"Work distribution among team members and accountability for completion with a clearer picture."
"Traceability reporting is inbuilt and includes all your requirements."
"Good for managing stories, sprints, hydration and releases."
"Scalability is great. It has absolutely met every need for us so far. We do have some concurrent development paths and we're able to flexibly assign variables. At the same time, our skeletons assemble where we want them to, so the scalability is very good."
"We audit once a year for our ChangeMan access, accurate financial programs, and all of that. Auditors really love ChangeMan for how easy it is to get through and how tight the security is on it. Our internal auditors, external auditors, and SOX editors love this solution. We're in the healthcare business, so HIPAA regulations and all such things are a big deal, and this makes all that really simple."
"Teams need clearer pictures of resource availability in charts and dashboards along with plans."
"Lacks ability to customize and reporting can be slow."
"The solution is very heavily vendor dependent."
"As such, there's nothing wrong with the product. It is great, but there are small things that can be better to make it much more friendly. The way you navigate through fields can be improved. If I'm going to stage a component over something that exists and that I've created in another library, and I want to pull it in and write it over what I've got there in my package, I've got to type in that data set name every time. That can be aggravating. It is not a big deal. The way things are sorted can also be improved. If you're doing a delete of a bunch of components, you can't sort those out by type or anything. Some things are just standard, and you can't look at them in a way that would be helpful."
"I would like to see them enable parallel development for online. It's available now for batch stuff on the mainframe. Jenkins, IBM, and Rocket all supposedly already have safe and workable version of Git for the mainframe. With that in mind, we need to know where our feature is."
More IBM Engineering Workflow Management Pricing and Cost Advice →
IBM Engineering Workflow Management is ranked 1st in Software Configuration Management with 3 reviews while Micro Focus ChangeMan ZMF is ranked 5th in Software Configuration Management with 2 reviews. IBM Engineering Workflow Management is rated 5.6, while Micro Focus ChangeMan ZMF is rated 7.6. The top reviewer of IBM Engineering Workflow Management writes "Great inbuilt traceability reporting; unfortunately, the solution is heavily vendor dependent". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Micro Focus ChangeMan ZMF writes "It simplifies things and has tight security but needs better technical support and a few enhancements". IBM Engineering Workflow Management is most compared with Jira, codeBeamer ALM, CA Endevor Software Change Manager, Digital.ai Agility and TFS, whereas Micro Focus ChangeMan ZMF is most compared with CA Endevor Software Change Manager, BMC Compuware ISPW and Micro Focus Dimensions CM. See our IBM Engineering Workflow Management vs. Micro Focus ChangeMan ZMF report.
See our list of best Software Configuration Management vendors.
We monitor all Software Configuration 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.
