IBM Engineering Lifecycle Management vs. IBM Rational ClearQuest

Overview
ProductRatingMost Used ByProduct SummaryStarting Price
IBM Engineering Lifecycle Management
Score 5.3 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
IBM Rational ClearQuest
Score 7.0 out of 10
N/A
A customizable database workflow application development and production system that provides better visibility and control. IBM Rational ClearQuest is change management software that helps improve developer productivity while accommodating the methodologies, processes and tools that best fit the project and the people on the team. It provides tools and processes used to maintain control of changes while catering to the diverse needs of the developer.N/A
Pricing
IBM Engineering Lifecycle ManagementIBM Rational ClearQuest
Editions & Modules
No answers on this topic
No answers on this topic
Offerings
Pricing Offerings
IBM Engineering Lifecycle ManagementIBM Rational ClearQuest
Free Trial
NoNo
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 ManagementIBM Rational ClearQuest
Considered Both Products
IBM Engineering Lifecycle Management
Chose IBM Engineering Lifecycle Management
It was easier to do all the change management-related activities, even configurations were handled very effectively. New process definitions and initiatives made it easier for better project deliverables. Effective resource allocations and better reporting and defect …
IBM Rational ClearQuest

No answer on this topic

Best Alternatives
IBM Engineering Lifecycle ManagementIBM Rational ClearQuest
Small Businesses
Polarion ALM
Polarion ALM
Score 9.9 out of 10

No answers on this topic

Medium-sized Companies
Polarion ALM
Polarion ALM
Score 9.9 out of 10
Whatfix
Whatfix
Score 9.9 out of 10
Enterprises
Polarion ALM
Polarion ALM
Score 9.9 out of 10
Whatfix
Whatfix
Score 9.9 out of 10
All AlternativesView all alternativesView all alternatives
User Ratings
IBM Engineering Lifecycle ManagementIBM Rational ClearQuest
Likelihood to Recommend
3.0
(22 ratings)
4.0
(6 ratings)
Likelihood to Renew
8.0
(6 ratings)
8.0
(2 ratings)
Usability
4.0
(5 ratings)
7.0
(2 ratings)
Support Rating
5.0
(3 ratings)
9.0
(2 ratings)
Implementation Rating
10.0
(1 ratings)
8.0
(2 ratings)
Configurability
-
(0 ratings)
10.0
(1 ratings)
User Testimonials
IBM Engineering Lifecycle ManagementIBM Rational ClearQuest
Likelihood to Recommend
IBM
The software is robust enough to handle highly complex software development or other product development and can be used well beyond the range to do what a client needs. However, because of the inability to hold its users to proper best practices, things can get wildly out of hand and cascade over the years, creating unnecessary technical debt. The system has a lot of usable features, but they don't funnel users toward the correct processes and practices.
Read full review
IBM
If you are familiar with IBM Rational Suite products, RequisitePro will add up due to the synergy between other components. Beyond that, if your business is not structured to an adequate development methodology or lacks the degree of maturity or necessary resources, probably RequisitePro does not add much value. If you work with developers in the requirements analysis, they probably prefer to use an SVN repository.
Read full review
Pros
IBM
  • Open Services supporting Lifecycle Collaboration (OSLC).
  • Required definition management and managed capabilities enabling.
  • Rational DOORS Web Access for local on the test field presence.
  • On-sites established reporting system.
  • Approved linking requirements to test plans
  • Engineering Requirements Management DOORS traces requirements thereby eliminates manually processes and spreadsheets, for improved productivity.
  • Returns the investment efficiently.
Read full review
IBM
  • Capability to query bugs on multiple criteria and export it to csv for triages.
  • Simple and intuitive user experience and clearly planned defect life cycle
  • There are other features like assigning the defect to pull request, clearly explaining defect by attaching screenshots, detailed description etc
  • If you are using other IBM tools for requirements documentation, this tool integrates very well
Read full review
Cons
IBM
  • I feel like it is too heavy sometimes and updating is not very straight forward. For example, if I want to change an incident ticket (IN) to a service request (SR) and add some comment for the change, I have to first change the IN to SR, then click refresh which takes a few seconds, then add a comment. If I forget the refresh step, my comment will be discarded without warning like my ticket is not in the latest status. This also happens when somebody else changes the ticket during my edit as I can not lock the ticket exclusively.
Read full review
IBM
  • Performance can be an issue. Make certain the server is sized properly
  • There is a large difference in capability of the Thick Client Version compared with the web based version. Make certain each job function has proper access to be able to do what is required of them.
  • Learning curve is not too steep, but would suggest having someone with experience setup the repository. Highly suggest getting a contractor to assist to get the repository up and running.
Read full review
Likelihood to Renew
IBM
At the moment we are required by contract to continue to use the IBM DOORS software for our current client. Given that it can be expensive, if we were to use it after our current client's needs were met, we would have to secure other projects in order to justify the continued use of the software.
Read full review
IBM
Most likely as it's one of the powerful tools in the organization. We needed this tool to track all the process related documentation and also to capture signatures.
Read full review
Usability
IBM
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
IBM
Please keep in mind that this all has to do with you you customize the user interface. It becomes very easy to house all of your requirements, but it may and can make life difficult for you if you do not think ahead of how you want the app to work and house your data
Read full review
Support Rating
IBM
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
IBM
IBM has good support and knowledge base. With the wealth of information on their site and the support desk, we were able to quickly resolve issues. It is smart to build up a COE and a group that manages the software otherwise it is quick to be able to lose the knowledge as team members are assigned different duties
Read full review
Implementation Rating
IBM
No problems
Read full review
IBM
It was pretty simple.
Read full review
Alternatives Considered
IBM
It was easier to do all the change management-related activities, even configurations were handled very effectively. New process definitions and initiatives made it easier for better project deliverables. Effective resource allocations and better reporting and defect management. The overall cost of the tool is great too and well within budget.
Read full review
IBM
IBM clearquest would the BEST option if you are looking for managing change requests, managing project workflows, generating reports on status of requests. The reason being: cost, cost and cost. It almost handles everything that you would need for your project including bug tracking unless you want something really fancy (like HP QC) with a higher cost that supports a wide variety of needs which you might need to evaluate based on your project needs. For example, if you would be really making use of all those additional features provided by HP Quality Center. To be honest it depends on your project size, the skills of team members and of course budget!
Read full review
Return on Investment
IBM
  • 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.
Read full review
IBM
  • IBM Rational ClearQuest has provided a workflow that works without unique software methodology. As a result we deliver complete software products to our clients in a 6 to 8 week development time frame.
  • As a result of our highly customized implementation, we have 8 resources supporting IBM Rational ClearQuest. Three of the resources are full time configuration management staff that administer and support the tool set and the other 5 are from the testing group that handle ClearQuest user support issues in addition to their testing duties.
Read full review
ScreenShots