We performed a comparison between IBM Engineering Workflow Management and OpenText ALM Octane based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out what your peers are saying about Microsoft, GitLab, Atlassian and others in Enterprise Agile Planning Tools."Work distribution among team members and accountability for completion with a clearer picture."
"Traceability reporting is inbuilt and includes all your requirements."
"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."
"All of the features work together to provide a powerful holistic solution - from the dashboard all the way through to security."
"Agile templates give us a standard methodology for every Agile project. Also, the ability to create our own object types and linkages to features/epics allows us to enhance the verification of feature readiness."
"Good for managing stories, sprints, hydration and releases."
"Micro Focus' technical support is good."
"We are seeing some real improvements in the way we do things. We are becoming more agile in the way we do it because of that and in a way that stories are managed. Stories are given lifecycles as opposed to just being entities within a tool."
"The filtering options are very good once you learn them. The document reports are also valuable. You can create reports in Word and PDF formats. That's very useful."
"Octane creates a gentle approach to Agile-based projects."
"With an Octane project, we have our automation, our requirements, our tests, our pipeline into build-and-deploy, and the ability to identify problem areas. It makes things quicker because it's more along the lines of an automated process."
"We like Micro Focus ALM Octane because its performance is okay, and its stability is okay, so we use it a lot. The platform is easy to use."
"The feature I found most valuable in Micro Focus ALM Octane is its ability to integrate with the CI/CD stack."
"It is a very stable solution. Stability-wise, I rate the solution a ten out of ten."
"Some administrative tasks are difficult to perform. These could be simplified."
"Lacks ability to customize and reporting can be slow."
"The solution is very heavily vendor dependent."
"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."
"Teams need clearer pictures of resource availability in charts and dashboards along with plans."
"When I manage projects that are being created in ALM, I have a standard template, but I don't have a template for them in Octane. I literally have to create the project from the ground up every time, which for an administrator, is a nightmare solution"
"The solution should improve by adding scrum board-like functionality."
"There is an opportunity for them to do a little more with the dashboarding. We still feel that HPE Quality Center/HPE ALM reporting is very powerful. We talked with R&D, and there are some things on their roadmap, but at the same time, their strategy is to connect Octane with visualization tools such as Power BI."
"Because JIRA is a leading tool for both development and requirements management - everybody is using JIRA - I'm pretty there will be a use case where people are trying to connect between ALM Octane and JIRA. The back-end configuration of the synchronization with JIRA could be simplified. The architecture is really complicated. We required a lot of machines to build the cluster and the configuration was not really clearly described within the documentation. This may have something to do with the fact that the software is pretty new."
"Updating items, sorting, bulk updates—these things could have a bit more flexibility, but it's still possible to do them."
"I like their smart analytics; perhaps they should continue to expand and improve there because it's a fantastic start."
"The product's requirements management feature needs enhancement in terms of functionality."
"They don't support all IDEs yet. We have Visual Studio code, which is not supported, and loved by our developers. This integration is missing. We also had to do our own in-house integration with the Confluence. That is also something that they could add."
More IBM Engineering Workflow Management Pricing and Cost Advice →
IBM Engineering Workflow Management is ranked 10th in Enterprise Agile Planning Tools with 14 reviews while OpenText ALM Octane is ranked 7th in Enterprise Agile Planning Tools with 38 reviews. IBM Engineering Workflow Management is rated 6.8, while OpenText ALM Octane is rated 8.2. The top reviewer of IBM Engineering Workflow Management writes "Offers good traceability elements but UI needs improvement ". On the other hand, the top reviewer of OpenText ALM Octane writes "Reporting engine, widgets, and dashboards are a huge plus, and powerful REST interface means we can interact with other tools". IBM Engineering Workflow Management is most compared with Jira, Microsoft Azure DevOps, Codebeamer, GitLab and Polarion ALM, whereas OpenText ALM Octane is most compared with Jira, OpenText ALM / Quality Center, Microsoft Azure DevOps, Rally Software and GitLab.
See our list of best Enterprise Agile Planning Tools vendors.
We monitor all Enterprise Agile Planning Tools 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.
