We can use the tool to perform limited tasks in developing information systems.
The easiest route - we'll conduct a 15 minute phone interview and write up the review for you.
Use our online form to submit your review. It's quick and you can post anonymously.
We can use the tool to perform limited tasks in developing information systems.
The product is efficient. It is an accepted tool globally.
The product must improve its stability. It must do more innovations. It could be made more efficient to provide the best responses. It will help us with internal and external processes.
I started using the solution this year.
The tool is stable. I rate the stability an eight out of ten.
The tool is scalable. I am the only user.
The initial setup is not complex. It’s moderately easy.
The tool is useful for students. However, if we are looking for other opportunities, we can use a different solution that is more efficient, optimized, and easy to use. I am a beginner-level user. Overall, I rate the solution an eight out of ten.
In terms of data, when I started in 2018, the database for IBM ELM was around 200 to 300 weeks. Now, in 2023, it's grown to 15 terabytes.
The main use cases include RTP, API, and PI planning, sprint planning, data planning, defect fix tracking, and other related activities.
We have a custom process specific to our organization, which we internally developed. Each project has related V&V requirements and RQM testing projects. These projects are version-controlled and GRC-enabled, creating a complex GRC hierarchy and structure.
The most valuable features are traceability and reporting. Our organization heavily depends on reports with traceability, starting from requirements to related work items and then to test cases and their statuses.
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.
There is room for improvement in the UI. The UI has to improve a lot compared to the competitive tools, like Atlassian Jira, for example. It's very easy to use. It is easy to manage and easy to use. Anybody can learn it right quickly and start with it.
But IBM ELM is something where somebody has to have good knowledge, training, and understanding and then only start using it.
But there's a big known knowledge curve for IBM ELM. But once that is there, it's normally; organizations do have their own internal team to basically manage it IBM ELM portfolio, the tool chain.
So if they have internal teams who are doing it for quite some time, not something new, then it is definitely better. But if there's if somebody is starting new, definitely there is a knowledge curve time it can take at least a year or maybe a couple of years before they can start realizing the benefits.
I've been with this company for over five years, but IBM Engineering Workflow Management has been in use for more than that.
I would rate the stability a seven out of ten. 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. So, we heavily invest in monitoring tools, like AppDynamics, Dynatrace, and other things, to monitor this system and make sure that it works properly. And if something goes wrong, we get notified early. Many such things are there.
The scalability is good. However, with the exception of the reporting server, all other applications are scalable. The reporting server is currently using a flat-file system based on Apache Java, which is causing performance issues. IBM is coming up with a 7.0.3 version that will provide the ability to predict and create indexes for reports in Oracle.
Right now, it is using Apache Java-based, like, flat price system-based database. Pretty huge. We hope that this will improve the scalability of the reporting server.
We have around 5,000 to 6,000 engineers using this solution.
The initial setup itself is not that challenging. But, the upgrades can be quite time-consuming.
Since we started using this solution, we have had two major upgrades. These upgrades can take a significant amount of time and often introduce major issues.
As a strong partner of IBM, we report these issues to them so that they can identify and fix the underlying problems. The data-sharing experience varies from customer to customer due to differences in data size.
For smaller data sets, the process is relatively easier. However, for larger data sets like ours, the process becomes more complex and can lead to slowness, performance issues, and other unforeseen challenges. We closely report these issues to IBM, and their development team provides fixes or patches to improve the overall tool.
Our in-house team deployed the solution, but there are sometimes consultants for onboarding and specific plug-in or customization development. However, integrations are all handled in-house.
The deployment steps are properly defined on the IBM website Jazz.net. We follow those end to end, but then, specific to our case, there are certain scenarios that we have to modify and create, like a cutover plan with exact instructions for it and everything. And then only we have to follow it. So, we'll test it in a non-production environment and then move to the production environment.
It is an on-premises solution. Due to the nature of our data, the cost of a cloud solution would be prohibitive for any organization.
We have a team of ten people for the deployment and maintenance of the solution. The team has managers, admins, engineers, and developers.
Customers need to pay for a license to use this product. It is not a free tool. We use a token-based licensing model, which is specific to IBM.
We have about 7,800 tokens, and including maintenance and other fees, we pay IBM about $1.2 million USD per year. The cost per token is around $115-$120.
Overall, I would rate the solution a seven out of ten. I would recommend it.
My specific advice is for people in the automotive, aerospace, defense, or healthcare industries, where auditing is crucial. For example, in healthcare, where the FDA is involved, their audits are very strict, and they require a tool like IBM ELM that provides end-to-end traceability of changes. This traceability allows you to track what changes were made, why they were made, and how they impacted the requirements.
This is essential for industries where functional safety or certifications are critical. I would recommend this product for these use cases.
If you are working on a small project or managing a small internal team, I would not recommend using IBM ELM. It would be too much overhead for such projects.
