Try our new research platform with insights from 80,000+ expert users

BMC Compuware ISPW vs CA Harvest Software Change Manager comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive Summary

Review summaries and opinions

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

Categories and Ranking

BMC Compuware ISPW
Ranking in Software Configuration Management
2nd
Average Rating
8.6
Number of Reviews
5
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
CA Harvest Software Change ...
Ranking in Software Configuration Management
9th
Average Rating
7.2
Number of Reviews
6
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
 

Mindshare comparison

As of May 2025, in the Software Configuration Management category, the mindshare of BMC Compuware ISPW is 29.5%, down from 31.7% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of CA Harvest Software Change Manager is 3.2%, up from 2.4% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Software Configuration Management
 

Featured Reviews

BM
Tracks code during the change process so that more than one group could have code checked out for change. ISPW provides this tracking info real time helping move toward a more Agile environment.
One of the features that the developers like is that they can retrieve what they need with ISPW. They don't have to go through a process or request something be done by another team. They can get the programs they need, compile them, retrieve the JCL and alter the JCL if they need to, and put these programs wherever they need to go for their testing. They can promote all the way through to the production step. I know that might make a lot of companies nervous when we talk about the fact that developers can promote to production. What that means is the developers promote the code to the point of being ready to be released into production. The release step is still controlled using your current approval process. This gives the development staff a lot more control over what they're doing, and it dovetails nicely into an Agile process. ISPW is really great at giving the developers access to all of the components all the way through the process. The control of actually putting code into production is more about the "when" and not the "how." In most companies, your change-control coordinators or business analysts, or managers that release code into production environment, will still do that last step. That's all controllable and secure at different levels. But it really gives the development staff a way to get everything where it needs to be, staged-up and ready to be released so that they can go work on something else. And the management of that movement into production is still maintained through whatever level you choose.
GR
Powerful UDP functionality with a user-friendly interface
While all of the features are valuable, we use a lot of the UDPs. They normally link to all of the purchases that are being used in a project. They've got a lot of processes that come planned as part of the application, but with the UDPs, you can scale it, or build your own scripts and deployment mechanisms. It's really scalable from a functionality point of view. If there's an issue with functionality out of the box, then you can take care of that via the UDP processes. The interface is very user-friendly.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"We had parallel development before, but the way ISPW implements it is better. It has more control and oversight of the process, whereas before, it was like the Wild West. Everybody could have their own package with their own version of the component in it... ISPW is constantly aware of it. It notifies when someone else is using or has a different version of that component."
"One of the features that the developers like is that they can retrieve what they need with the tool. They don't have to go through some process or request something be done by another team. They can get the programs they need, compile them, retrieve the JCL and alter the JCL if they need to, and put these programs wherever they need to go for their testing."
"The visual ability to see potential downstream impacts to changes being made assists our developers in understanding the impact associated with their change."
"It does our CICS NEWCOPYs and our Db2 binds for us, whereas before, that was a manual process. It takes a lot of the workload off of the operations folks and off the DBAs."
"I think the most valuable features are code management, code deployment, and code generation. The fact that those three features are included makes BMC Compuware ISPW a robust product. If one of those features was missing, it would be less robust and less interesting. But because it has those three features, it is a very good solution for code development and management."
"Using this solution, we were able to implement a full process for all of our lifecycles."
"The ability to give our teams functionality from a control perspective, allowing them to decide how they want to implement the tool, is valuable."
 

Cons

"There are some features that are not well documented, so documentation could use a little help, on things like setting up deployment and which structures in the database correspond to which tables."
"One thing I would really like to see some improvement on is the promotion diagnostic messages. It invokes utilities "under the covers" to copy components, and it does not echo back any of the error messages from those utilities."
"The solution could be improved by being better integrated with the open world. In the next release, I would like to have the ability to work in an open environment whilst remaining integrated with the legacy environment."
"Better discussions to identify inventory prior to the start of any migration would be helpful for potential clients that have applications with code that is not modified often."
"When you're setting up the parameters for how ISPW will work in your shop, there are a lot of questions that have to be answered... BMC Compuware should have more in-depth explanations about what the choices in each question mean. If you pick A, what does that mean has to happen? What does that impact? If you pick B, what does that mean? What does that impact?"
"Technical support for this solution is very good, although they can still use improvement in some regards."
"Password complexity is not enforced by the tool."
"Security features can be improved."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"The price point is great."
"I like the seat-based licensing much more than MSU-based licensing, and that the cost has been competitive."
"Once you purchase your licenses, there is maintenance support that is renewed every year."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Software Configuration Management solutions are best for your needs.
850,028 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Financial Services Firm
47%
Computer Software Company
11%
Insurance Company
10%
Manufacturing Company
8%
No data available
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
No data available
No data available
 

Also Known As

No data available
CA Harvest SCM, CA Software Change Manager
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

mBank, Standard Bank
State of New Hampshire, Blue Hill
Find out what your peers are saying about BMC Compuware ISPW vs. CA Harvest Software Change Manager and other solutions. Updated: April 2025.
850,028 professionals have used our research since 2012.