IBM Engineering Requirements Management DOORS Next Reviews & Product Details


What is IBM Engineering Requirements Management DOORS Next?

Strategic requirements management and traceability solution focuses on development lifecycle collaboration. (CLM) Available onsite and on cloud. Increase satisfaction Understand customer needs and respond effectively to changes collaboratively as they occur. Manage compliance Capture and manage traceability to tests and other engineering artifacts, including software, throughout the product development lifecycle. Reduce cost Improve performance to help your teams reduce development costs by up to 57 percent, accelerate time to market by up to 20 percent and lower cost of quality by up to 69 percent. Improve engineering efficiency Support common application conventions, such as user experience and design standards, to provide a unified, seamless experience in multi-tool solutions. Accelerate time to value with cloud Use the cloud to get up and running faster. With no hardware, provisioning or installation needed, your team can focus on your business goals and technological innovation instead of maintenance. Support all domains for requirement Drive software and systems engineering with requirements in all forms of engineering domains including systems engineering, agile/lean/SAFe, continuous engineering and DevOps.

Write a Review

IBM Engineering Requirements Management DOORS Next Screenshots


IBM Engineering Requirements Management DOORS Next Profile Details

IBM Engineering Requirements Management DOORS Next Profile Details

Provided by:

Provided by:
Kathy Reppucci

Website
www.ibm.com
Related Links
Q&A
Vendor
IBM
Description
IBM offers a wide range of technology and consulting services; a broad portfolio of middleware for collaboration, predictive analytics, software development and systems management; and the world's most advanced servers and supercomputers.
Company Website
Year Founded
1911
Total Revenue (USD mm)
79,139
HQ Location
Armonk, NY
Phone
1-866-277-7488
Ownership
NYSE: IBM
LinkedIn® Page
www.linkedin.com
Employees on LinkedIn®
579,174
Twitter
@IBM
Twitter Followers
536,125
Show moreShow fewer

IBM Engineering Requirements Management DOORS Next Reviews

Filter Reviews
Filter Reviews
Sort by
Ratings
Company Size
User Role
For Category
All Industries
Write a Review
1-50 of 94 total IBM Engineering Requirements Management DOORS Next reviews

IBM Engineering Requirements Management DOORS Next Reviews

Write a Review
Filter By
Connections
Show reviews that mention
1-50 of 94 total IBM Engineering Requirements Management DOORS Next reviews
Copy Review URL
Design V&V Engineer
Financial Services
Mid-Market
(51-200 employees)
Validated Reviewer
Verified Current User
Review Source
Copy Review URL

"Clunky Requirements Module"

What do you like best?

I like that it's able to link up with HP ALM, our test management tool and generate trace matrices. It's quite comprehensive and has a lot of options to customize and generate the reports we need for documentation.

What do you dislike?

I don't like the GUI and the learning curve to set up and eventually generate trace matrices is quite difficult. The process is not intuitive and there is a lot of room for mistakes so that you'll end up guessing what you did wrong when modules don't link up.

Recommendations to others considering the product:

Have your projects management team work closely with development and testing teams so that they can be on the same page about requirements management.

What problems are you solving with the product? What benefits have you realized?

We use it to store and manage requirements for some projects. We use DOORS to establish traceability matrices to conform to our quality system standards. It has helped people in our company create, organize and output requirements for our projects.

Copy Review URL
Senior System Engineer
Civil Engineering
Enterprise
(1001-5000 employees)
Validated Reviewer
Verified Current User
Review Source
Copy Review URL

"Strong requirements management tool, but still missing some key features of legacy DOORS"

What do you like best?

The fact that DNG is web-based and cloud-based is already a major improvement over legacy DOORS. I find the user interface more intuitive than legacy DOORS. There is a strong online community for help and support. IBM has been fairly responsive to our problem reports. Using custom reports created with Rational Publishing Engine, we have been able to produce well formatted documents that are deliverable to our client with very little manual formatting to do outside of DNG.

What do you dislike?

Complex Boolean filters that existed in legacy DOORS are missing from DNG. The commenting feature is half-baked, for example, comments on an artifact disappear when the artifact is removed from a module, and comments cannot easily be exported from DNG. Even at version 6.0.4., there are still some user interface bugs, such as the page not displaying properly after scrolling quickly. There is no way to export the comparison between two baselines.

Recommendations to others considering the product:

Whether you should choose DNG over another vendor's requirements management product or not I cannot say. However, legacy DOORS was the industry leader for RM, and I recommend DNG over legacy DOORS.

What problems are you solving with the product? What benefits have you realized?

DNG is a solid requirements management tool. Although it has some issues that I mentioned above, legacy DOORS also has different issues. I would certainly choose DNG over legacy DOORS to manage requirements, whether for a program, project, system, software, or hardware.

Copy Review URL
Senior Systems Engineer
Enterprise
(10,001+ employees)
Validated Reviewer
Review Source
Copy Review URL

"Frustration at lower levels"

What do you like best?

DOORS Next has a wonderful interface and looks good....however, many of the features that we had in DOORS Classic are missing. It is great to see, via the hovering, the information from another tier. The management of attributes and views is really good. Traceability via various link types is terrific. Some reuse of requirements has been beneficially to management of requirement specifications.

What do you dislike?

DOORS Next is being features that have been standard in DOORS Classic. Things like layout DXL, the ability to combine information into an attribute, links across multiple tiers of requirements, etc are missing.

What problems are you solving with the product? What benefits have you realized?

Requirements development and management is the NUMBER ONE problem with programs....being able to do this successfully is CRITICAL to program success. Having a tool to manage, develop, and handle change management will greatly enhance our success and profitability.

Copy Review URL
Copy Review URL

"Perfect tool for requirement engineer"

What do you like best?

This is an amazing tool to define requirements clearly and manage them. As project proceeds requirements can change and this helps keeping track of it.It is also really quick and responsive. DOORS made my work a lot easier when I was working as a requirement engineer for a project I was involved in.

What do you dislike?

UI looks a bit old fashioned. Could be improved.Also, sometimes it is a bit heavy on server.

Recommendations to others considering the product:

You need this tool to sell your product. In my opinion it is very useful for a midsize-large company. There is a learning curve, but the effort is worth it.

What problems are you solving with the product? What benefits have you realized?

We mainly use DOORS as a requirement engineering tool where we manage all the requirements of the project from the beginning. This gives tractability and make transfer of the project to a new person easy. In my company we used it for Automotive Software Development.

Copy Review URL
System Requirements and Integration Manager
Enterprise
(5001-10,000 employees)
Validated Reviewer
Review Source
Copy Review URL

"DOORS and DNG Provide Full Requirement Management Capabilities"

What do you like best?

DOORS and DNG provide the capability to interact with other MBSE tools such as Rhapsody, and RQM to name a few, which allows a comprehensive solution to requirements management and product design. Each tool has its benefits and its drawbacks, however both tools are well supported.

What do you dislike?

DNG can improve on its usability, for example in DOORS it is easy to look at a hierachy tree, where in DNG it is not obvious, if its there ( i have not seen this). The ability to import and export is a bit clunky and when needing to make large scale changes this capability falls short, in contrast this is quite easy in DOORS,

What problems are you solving with the product? What benefits have you realized?

We are working on design development and verification for Space Applications.

Copy Review URL
Technical Consultant - IBM Rational
Information Technology and Services
Enterprise
(1001-5000 employees)
Validated Reviewer
Verified Current User
Review Source
Copy Review URL

"Great tool for managing requirement in complex environment"

What do you like best?

Prior to version 6, the requirement module was not that much mature, lacks many important features but from version 6, the introduction of global configuration management added many good things. now requirement analyst can develop their requirements and mange the trace-ability specific to any particular requirement version. Moreover graphical requirements can be easily developed now because of HTML5 builtin editor.

What do you dislike?

There are couple of things which can be improved. First is the performance, if you are working in module and the size is quite large, we face lots of performance issues. also there are many issues related to arabic language.

What problems are you solving with the product? What benefits have you realized?

The major problem its solves is tracing defects or any item back to original requirement. This feature helps a lot in figuring out the impact analysis as well as trace-ability matrices

Copy Review URL
IBM Rational Jazz Tools SME for the U.S. Dept. Of Agriculture
Information Technology and Services
Mid-Market
(51-200 employees)
Validated Reviewer
Verified Current User
Review Source
Copy Review URL

"DNG For Project Requirements Management Solution"

What do you like best?

DNG has an intuitive web interface, with project data organized in a structured hierarchy. It's easy to filter, search and identify inter-dependencies of project artifacts. The storyboard capabilities and graphical link explorer facilitate excellent requirements elicitation. The capabilities it brings to the Requirements Management solution via Collections and Modules are indispensable for efficient requirements management solution both for Software and Systems Development teams. It's definitely a happy marriage between RequisitePro and Legacy Doors.

What do you dislike?

None. I would be inclined to say cost of ownership and maintenance, but measuring the improved efficiencies of teams and the overall improvement in the quality of the product and/or systems develop it outweighs it.

What problems are you solving with the product? What benefits have you realized?

Functional Requirements Management and all other Requirements Artifacts Management (The customer refers to them as Non-Functional Requirements)

Copy Review URL
UI
Enterprise
(10,001+ employees)
Validated Reviewer
Verified Current User
Review Source
Copy Review URL

"Using Doors for Product Requirements"

What do you like best?

Doors offers a nice platform for tracking requirements between products and product families. I use this to track both hardware and firmware requirements for complex manufacturing products. The trace-ability and decomposition it provides are nice for piece-wise workloads. It is easy to create document baselines for different releases and track changes as the product requirements become more defined.

What do you dislike?

Doors program portal is like using microsoft word from 1998. There is no ability to zoom in or make text bigger. The interface to printing or even publishing a pdf is clunky and doesn't create simple documents. As a hardware electrical engineer we also like block diagrams and tables - the table and picture import functions are relatively poor.

What problems are you solving with the product? What benefits have you realized?

This tool is forcing our designers to talk about requirements and justify certain design specs that may have been overlooked. It's also great for multiple design iterations or tracking high-level requirements from the top to the bottom.

Copy Review URL
AF
Enterprise
(10,001+ employees)
Validated Reviewer
Verified Current User
Review Source
Copy Review URL

"Use DOORS with agile methodology is not productive"

What do you like best?

I consider quick search the strongest point in DOORS.

Traceability could be a powerful feature whether it is used taking care about complexity (several artifacts related to each other may cause unnecessary complexity).

What do you dislike?

As much as you populate DOORS with artifacts, after a period of time, could be difficult you find what information you are looking for. Depending how the Project Areas are organized in your Company, navegability can be tiring. For example:

- When you want to link an artifact to another, a window is opened and you have to navigate through entire structure of folders to find the artifact you are looking for.

- Many colleagues of mine comment about there is no baseline per artifact, just on full Project Area. Most part of time, you wish to get a snapshot of only one artifact.

- Few options to customize the export format (.pdf or .doc).

- When you have to export, if the artifact contains inserted artifacts, you have to expand all of them to assure the document exported will contain every information you need. In some cases, when you have more than two levels of traceability, it is not possible to export the third level, because DOORS only expand until the second level. So, you cannot to export in these cases.

- When you link an artifact to another, DOORS does not check if that relation already exists. So, in the tab on the right, you can observe several duplicated links.

- In the folder structure, would be possible you order by drag and drop. Today we have an alphabetic order.

- In an agile environment, I think DOORS is loosing visibility because it is a tool with a lot of features that can generate a complexity. Normally, in an agile context

Recommendations to others considering the product:

In my opinion, in the moment a Company decide to adopt DOORS, it should make an exhaustive PoC conduced by an experient professional that already had implemented this solution in other Organizations, like an user, not like a vendor. It allows to validate specific situations that happen in day by day.

Commonly, PoCs to sell software products simulate best scenarios that does not happen in real world.

What problems are you solving with the product? What benefits have you realized?

In the Company where I work, we started an Agile Transformation in 2014. We purchased the IBM suite tool to implement RTC, RDNG and RQM. We had thought until last year that IBM CLM could help the teams get their day by day faster. Although we have identified a negative reposition of this suite compared with others (such as Atlassian, CA...) mainly related to usability and complexity of use.

It is motivating a non use by our staff, whose have chosen alternative solutions (even phisycal kanban, for example).

Finally, today we are not perceiving a real benefit with DOORS, just the use by internal policy, not because promotes more productivity.

Copy Review URL
A
Enterprise
(10,001+ employees)
Validated Reviewer
Review Source
Copy Review URL

"DNG Configuration and Deployment"

What do you like best?

I like the web client interface and its association with other web applications on the Jazz platform. I like the flexibility in adding more applications via OSLC. Traceability with other applications is also a big benefit. Going further all data being stored in a relational database and be referenced many times rather than copied is a huge benefit over classic DOORS. Add in the ability to configuration manage your requirements using GCM facilitate requirements reuse by reference across my entire product line.

What do you dislike?

DNG has some hard constraints like not being able to move projects/component from server to server .... one must be near perfect in the partitioning of data. Linking constraints are an all or nothing proposition. Configuration of change constraints must be set every time you create a stream. The type system also has hard constraints that cannot be violated otherwise you will corrupt the type system (duplicates). Type system must be identical to clone and copy, otherwise you incurr data loss.

What problems are you solving with the product? What benefits have you realized?

Automotive electrical architecture and electronic component development. Benefit is specifying what we want the product to do, link it to test cases in RQM to verify it and reuse these assets across our entire product line. Quality goes up, cost go down when we do reuse.

Copy Review URL
U
Enterprise
(10,001+ employees)
Validated Reviewer
Review Source
Copy Review URL

"Excellent requirements management system with full traceability"

What do you like best?

DNG provides the capability to add custom attributes for tracking and reporting on requirement metadata. I especially like that I can trace my requirements to User Stories in Workflow Management and Test Cases in Test Management to manage my large scale software development project. This traceability allows me to provide detailed reports to my customer that demonstrate that requirements have been implemented and fully tested. The interface is easy to use (for creating requirements) and the views allow me to query requirements by user defined attributes. You can easily generate a requirements document from DNG using the "module" feature.

What do you dislike?

There is really no downside other than the licensing costs if you have a small project. I believe the cost are worth the full lifecycle capability of the full IBM ELM tool suite.

What problems are you solving with the product? What benefits have you realized?

We are developing a mission critical software system for nuclear explosion detection and DNG with its tracebility to work items and test cases increases the quality of our delivered system.

Copy Review URL
Analista de Processo, Qualidade e Métricas
Enterprise
(10,001+ employees)
Validated Reviewer
Review Source
Copy Review URL

"Plugged with the future"

What do you like best?

It is a versatile tool where I can plan and create almost any requirements structure I need in an easy way and fast. The traceability feature is really great, you can configure it to fit your project necesities with no problems.

What do you dislike?

It is really difficulty to use some features like OSLC. The server performance over a distributed environment not always is good. When you don't use a default template it is not easy to create reports. The user interface scares some no tecnical users.

Recommendations to others considering the product:

Migrating from other tools must be planned in advance, not always it can be done in an easy way. There are a lot of ways to structure the requirements in it. Take your time on testing them and getting the drawbacks and advantages from each of them. Avoid to import documents in word as they are. Use the attributes and tags, it is a lot easier to query things with them. Create module templates with tittles that are read-only and shared among all documents (reuse option). Create a group to maintain the project structure apart from the admin group.

What problems are you solving with the product? What benefits have you realized?

It is easy to relate the business knowledge what helps a lot the impact study and knowledge sharing.

Copy Review URL
Mid-Market
(201-500 employees)
Validated Reviewer
Verified Current User
Review Source
Copy Review URL

"Finally an integrated tool suite"

What do you like best?

I like the flexibility and power of the DNG platform and the fact that it directly integrates with RTC and RQM for full lifecycle management.

What do you dislike?

I would have preferred more examples of configuration management within the help documentation

Recommendations to others considering the product:

While the learning curve may be a little daunting, the end state is worth the effort

What problems are you solving with the product? What benefits have you realized?

We are using the DNG suite to capture our Customer and System requirements and also help control traceability to our software and test suites.

Copy Review URL
CI
Enterprise
(10,001+ employees)
Validated Reviewer
Review Source
Copy Review URL
Business partner of the vendor or vendor's competitor, not included in G2 scores.

"Overall Satisfaction with IBM Rational DOORS Next Generation"

What do you like best?

In our organization business analysts and systems analyst are using this module to develop their requirement artifacts. We have the complete IBM CLM suite so that other departments like development and QA use these requirement to develop and test the application. This end to end traceability and easy collaboration across the lifecylce help us a lot.

There are a couple of areas where IBM Rational DOORS is quite strong. First, it is part of the IBM CLM solution so the artifacts developed in this module can be easily available for other functions like development and QA. They can link with their stories and test cases and team leads and managers can use traceability matrix to find out where there are gaps in coverage.

Comprehensive configuration management functionality (concept of multiple streams and global configuration) is available, which can be helpful if you need to implement configuration management scenarios for your product or project. For example, a certain version of a requirement can be linked with one story and another version of same requirement can be linked with another story. This is the unique feature which other current tools in the market don't provide.

It's highly customizable so you can configure the project areas based on your need. You can have your own requirement types, and you can define templates to speed up the process. Comprehensive review functionality is there as well.

What do you dislike?

Wireframes are quite basic. If you need intuitive and interactive wireframes to elaborate the requirements. you probably need to define outside the tool and then upload as image.

ER (define data dictionaries) modeling is not there.

Use case modeling is quite basic. You can visualize the use case and actors relation but the tool does not enforce the rules.

Does not support offline work.

Recommendations to others considering the product:

Very good tool for requirements management like baselining the requirements, traceability across the lifecyle, coverage matrixes, working on multiple version of requirement at a time, etc. But not up to the mark for requirement development activities like developing interactive wireframes, data modeling, BPMN, or Use case modeling. Also it does not support offline work.

What problems are you solving with the product? What benefits have you realized?

It's part of CLM suite so it can be used to manage the whole lifecycle with tight integration with development module (Rational Team Concert) and quality module (Rational Quality Manager).

Comprehensive reports and dashboards provide better visibility.

License cost is on higher side.

Copy Review URL
Sr. DevOps Consultant
Information Technology and Services
Mid-Market
(501-1000 employees)
Validated Reviewer
Verified Current User
Review Source
Copy Review URL

"Sr. IBM DevOps Consultant"

What do you like best?

Reduced the time taken to detect the causes of bugs by 99%. Reduced system design time by more than 70%. Accelerated the time to market and the rate of innovation.

What do you dislike?

There should be client API for RDNG as well so that we may do customization like we do in RTC.

Recommendations to others considering the product:

Accelerated the time to market and the rate of innovation.

What problems are you solving with the product? What benefits have you realized?

Increased time to market and customer satisfaction. Reduced the time taken to detect the causes of bugs by 99%. Reduced system design time by more than 70%. Accelerated the time to market and the rate of innovation.

Copy Review URL
Business Consultant
Information Technology and Services
Mid-Market
(51-200 employees)
Validated Reviewer
Review Source
Copy Review URL
Business partner of the vendor or vendor's competitor, not included in G2 scores.

"Doors NG Review"

What do you like best?

The following features

1. User-friendly GUI

2. Customisable dashboard and ability to manage notifications

3. Tagging and traceability -- map requirements even across different modules, documents

What do you dislike?

If we do not enable filter option - loads of artefacts seen. Maybe a feature in which only the recently used artefacts are seen and the others hidden would be good.

Recommendations to others considering the product:

It's a tool that mostly offers what it promises. With a bit of time/training, one can pick up the more advanced features and use it in the workplace.

Customisable GUI and notifications is a definite plus, you only see what you need to and nothing else.

What problems are you solving with the product? What benefits have you realized?

Business Partner - used Doors NG to make a demo for a client. Was easy to pick up the tool and build a demo within days.

Copy Review URL
Lead Engineer
Automotive
Enterprise
(10,001+ employees)
Validated Reviewer
Verified Current User
Review Source
Copy Review URL

"DNG useful for Product line engineering"

What do you like best?

RDNG 6.0.3 has great features to manage requirements, status (work flow enabled) of each requirement is much handy for the teams.

It eases the effort with product line engineering, managing variants across products and enabling reuse of requirements.

What do you dislike?

1. Thoughts behind components could have been better with access control, currently access control is at project level.

2. There are few performance issues with linking artifacts

Recommendations to others considering the product:

It is a very good tool.

What problems are you solving with the product? What benefits have you realized?

Centralized database for requirements management. It supports for reuse artifacts across products

Copy Review URL
ET
Mid-Market
(501-1000 employees)
Validated Reviewer
Review Source
Copy Review URL

"Doors next gen revirew"

What do you like best?

good tool for managing requirements and their depedencies

possibility for requirement versioining

possibility to make collectoin of requirements - represents product demands or features

tight integration with Rational QM (requirement testing tool)

good support from IBM

What do you dislike?

very complex tool

hard to manage

heavy demands on server (java based), slow performance

Recommendations to others considering the product:

make a good plan and goals what you want to achieve using this product

hire external consultant who have experiences with implementation of this product

you need to have support contract it is very complex architecture of this product

What problems are you solving with the product? What benefits have you realized?

In R&D we write huge FSS documents where we put all requirement demands. Problem was, that a lot of same demands (for example for protocols) reappear in all this documents, which could be more than 100 pages long. Work and development process was not optimal

We use Doors Next generation to avoid writing such documents, now we write requirements and use re-use of requirements if they appear in multiple products or features. We have now also very good requirement traceaability and relation with test patterns.

Copy Review URL
IBM Jazz administrator
Information Technology and Services
Mid-Market
(501-1000 employees)
Validated Reviewer
Verified Current User
Review Source
Copy Review URL

"RDNG 6.0 review"

What do you like best?

Installation and administering is easy now and you have great integration features on Jazz platform.

What do you dislike?

web UI has many functions, but it's not easy to understand and use.

Recommendations to others considering the product:

Don't put all requirements in repository at one - put the small part and start to use it. And control who can add folders, requirements types etc. to keep requirements management as easy as possible for you.

What problems are you solving with the product? What benefits have you realized?

we have common repository for requirements and can use them with different teams in one place.

Copy Review URL
Enterprise
(1001-5000 employees)
Validated Reviewer
Review Source
Copy Review URL

"Next generation requirements management "

What do you like best?

Web interface and cross tool integration is very handy.

What do you dislike?

Feature selection and usability could be much better. Functionality is less is some areas than DOORS 9.

Recommendations to others considering the product:

Don't assume that capabilities present in previous generations will be available in DNG. There are trade-offs made to achieve better scalability which results in some feature reduction. Those features should eventually make their way back into the tool, but their prioritization is not guaranteed.

What problems are you solving with the product? What benefits have you realized?

Requirements management and traceability to meet auditability needs in highly regulated industries

Copy Review URL
GD
Enterprise
(5001-10,000 employees)
Validated Reviewer
Verified Current User
Review Source
Copy Review URL

"Wonderful Tool For Tracking Requirements"

What do you like best?

The structure of of the software is what I like best. It is very clear how to go look for a requirement by module. The search tool is user friendly as well. I also like the way you can be detailed in the way you organize your modules so that it is clear how you are tracking your requirements.

What do you dislike?

The one thing I can certainly say I do not like is that there is no MAC version available so I am forced to use this software on Parallels. Not that it is a bad thing, but it tends to be very slow, so it takes up time to do a small task.

Recommendations to others considering the product:

Best to use on a PC, but it is OK on a MAC. Beware that it can get slow.

Also, remember to write down your password, as it can get tricky to remember it!

What problems are you solving with the product? What benefits have you realized?

We track our requirements on this tool and it is very useful in that it keeps everything organized in one place and everyone can access it to check the details of a particular requirement or update as needed.

Copy Review URL
U
Mid-Market
(201-500 employees)
Validated Reviewer
Review Source
Copy Review URL

"DNG Review"

What do you like best?

I like the following about DNG:

1. Components can be customized

2. Change Sets

3. Dashboards

What do you dislike?

The folder structure was not retained from DOORS, the columns cannot be filtered in artifacts in a module pages, accessing DNG configurations gets quite confusing when working via global configurations

What problems are you solving with the product? What benefits have you realized?

Store requirements for all features, systems, subsystems and components. We have thousands of modules and millions of artifacts in DOORS that we had planned to migrate to DNG. We were having a lot of performance issues with DNG which seem like have been resolved with respect to the concurrent user usage, not sure about response time improvements. until we have more users and artifacts migrated to DNG the benefits remain to be seen.

Copy Review URL
Sales Attendant
Telecommunications
Enterprise
(1001-5000 employees)
Validated Reviewer
Review Source
Copy Review URL

"Complete Software for your requirements needs!!"

What do you like best?

IBM Engineering Requirements Management DOORS provides a capability to go seamlessly Interact with other MBSE tools such as Rhapsody.The interface is intuitive,very user-friendly making it easy to use.

What do you dislike?

I haven't experienced any challenge so far.IBM Engineering Requirements Management DOORS is great and amazing.

Recommendations to others considering the product:

To check their budget before implementing IBM Engineering Requirements Management DOORS.

What problems are you solving with the product? What benefits have you realized?

Clean user interface.

Easy to learn and use.

Provides complete requirement management capabilities.

Copy Review URL
UB
Enterprise
(10,001+ employees)
Validated Reviewer
Review Source
Copy Review URL

"Highly Customisable"

What do you like best?

I've dabbled a bit with project development and I wouldn't say you need a lot of expertise as you can easily set it up as long as you have a deep deep understanding of both requirements management and the tool or know someone who does.

What do you dislike?

One huge improvement would be to have better support for distributed teams. The Rational DOORS client is terribly slow if you are not on-site with the server. Also, a better method of exchanging data between Rational DOORS servers or better yet a synchronisation method would be perfect.

What problems are you solving with the product? What benefits have you realized?

We are able to use DOORS to help us with our project management by enabling team togetherness and being able to collaborate together so we can get the tasks done at hand quickly and in an organised manner.

Copy Review URL
Senior Systems Engineer
Mid-Market
(51-200 employees)
Validated Reviewer
Review Source
Copy Review URL
Business partner of the vendor or vendor's competitor, not included in G2 scores.

"Moving to the next level of requirements management"

What do you like best?

The zero deploy web based applications are very cost effective. Sharing requirements directly with Test, and developers reduces misunderstanding, and versioning errors.

What do you dislike?

DOORS Classic has a very large following, and user trained base. DNG requires a re-think of how requirements are managed. Some industries can adapt quickly, others, not so fast.

What problems are you solving with the product? What benefits have you realized?

Collaborative sharing of information across domain experts who all have different perspectives or use for requirements.

Copy Review URL
AI
Enterprise
(1001-5000 employees)
Validated Reviewer
Verified Current User
Review Source
Copy Review URL

"Alot of features but alot of headaches"

What do you like best?

It has an incredible amount of features. All the modules have a lot of power to a user. A person could stay in the app the whole time, no need to exit out to work on a diagram elsewhere or write an email. It is a one stop shop for managing your requirements.

What do you dislike?

It is not easy to install or configure. We had to hire a person to setup the application for us and they are still on standby when issues come up. We install it on site and the number of parts that need to be installed and setup properly took quite a bit of time for us. The system uses java a lot and we have found some of the heavy diagram based artifacts we have in the system can stall the use of for others. It is a lot of a system that is not meant for small groups without a dedicated administrator. It is very powerful and has many options but because of that some abilities require an expert to set them up for you, the notes for a user to operate it are not friendly.

Recommendations to others considering the product:

Make sure you have someone on call for support of this product. It's not for small groups or those who don't have previous experience with the tool. It is good if you have dedicated people who can use and learn the product and will use it for the long haul.

What problems are you solving with the product? What benefits have you realized?

We did not have a way to list requirements and trace them back from the implementation of the project. We had planned to use spreadsheets but then it lacks the ability to link items as well and more than one person cannot use a spreadsheet at once. This one application replaces many others like visio, word, excel and projects.

The benefit is that we now have a better way to monitor our project than before and no juggling of multiple files.

Copy Review URL
Copy Review URL

"Flexibility"

What do you like best?

Global accessibility. Capabilities. Global Configurations. DNG Allows you to manage requirements using best practices while streamlining the working process.

What do you dislike?

There is not much I dislike about DNG. There is a bit of a learning curve. All of the performance issues experienced with scrollinbg through modules has been corected by the engineers.

What problems are you solving with the product? What benefits have you realized?

Actually managing requirements the correct way rather than keeping them locked in a database and being modified in excel.

Copy Review URL
CD
Small-Business
(11-50 employees)
Validated Reviewer
Review Source
Copy Review URL
Business partner of the vendor or vendor's competitor, not included in G2 scores.

" DNG"

What do you like best?

globally accessible requirements management and the built in config management. It is powerful while retaining some of the key features of classic DOORS- like modules

What do you dislike?

I believe that some improvement can be made around usability. there is a little bit of a learning curve. when you have a large set of requirements in multiple projects and components

Recommendations to others considering the product:

Make sure you focus data architecture before migration

What problems are you solving with the product? What benefits have you realized?

Time save due to configuration management being enabled. we are able to see all the changes that are pending approval and review them in the tool rather than exporting and emailing. We are also able to provide better traceability between multiple systems

Copy Review URL
Copy Review URL

"Still Learning"

What do you like best?

I like that the application is still being refined. User comments are constantly being implemented to make the tool better.

What do you dislike?

I am still learning DNG, so there is nothing I dislike at this time.

What problems are you solving with the product? What benefits have you realized?

DNG is being used to evaluate what benefits it provides over Classic DOORS. DNG is part of the entire CLM suite and it what the customer wants to use.

Copy Review URL
A
Enterprise
(10,001+ employees)
Validated Reviewer
Review Source
Copy Review URL

"DOORS Next Gen"

What do you like best?

Variant management , audit history and webbased application features are some of them that our users love about it.

What do you dislike?

Read access issues and complexity of reviews within the tool is what hesitates us to use the tool to a complete extent. We also wish there was some kind of white paper/guidance on how change drivers work / should work in DNG in good detail.

What problems are you solving with the product? What benefits have you realized?

Requirements are managed better using the DOORS Next product with better traceability. We also are trying to use it to do better data analytics.

Copy Review URL
AM
Small-Business
(11-50 employees)
Validated Reviewer
Verified Current User
Review Source