IBM Engineering Lifecycle Management vs. Modern Requirements4DevOps

Overview
ProductRatingMost Used ByProduct SummaryStarting Price
IBM Engineering Lifecycle Management
Score 7.0 out of 10
N/A
IBM Engineering Lifecycle Management (ELM) is an end-to-end engineering solution used to manage system requirements to design, workflow, and test management, extending the functionality of ALM tools for better complex-systems development.N/A
Modern Requirements4DevOps
Score 8.0 out of 10
N/A
Modern Requirements4DevOps is a fully-featured Requirements Management tool built into Azure DevOps. By partnering with Microsoft, Modern Requirements is able to offer a fully integrated solution within Azure DevOps, TFS, and VSTS. The Modern Requirements solution provides the ability to: Create documentation without leaving an Azure DevOps project Construct Diagrams, Mockups, and Use Case models that the user can connect requirements directly to Build…N/A
Pricing
IBM Engineering Lifecycle ManagementModern Requirements4DevOps
Editions & Modules
No answers on this topic
No answers on this topic
Offerings
Pricing Offerings
IBM Engineering Lifecycle ManagementModern Requirements4DevOps
Free Trial
NoYes
Free/Freemium Version
NoNo
Premium Consulting/Integration Services
NoNo
Entry-level Setup FeeNo setup feeNo setup fee
Additional Details
More Pricing Information
Community Pulse
IBM Engineering Lifecycle ManagementModern Requirements4DevOps
User Ratings
IBM Engineering Lifecycle ManagementModern Requirements4DevOps
Likelihood to Recommend
8.8
(0 ratings)
8.0
(0 ratings)
Likelihood to Renew
8.0
(0 ratings)
-
(0 ratings)
Usability
2.1
(0 ratings)
-
(0 ratings)
Support Rating
5.0
(0 ratings)
-
(0 ratings)
Implementation Rating
10.0
(0 ratings)
-
(0 ratings)
User Testimonials
IBM Engineering Lifecycle ManagementModern Requirements4DevOps
Likelihood to Recommend
While working on a complex project it is important all the needed change requests are handled in an effective manner, this tool helps us do exactly the same, it had great features to manage those change management tickets, making sure to merge the change with existing workflow, prioritize the requests centrally so there are no duplicates. Easy to collaborate across different teams and colleagues across the aisle.
Read full review
We tried the Modern Requirements4DevOps AddIn to see if it brings a added value to our development. I have to say that I would distinguish between types of projects in which it is beneficial and in which it is probably "over engineering". Certainly, bigger development projects with higher complexity are more suitable than small and not really complex projects. However, for the bigger projects Modern Requirements4DevOps definitely helps to deal with the complexity as it adds way more contextualisation to the various entities. It really helps to understand which requirements led to which action in a diagram or task during development. It helps to control the complexity and inform all team members along the project.
Read full review
Pros
  • 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.
Read full review
  • Smart Documents
  • Building a connection between individual entities (requirements, documents, tasks, tests)
  • Requirements Management and Reporting
Read full review
Cons
  • Too complex for projects or businesses that don't really need the detail. It is basically overkill.
  • If you are new to IBM Rational tools, it may be a medium learning curve. You'd also need lots of training from your people, since, as usual, this tool shouldn't be managed alone.
  • It may seem old fashion compared to Jira and the current control tools used in IT industry.
Read full review
  • forms could be transferred into in line fields to allow in line maintenance of data
  • make window management of diagram builder more flexibility to make more space to build diagrams
  • I would wish that the performance is a bit better sometimes, loading times can be quite long in some cases
Read full review
Likelihood to Renew
One of the downsides for us was the capabilities of the native build tools were lacking. The project management and work item tracking capabilities are great and I would recommend the tool to anyone. There is a definite learning curve with RTC as a source control system, and the streams are a concept unique to the product
Read full review
No answers on this topic
Usability
The UI is terrible and not intuitive. Users need training in order to complete tasks. Much like SAP, it's not the clearest tool. The tracing feature is especially complicated because you must write the scripts yourself. There is a learning curve. Also, even the setup, installation, and logging in each time takes a considerable amount of time.
Read full review
No answers on this topic
Support Rating
It does a basic job and has the potential to complete some robust reporting tasks, however, it really is a clunky piece of software with a terrible user interface that makes using it routinely quite unpleasant. Many of our legacy and maintenance projects still use DOORS but our department and company use many alternatives and are looking for better tools.
Read full review
No answers on this topic
Implementation Rating
No problems
Read full review
No answers on this topic
Alternatives Considered
The established experience contained in most IBM Rational DOORS installations is only compensated by the high flexibility of Atlassian JIRA. The markets state that Jira is less expensive in the setup. There are many manufacturers that support IBM Rational DOORS to have the big tiers as their customers. Jira has problems in that growth. Jira has more features compared to IBM Rational DOORS. For example in cloud support, IBM Rational DOORS relies on improved external services while Jira abstracts in the most modern way. Jira experts have a different professional background compared to that of IBM Rational DOORS. They are indeed from different engineering generations. There is little interchange in personal and ideas.
Read full review
Modern Requirements4DevOps is an AddIn for Azure DevOps Server (Microsoft Azure DevOps) and extends the native features of Azure DevOps in the area of Requirements Engineering, Requirements Management and Reporting. Azure DevOps already contains tons of valuable features. However, for bigger and more complex projects Modern Requirements4DevOps extends Azure DevOps by further features. Thus we used both products alongside.
Read full review
Return on Investment
  • RTC helps automate incident management workflow which improves our work efficiency. With the integration with Geneos and GSD, we can one click create RTC incident tickets from Geneos with most of the information copied from Geneos automatically and then link the details to GSD for privilege account management if needed.
  • RTC provides a holistic view on ad hoc production activities. We use RTC for production management. Whoever needs to get access to production due to non-planned activities (planned change is managed in GSD) has to raise an incident ticket or service request ticket in RTC so as to get production privilege accounts.
  • RTC is also being used to review and approve the usage of privilege account which help us to meet audit requirements. For example, if a user made some database change using privilege account under incident number xxx, an entry will be added in RTC and sent to account owner or production support manager to review and approve.
Read full review
  • Better communication --> thus less misunderstandings
  • More Transparency about requirements --> adds context and helps to build a common understanding
  • Traceability of Requirements --> we used the baseline also to look into the history of requirements to understand how certain requirements have changed
Read full review
ScreenShots