IBM DOORS Reviews

The DXL Library DXL script routines/algorithms and the DOORS importer.

It's saved us time, as much as 35% when compared to v9.3.03.

None as IBM have left v9.5 as the extant version and now moved it into DOORS Next Generation.

I've used Rational DOORS since 2009, and v9.56 for 18 months.

No issues encountered.

It is the most stable platform, and did not crash once unlike v9.3.03 version that we had previously.

We used it on one programme to start with, but when I left the company, we were using it on five separate programmes.

We were using IBM directly, and they were 10/10.

10/10 - IBM take real pride in their technical support activity with customers.

No we didn't, as we were under contract to use DOORS.

It installed really well, and it has a straightforward license key operation.

It was done in-house, but our engineers had guidance and support from IBM, which was excellent.

It's massive, as it's a contract requirement. DOORS v9.5 enabled us to satisfy all our customer demands with relative ease. Can't quantify the ROI in financial terms though.

DOORS rules are that you have licences per company which give access to the software according to the users who need access at a particular time. Most businesses would probably find it too expensive to have a single licence per every DOORS user.

No other solutions were looked at due to contractual requirements.

Use DOORS Next Generation or later versions of DOORS v9.X

• Traceability
• VRTMs

Requirements development, and doing everything from functional requirements to system requirements, means we can verify that there are no orphan or childless requirements, which ensure full traceability in a short amount of time using the available tools.

I've used it for six years.

No issues encountered.

No issues encountered.

8/10.

8/10.

No previous solution was used.

It was very straightforward.

It was done in-house.

It's better if your partners use the same tool, which makes for better sharing of files and artefacts.

The traceability matrix along with the linking of software design with requirements. We are also using it for test management, so it provides bi-directional linking between requirements, design, and test cases.

Previously we were not using any requirements management tools, or maintaining different types of requirements (i.e. customer, system, software, test cases) in our process defined templates. It gets a bit tricky for organizations divided over time zones if you're not using any proper management tools like DOORS. It helps us to standardize the way our globally distributed teams are now collaborating and managing the different artifacts.

The Import and Export feature. Additional templates and options should be made available, and it should be more intuitive along with giving users more options for control. Also, I believe it should give more options for database support instead of supporting default databases that different companies are using for productions. This would mean users will be at ease if maintaining different databases for different production activities.

I have been working on this for almost three and a half years in parallel to other IBM Rational tools.

There were some issues during the import and export using the GUI, and although scripting works well, not all users are accustomed to using DXL scripts.

Not really, but sometimes it crashes when running DXL scripts that have a number of errors. In that case it’s not possible to rule out the cause of trouble.

The solution is quite adaptable to encapsulate the growing needs of organizations in terms of growth, new functionalities, and enhancement.

I have worked in the past with one of IBM Rational DOORS partner companies, so overall they are quite supportive, and at a par depending upon the complexity of the rising issue.

8.5/10 - sometimes if you forget to mention the level of complexity they become little at ease replying to your mail, but overall it’s good to have this kind of support.

No, not any kind of requirements management solution. We were managing requirements in the form of our own Microsoft Word defined templates. Management of requirements for our globally distributed teams in a centralized location was a prime driving force for the change.

It's simple to setup the complete environment. Linking with external applications is also friendly. We are using Rational Directory Server for our user management and Rational Change for change management, so the integration configuration was somewhat easy without much trouble.

We did an In-house deployment and configuration, with own local ICT and Tools and Methodologies engineer.

Pricing is on the higher side because of multiple users who want to make use of the great functionality of tools.

Single tool licensing is good, but again it's costly, and with respect to extensions like DWA, DNG, and others, it becomes even more critical for companies who do not have high end budgets.

It’s a good choice to invest money in, and will definitely prove to be value for money, even more if it's not utilized to the best possible extent. Proper planning on board will definitely prove to be beneficial.

• Traceability
• Impact analysis
• History
• Baseline sets
• DXL scripting
• Publication with Rational Publishing Engine (separate product)

IBM Rational DOORS allows requirements to be efficiently and effectively tracked, traced, and managed throughout the project lifecycle. Managing requirements in documents, e-mails, spreadsheets etc. becomes unwieldy. Anybody that has attempted this will find IBM Rational DOORS a godsend.

Some users complain of a clunky interface, but DOORS NG which is planned to succeed DOORS over the next 5-10 years addresses these issues and is a good up and coming alternative to DOORS.

I've used it for 12 years.

Most of the issues of deployment in my experience tend to be people related issues. For instance, resistance to change in processes, and learning a new tool.

IBM Rational DOORS is a very mature stable solution.

I have not encountered any issues with scalability. I have experience of supporting databases containing hundreds of thousands of requirements with no issues that cannot be mitigated through good schema design.

IBM Rational DOORS customer service are approachable and easy to deal with.

IBM Rational DOORS technical support are prompt and good at resolving issues.

I have used other tools such as RDD-100, CaliberRM and in-house developed solutions.In all cases I have simply moved into new roles in other organisations with the opportunity to use IBM Rational DOORS.

With a qualified DOORS Deployment Professional, the initial setup is relatively straightforward. They should be able to design and build a schema to support your process. templates can be created to make project setup relatively straightforward.

I normally work as part of a vendor team.

The largest ROI would normally be achieved on bigger projects, but an ROI is possible across many smaller projects so long as consistency is maintained in terms of process and schema across the projects.

Consider the overall cost of ownership beyond the initial license costs. You will need to budget for development of your process, designing and building the schema, training and ongoing database administration and support to users of the tool.

Over many years I have evaluated and used many other COTs and bespoke requirements management tools. I have found IBM Rational DOORS to be the most flexible and powerful solution available for serious requirements management.

Develop good requirements development and management process firstly then design and implement a DOORS schema and training around your process. Simplicity and consistency is the key to a successful implementation. Management buy in and support is also essential.

• Traceability
• Audit trail
• Configuration Management for Requirements

• Doing Impact analysis
• Producing documents
• Rich-text editing

Integration with MS Word.

I've been using it for 15 years, and am also using it alongside Rational DOORS Next Generation 6.0.

Replacing a word document is always hard.

No issues encountered.

No issues encountered.

We provide it.

It's very good.

I've tried many of them, and found that this one is the best.

It depends on the organizations size and needs.

We are a vendor and implement it for our clients.

Things are delivered to the customer on time, with less mistakes and missing features.

There are a few other requirements management tools, but none are at this level of solving complex situations.

Make sure you know your pains before starting the process.

It handles large-scale requirements analyses including traceability and impact, but in addition also has its own accessible scripting language, DOORS Extension Language (DXL), which allows users to tailor the tool to suit their more specific needs and processes. Extensions built through DXL have offered a much greater ability to tailor Rational DOORS for a variety of specific processes and needs.

I use it to support a variety of customers. Using it, I have been able to quickly and accurately perform holistic analyses of data. I am able to create a traceability and impact analysis report of a set of 20+ documents in minutes, and then use the tool to help verify that the data is accurate.

"Out of the box" Rational DOORS, in most cases, will not have many desired features for specific needs. DXL allows a user to customize it to fit many of those specific needs, but such extensions require lots of training and time. Therefore, while the rooms for improvement can be filled, it requires a trained expert user - or users - to access the full Rational DOORS functionality. It is not friendly to new users, and has a steep learning curve.

I’ve used it for one year.

I have not had any performance issues between a Rational DOORS database of 100 requirements vs. one with 10,000+, beyond an expected increase in processing time for dealing with more objects. Even with 100 to 10,000 requirements, processing time for common tasks only goes from a few seconds to a few minutes.

In most cases with clients, initial set-up involved importing a document corpus into Rational DOORS, then verifying that it was imported successfully. Regardless of the format of the original documents, I have not had trouble configuring documents then importing them into Rational DOORS, which supports imports of CSV, ReqIF, rich and plain text, FrameMaker files, and several others. Rational DOORS 9.6 also supports importing documents/spreadsheets to update current data.

It is process agnostic, i.e. it can be tailored to serve any life-cycle process flow. It also integrates with the largest number of software and systems engineering tools in the marketplace.

It supports the capture, management and development of requirements, thereby reducing defects at the earliest stage of a project.

The underlying database engine is proprietary, therefore integration with other tools can only be achieved via the Rational DOORS DXL API. The newer version, Rational DOORS Next Generation, will fix that.

I started using it at v5.2.

Organizations that do not have a requirements engineering process in place are generally in for a big surprise when they deploy Rational DOORS, since it does not implement any particular process or methodology.

Partitions are one complex feature of Rational DOORS that are not particularly robust and is generally avoided, unless the project database is administered by a very proficient and experienced administrator.

It is based on a single, centralized database server, making multi-site exchange and collaboration somewhat challenging.

Customer service suffered everytime Rational DOORS changed its organizational structure (i.e. from QSS to Telelogic to IBM). Also, the quality of service suffered when it was outsourced to India. Since then, however, IBM has improved it considerably.

Richard Watson's team has provided Rational DOORS technical support from day one. If it could be explained, they would explain it. If it could be fixed, they fixed it.

I've not used a previous solution, but today, I'm investigating the Eclipse Requirements Management Framework (RMF) for small entities/teams that cannot afford a power tool like Rational DOORS.

Installation is straightforward. Project start-up can take some time if an organization or project does not have an institutionalized process around which they have tailored DOORS usage. Also, if tailoring requires DXL scripting, the organization or project must have the expertise available. Many projects/organizations stay away from customization for that reason. Using Rational DOORS integrations with other tools can add another layer of complexity.

I have implemented Rational DOORS projects both as an external consultant and as an in-house expert.

The best money invested on a project is always on requirements engineering, and an ROI of 10-20:1 is not uncommon.

For small teams, node-locked licenses are the least expensive by far. As the project team grows, i.e. 10+, one flex licence per five team members becomes more cost-effective.

Over time, I have tried every other ARM tool out there for various customers and kept going back to Rational DOORS.

If you do not have a resident Rational DOORS expertise, invest some up-front money to secure the assistance of one to help with deployment, tailoring and training,