We changed our name from IT Central Station: Here's why

IBM Rational DOORS vs Jama Connect comparison

Cancel
You must select at least 2 products to compare!
IBM Rational DOORS Logo
8,764 views|5,807 comparisons
Jama Connect Logo
3,248 views|2,515 comparisons
Featured Review
Find out what your peers are saying about IBM Rational DOORS vs. Jama Connect and other solutions. Updated: January 2022.
566,121 professionals have used our research since 2012.
Quotes From Members
We asked business professionals to review the solutions they use.
Here are some excerpts of what they said:
Pros
"I like the user interface with regard to creating links between requirements and tracing links to requirements.""It is a mature product that is stable.""When you install DOORS locally, you have the flexibility to do what you want with the solution. You can add functionality and do many things that you can't do with other tools or do well enough to satisfy your users' requirements.""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.""The most valuable feature is the management verification and login.""Very customizable and can be as powerful as you want it to be.""Makes good work of prioritizing and planning product delivery.""This product can help improve how your organization proceeds through solution development."

More IBM Rational DOORS Pros →

"The most valuable feature is the user-friendly interface.""It is good at requirements management and test management."

More Jama Connect Pros →

Cons
"The interface needs an area to be able to type your query and actually be able to find them.""Complexity, performance, openness are the three areas that can be improved. The IBM architecture and specifically Jazz looks more complex. There are a lot of servers. It's quite complicated. The search capabilities lack in IBM Rational DOORS Classic for customers who have a database with a requirement of more than 25,000 records. For example, you can search easily for a module, but it's really difficult to look for keywords through the whole database because all the modules are separated into small components, which makes the search quite complex. This is something that's really annoying because when we want to make an impact analysis, we would like to analyze the product globally. It's quite difficult to manage. The fact that you can interact externally with data makes it complex. The approach is complex and doesn't work as expected. For example, when I tried to experiment with exporting some records, the tool crashed, but I couldn't find out the root cause, that is, whether it happened because of Rational Windows or lack of memory. It was just crashing. Logs weren't very clear. IBM can try to use more recent technology for different aspects and make it easy. They can also provide free integration from DOORS Classic to DOORS. Currently, all the customization in Excel is lost, which makes it very complex. It would be a feature to make new versions compatible with features in the past versions.""The web application DOORS Web Access doesn't have the same functionality as the standard client, so it's not a real substitute. For example, web Access only provides writing requirements, but you can't do much more with it.""It would be nice if it could be scaled-down so that it could be installed and implemented without much learning or training.""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.""One of the things that many people complain about is it's hard to manage attributes. For example, tables or figures. This is something that can be improved.""There are problems with communicating between DOORS and Microsoft Office.""The performance could be improved. It doesn't run as smoothly as it could."

More IBM Rational DOORS Cons →

"I have inquired about pricing for this solution but have not yet heard anything, so their response time in this regard is something that should be improved.""The initial setup could be better, it's complicated."

More Jama Connect Cons →

Pricing and Cost Advice
  • "Licensing fees are billed annually and there is no support included with what I pay."
  • "IBM is a bit too expensive in terms of pricing. Customers are paying a lot for the license, and the price is quite high for this kind of environment. It is quite high as compared to what we can get today with other solutions."
  • "It is expensive to onboard additional users."
  • "It's expensive."
  • "I don't personally know what the numbers are. I just know that one of the reasons we've limited it to three seats is a function of cost."
  • "Pricing can vary depending on the size of the organization and how contracts are negotiated."
  • More IBM Rational DOORS Pricing and Cost Advice →

  • "The cost seems very competitive with other offerings."
  • More Jama Connect Pricing and Cost Advice →

    report
    Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Application Requirements Management solutions are best for your needs.
    566,121 professionals have used our research since 2012.
    Questions from the Community
    Top Answer: 
    What I like about DOORS is baselines, it's easy and I use the capability of multiple users. The traceability or links between different levels are very nice. Additionally, it is used by all of our… more »
    Top Answer: 
    I don't personally know what the numbers are. I just know that one of the reasons we've limited it to three seats is a function of cost.
    Top Answer: 
    One of the things that many people complain about is it's hard to manage attributes. For example, tables or figures. This is something that can be improved. The most important improvement for me right… more »
    Top Answer: 
    It is good at requirements management and test management.
    Top Answer: 
    The initial setup could be better, it's complicated. They could be better. In my perception, they are slow to move on feature improvements.
    Top Answer: 
    We use Jama Connect for requirements management, test management, and some attempts to utilize it to store documents, despite the fact that it was not designed for that use.
    Ranking
    Views
    8,764
    Comparisons
    5,807
    Reviews
    14
    Average Words per Review
    722
    Rating
    7.7
    Views
    3,248
    Comparisons
    2,515
    Reviews
    2
    Average Words per Review
    421
    Rating
    6.5
    Comparisons
    Learn More
    Overview
    IBM Rational DOORS is a requirements management application for optimizing requirements communication, collaboration and verification throughout your organization and supply chain. This scalable solution can help you meet business goals by managing project scope and cost. Rational DOORS lets you capture, trace, analyze and manage changes to information while maintaining compliance to regulations and standards. Rational DOORS provides requirements management in a centralized location for better team collaboration, and traceability by linking requirements to design items, test plans, test cases and other requirements. It also provides scalability to address your changing requirements management needs, test tracking toolkit for manual test environments to link requirements to test cases, and integrations to help manage changes to requirements with either a simple pre-defined change proposal system or a more thorough, customizable change control workflow with Rational change management solutions.
    Web-based requirements management application designed to help you increase collaboration, manage complexity and fuel innovation.
    Offer
    Learn more about IBM Rational DOORS
    Learn more about Jama Connect
    Sample Customers
    Infosys, Chevrolet Volt
    Deloitte, SpaceX, Omnigon, Delft University
    Top Industries
    REVIEWERS
    Aerospace/Defense Firm25%
    Manufacturing Company19%
    Transportation Company9%
    Computer Software Company6%
    VISITORS READING REVIEWS
    Computer Software Company22%
    Manufacturing Company20%
    Comms Service Provider14%
    Government8%
    VISITORS READING REVIEWS
    Manufacturing Company18%
    Computer Software Company17%
    Comms Service Provider16%
    Healthcare Company6%
    Company Size
    REVIEWERS
    Small Business23%
    Midsize Enterprise16%
    Large Enterprise60%
    No Data Available
    Find out what your peers are saying about IBM Rational DOORS vs. Jama Connect and other solutions. Updated: January 2022.
    566,121 professionals have used our research since 2012.

    IBM Rational DOORS is ranked 2nd in Application Requirements Management with 15 reviews while Jama Connect is ranked 7th in Application Requirements Management with 2 reviews. IBM Rational DOORS is rated 7.8, while Jama Connect is rated 6.6. The top reviewer of IBM Rational DOORS writes "Has given us a means for improving the way we proceed through solution development". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Jama Connect writes "Reasonably priced, stable, user-friendly, and has good support ". IBM Rational DOORS is most compared with Jira, Polarion Requirements, IBM Rational DOORS Next Generation, PTC Integrity Requirements Connector and 3SL Cradle, whereas Jama Connect is most compared with Jira, Polarion Requirements, IBM Rational DOORS Next Generation, Polarion ALM and Microsoft Azure DevOps. See our IBM Rational DOORS vs. Jama Connect 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.