We performed a comparison between Broadcom Agile Requirements Designer and IBM Rational DOORS based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Application Requirements Management solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."The modeling is a game-changer."
"It gives us an idea of creating the visual diagrams, which are quite easy to use. It is helpful in creating our business processes."
"The scale possibilities are endless, especially when combined with all the other products that CA has to offer."
"In terms of meeting business challenges, it helped to shorten the dev/testing cycle by identifying requirements gaps early in the process, by having models shared within the development team. It helped increase test coverage and reduce the number of issues experienced by clients/customers."
"It takes away all the time to construct test cases, so it is all automatic now, but it also levels the playing field."
"Technical support is excellent. They provide solutions quickly for issues encountered."
"Defects can be traced in the solution."
"Helps the communication between the testing organization and the requirements group. It helps us to simplify the work. Instead of dealing with individual test cases, you're working with a model."
"The most valuable feature of this solution is traceability. We can track every requirement, including what the stakeholder must do and component-level requirements."
"It is a mature product that is stable."
"IBM Rational DOORS keeps everything organized."
"The next-generation features are good."
"The most valuable feature for me is the ability to enter data into one table, or context, and link it across modules."
"It's a very interesting tool. I like that it's simple. You have to create your document, add your templates, and have your headings and definitions, and it's done. You must attribute the discipline and fill out the comment field for requirements. It also provides you with unique IDs for each requirement. I like that it never duplicates IDs."
"Very customizable and can be as powerful as you want it to be."
"We have different generations of all products. It lets us select and see unique attributes for each release or generation. You can use attributes to define a selection area to see which equipments are for the old versions and which ones are for the new versions. This inbuilt view is what I like in IBM Rational DOORS. So, for a database and a set of requirements, it will select and show unique attributes for a release or a generation."
"Integration with Agile management tools can be improved, i.e., mainly test case maintenance and linking test cases to the automation script."
"It would help if it would save different subsets of test cases, use cases, etc., of a given diagram, for different purposes and provide an easy way to name those subsets."
"Data flexibility is something which I would like to see, along with more integration with App Test."
"I think it's already coming, but it needs more automation aspects. There is a tab for Automation, but I think it's not robust. I think that it's going to be a crucial element of the tool."
"CA ARD doesn't provide integration with Tosca. The possibility of creating a test case and exporting it into Tosca is not available. Integration with end-to-end automation tools, like Worksoft or Tosca, is not provided by CA ARD as of now."
"They do not have an engine to house test scripts to really pull together the testing pieces of it."
"Needs improvement in aligning models so they look clear and readable without having to move boxes around."
"The solution could be more user-friendly. For example, attachments could be icon-based to make it easier for the user to notice them."
"I would like to see them improve in agile management the Scrum/Kanban Board to work with overseas team members."
"One thing that I would like to see is a lower-cost version of it that we could use for smaller projects. Sometimes, we do projects for commercial customers who would benefit from something like DOORS, but it's just so expensive. It's just a monster, so a lower-cost version would be the thing that we'd like to see."
"The software and GUI is very outdated."
"The low performance of the solution is probably because it is quite an old tool."
"Rational DOORS' most valuable feature is that you can write any kind of requirement you want."
"The user interface for the Change Proposal System could be improved."
"There needs to be quicker access to tech support. When I have a two minute question that takes two minutes to answer, it shouldn't take me 45 minutes and/or a few days of callbacks to get to the right technical support person. It's unnecessary and frustrating for the user."
"The images are not clear. We have to use them as OLE objects. And in the testing part, I'm not sure how to link it with it. This is my main concern."
More Broadcom Agile Requirements Designer Pricing and Cost Advice →
Broadcom Agile Requirements Designer is ranked 8th in Application Requirements Management with 20 reviews while IBM Rational DOORS is ranked 1st in Application Requirements Management with 51 reviews. Broadcom Agile Requirements Designer is rated 8.0, while IBM Rational DOORS is rated 8.0. The top reviewer of Broadcom Agile Requirements Designer writes "Easy to use, beneficial test case visibility, and effective support". On the other hand, the top reviewer of IBM Rational DOORS writes " Offers ability to automate tasks and to track changes within documents and compare different versions of requirements but modeling capabilities could benefit from a web-based tool ". Broadcom Agile Requirements Designer is most compared with Tricentis Tosca, Jira, TFS and Sealights, whereas IBM Rational DOORS is most compared with Polarion Requirements, Jira, Helix ALM, Jama Connect and IBM Rational DOORS Next Generation. See our Broadcom Agile Requirements Designer vs. IBM Rational DOORS 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.