Anonymous UserSr. Project Manager at University of Utah Hospitals & Clinics
We asked business professionals to review the solutions they use. Here are some excerpts of what they said:
"The ability to reuse test cases already used across projects is the most valuable feature of this solution. We don't need to create new ones."
"The user-friendly features are the most valuable. For example, migration of requirements and migration of test cases and the creation of traceability. You have various reports that you need. The plug-ins that are available to connect with the other tools."
"The reporting functionality helps vendors and technical resources identify bugs and issues that need to be addressed. The simple dashboard-style home page makes training end-user testers simple and straightforward. The actual testing UI is VERY straightforward and very intuitive for the end-users that test the system since very often we pull from business and operational users to help test new systems."
"Technical support answers fairly quickly compared to others like IBM or Atlassian. They also offer quite a good knowledge base for advanced cases and how to plan it, etc. via videos that they provide. They are quite useful."
"The most valuable feature is the user-friendly interface."
"It should develop integration with JIRA. We have some complexities which caused us not to decide to integrate it with our JIRA, like synchronous data."
"Migrating is not very easy. It depends on the organization, how efficient and effective the decision-making process is. The plug-ins should be easier and more integrated rather than the user trying to integrate the tools which are more popular, like Jira et al."
"The UI for managing test cases, test sets, test runs could be a little more integrated, currently, these feel disjointed at times and confusing. Also, the test steps page needs to display the test steps closer to the top of the UI so as to not have to scroll down to find."
"Test management can be improved. It's not so scalable. The user interface needs to split things into small projects."
"t is rather slow, so the speed of the process and consuming information should be improved. It doesn't have a nice way of viewing information. We would like to see better interfaces for consuming information."
"I have inquired about pricing for this solution but have not yet heard anything, so their response time in this regard is something that should be improved."
"To have a single source for all the requirements and all the change requests our company gets is the most valuable feature. It has also helped us to keep track of reviews."
Inflectra SpiraTest is ranked 3rd in Application Requirements Management with 3 reviews while Jama Connect is ranked 5th in Application Requirements Management with 3 reviews. Inflectra SpiraTest is rated 9.4, while Jama Connect is rated 7.0. The top reviewer of Inflectra SpiraTest writes "User friendly with ease of testing requirements management, migration from other tools and als othe integration with other testing tools". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Jama Connect writes "An excellent cloud solution that is a very user friendly and mature". Inflectra SpiraTest is most compared with Jira, TestRail by Gurock, Micro Focus ALM Quality Center and Tricentis qTest, whereas Jama Connect is most compared with Jira, IBM Rational DOORS, Polarion Requirements and Microsoft Azure DevOps. See our Inflectra SpiraTest vs. Jama Connect 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.