramming interface, a powerful central repository for all enterprise architecture or business process models and documentation, and a range of tools for visualization, analysis and decision making.

Offer
Learn more about Planview Enterprise One
Learn more about IBM Rational System Architect
Learn more about iServer
Sample Customers
Zurich Insurance Group, Zumbotel Group, Carphone Warehouse
Wuxi Lake Cloud, Nationwide, ETI, IDS Scheer
Barclays, Cathay Pacific, Deloitte, British Gas, MasterCard
Top Industries
REVIEWERS
Insurance Company24%
Financial Services Firm24%
Pharma/Biotech Company11%
Healthcare Company11%
VISITORS READING REVIEWS
Computer Software Company26%
Comms Service Provider14%
Government8%
Financial Services Firm8%
VISITORS READING REVIEWS
Computer Software Company25%
Manufacturing Company16%
Comms Service Provider14%
Government11%
VISITORS READING REVIEWS
Computer Software Company21%
Comms Service Provider17%
Government8%
Financial Services Firm7%
Company Size
REVIEWERS
Small Business6%
Midsize Enterprise2%
Large Enterprise92%
VISITORS READING REVIEWS
Small Business7%
Midsize Enterprise25%
Large Enterprise68%
No Data Available
REVIEWERS
Small Business20%
Midsize Enterprise30%
Large Enterprise50%
Find out what your peers are saying about IBM Rational System Architect vs. iServer and other solutions. Updated: July 2021.
523,230 professionals have used our research since 2012.

IBM Rational System Architect is ranked 13th in Architecture Management with 3 reviews while iServer is ranked 10th in Architecture Management with 3 reviews. IBM Rational System Architect is rated 6.6, while iServer is rated 8.4. The top reviewer of IBM Rational System Architect writes "Modeling is useful, but many features need improvement and technical support is lacking". On the other hand, the top reviewer of iServer writes "Stable with the potential to scale and integrates well with Microsoft". IBM Rational System Architect is most compared with Sparx Systems Enterprise Architect, UNICOM System Architect, ARIS BPA and SAP PowerDesigner, whereas iServer is most compared with Sparx Systems Enterprise Architect, LeanIX, ARIS BPA, Visio and ARIS Cloud. See our IBM Rational System Architect vs. iServer report.

See our list of best Architecture Management vendors.

We monitor all Architecture 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.