Polarion Requirements Reviews

Enterprise buyers find Polarion Requirements pricing generally higher, yet comparable to similar solutions. Some appreciate its efficiency for complex project management despite perceiving it as expensive, with historical pricing around 50 to 60 euros per user. Users highlight its flexible licensing model, allowing varied roles from reviewers to developers, making it cost-effective for targeted needs. Paying initially for licenses, with ongoing maintenance fees, offers a onetime investment structure adaptable to specific organizational requirements.

• "I rate the solution's pricing a seven out of ten."
• "The pricing model is flexible. You don't have to pay for the full functionalities. And it's a one-time investment for the licenses. You purchase what you need and then can work with that."
• "I believe the cost is subjective. It seems a bit pricey, but it depends on your perspective. To provide some context, I compared the prices with GitLab and Jira. Unfortunately, I couldn't find Jira's prices. However, GitLab costs around 40 euros, and DeepLab, which I recently discovered, also falls in a similar price range. I'm not sure about DeepLab's features or interface improvements, as they might have been implementing requirements management over the past six months. In contrast, Polarion costs around 50 to 60 euros based on the 2021 prices I have. While it may seem a bit expensive, it's worth considering whether the additional investment, perhaps around 68 euros per user, is justified. It might appear costly at first glance, but it's essential to acknowledge that it can greatly streamline your work processes."

Companies utilize Polarion Requirements primarily for requirements management across industries such as automotive, aerospace, and medical devices. They track requirements, manage user stories, software designs, and facilitate test runs. Teams document internal standards, enhance project delivery methodologies, and ensure traceability from initial customer requirements through systems. With LiveDocs and traceability, they improve Application Lifecycle Management, enhancing departmental and project management while expanding functionalities to include contract requirements and standardized technical documentation.

Polarion Requirements' customer service and support receive mixed feedback. Some users describe support as helpful, knowledgeable, and responsive, while others mention challenges such as delayed responses and unresolved issues. Some find the support prompt but feel that it falls short in quality, particularly regarding complex issues. The attentive response to production impacts is appreciated. Users highlighted the need for improved technical solutions and quicker resolutions, although some partners haven't needed direct support. Overall, Siemens support quality is rated around six out of ten.

Many found Polarion Requirements' initial setup straightforward and manageable. A few encountered complexities with template configurations and data migration issues. Setup duration varied, some deploying in hours, others taking longer due to project complexity. Training was noted as beneficial for understanding functionality. Challenges arose in translating existing methodologies and ensuring compatibility with previous systems. Installation was generally user-friendly, especially for web-based applications, but required careful planning and resource allocation in larger companies.

Scalability of Polarion Requirements is generally viewed positively. Many users perceive it as adequate for varying needs, from small teams to larger organizations. There are some concerns about performance at higher capacities, with occasional slowdowns and timeouts noted. Technical configuration is a crucial factor for optimal scaling. Some appreciate the cloud-based SaaS model for cost-effectiveness, allowing better scalability across different business sizes without on-premises constraints. Ratings vary, average between six to nine out of ten.

Polarion Requirements is generally considered stable, rated between seven and nine out of ten by users. Some users experience stability with good performance, while others mention difficulties with large work items, leading to timeouts. The platform is appreciated for its solid performance without crashes in its current version. Some encountered issues with shared licenses, yet most report satisfaction with its reliability.