IBM Rational DOORS is the ever so improved leader in the category requirements engineering software
June 15, 2022

IBM Rational DOORS is the ever so improved leader in the category requirements engineering software

Steffen Jäschke | TrustRadius Reviewer
Score 9 out of 10
Vetted Review

Modules Used

  • Requirements Management (Rational DOORS)

Overall Satisfaction with IBM Engineering Lifecycle Management

IBM Rational DOORS is designed to match paradigms of requirements engineering that matched the state-of-art up to lately 2011. It is still at the top of the list since many engineers have been educated with the paradigms in mind. But as can be already drawn from the name there is a mismatch in concepts that have developed bigger since. This is a package from the broader IBM Rational software suit. This emphasizes the Rational Dynamic Object Oriented Requirements System that has been extended by the DOORS eXtension Language (DLX). In the selling logic of IBM, it is superseded by IBM Jazz. For many of my customers, it is a hybrid between knowledge management and lifecycle management. It is important that it is bound against several trusted and approved engineering databases. These are sources of unmatched quality still despite contradicting facts. It is still under development and is supported by the IBM expert team. At IBM the product name is now Engineering Requirements Management DOORS. The product is cross-platform. Clients are Windows, servers are Unix. That has advantages and causes problems. The new focus in the development of the product is to be tech-savvy, enhance simplicity and overview, and grow clarity.
  • 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.
  • It is hard to conserve the achieved qualities for the experienced customers under futher technological changes.
  • The growing diverge of the product lines causes worries about the appropriateness of the software package for futures requirements policy package in software development.
  • Windows is seemingly not the best platform choice for the future. Security issues pertain and new come to the problem atop.
  • It seems more probable the IBM favors Jazz to Engineering Requirements Management DOORS due to advantages in the development process and the technologies reused from the infrastructures on which the servers will be run.
  • The advantage the Engineering Requirements Management DOORS is well established at the customers will be melted in the sun very soon and Jazz will be favored by the customers too.
  • The recognized databases will be updated to newer software platforms making a difference in manageable size and depth of knowledge at the same broadness.
  • The size of the software is already a problem for present day installations. There is no or little space to grow further. New splits and adopted packages are unavoidable.
  • Versatile handling of the requirements with mature requirement sets.
  • Well established at the leading companies for software development and still in growth.
  • Besides IBM Jazz the leading requirement package for software engineering and with the most benchmarking success.
  • The broad set of business roles that are enabled to work profitably by the IBM Rational DOORS.
  • IBM Rational DOORS is already succeeded by different IBM toolset for the task that proved to perform highly profitable.
  • Not all parts are under development. It might run out of date sooner or later by design.
  • IBM Rational DOORS has most installation in truncated format so it is in need of full fledged installation for development at the customer.
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.

Do you think IBM Engineering Lifecycle Management delivers good value for the price?


Are you happy with IBM Engineering Lifecycle Management's feature set?


Did IBM Engineering Lifecycle Management live up to sales and marketing promises?


Did implementation of IBM Engineering Lifecycle Management go as expected?


Would you buy IBM Engineering Lifecycle Management again?


IBM Engineering Requirements Management DOORS former IBM Rational DOORS profits very much from the mighty market position it had till today. It had been the most favored requirement engineering tools suite with the highest investments in the infrastructure concerning hardware, software, and knowledge sources. It was embedded in knowledge sources of test stands, hardware labs, and knowledge database servers. It allowed for some of the highest profit changes and made the fame with it. But the paradigms of requirements engineering change. If not were superseded by completely different approaches for the target solution worlds. The foremost position in the selling tables is unstable if changes are not solved or coped with by the strategist at IBM and their customers. Since the highly successful alternative suits are already at the market, and some are from IBM already the lifecycle for IBM Engineering Requirements Management DOORS is at the later highs. But the suite is still at the very top and very popular. There are still many problems unsolved and many wishes at the customers to make the use more comfortable and efficient at the overall level. If the time of setting up the software package is passed the adoption get more extended and complicated. There is a lot of work at the stage around and the expertise will be required for a long time from now.