We performed a comparison between Jama Connect and Polarion Requirements based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Application Requirements Management solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."It is good at requirements management and test management."
"Provides suitable tools for managing regulatory requirements."
"You can get full traceability with any other system. It also includes a test module, and you build the traceability matrix incrementally throughout the development process."
"Jama Connect is a good tool for the entire software development cycle."
"The most valuable feature is the user-friendly interface."
"I like Jama Connect because it's easy to use and understand. The widgets are great, and linking is straightforward. The solution is not complex compared to its competitors."
"Technical support answers fairly quickly compared to others like IBM or Atlassian. They also offer quite a good knowledge base for advanced cases and how to plan it, etc. via videos that they provide. They are quite useful."
"Polarion Requirements' most valuable features are link tracing, book entry, and sequence training features."
"Its flexibility and APIs are the most valuable."
"We can easily customize it because of the web services and open APIs. Also, the APIs are available. We integrated Polarion with one of Siemens' products, Teamcenter, which is especially useful for automotive industries. There is an open API for integration with Jira as well, so for me, customization is a strong point."
"It is easier to produce documents using the platform."
"A valuable feature from my side would be the comparison corporization."
"In my opinion, Polarion Requirements' most beneficial feature is the ability to manage specifications within a work-like document that functions as a work item. Its collaboration features have worked very well and have been very useful. We can easily exchange information with the testing team, the business, and with DevOps."
"I would say there is value in how powerful, configurable, and user-friendly it is."
"My company mainly utilizes the product for documenting internal standards, guidelines, and requirements. Currently, we're focusing on using it for internal purposes, but the vision is to expand its usage to include contract requirements and tracking functionalities. While we're not there yet, it has proven effective for managing our internal documentation needs."
"Test management can be improved. It's not so scalable. The user interface needs to split things into small projects."
"There are some security concerns with Jama Connect, including two-factor enablement."
"I think there's room for improvement, especially with the review process. Reviews should be integrated with requirement evaluation instead of being separate from it. The review should not run parallel to the requirement."
"I believe one of the weak points is the reporting side. You must export inter-readable reports from Jama if you do not use the system as a repository for your design history file. Jama is great if you keep it in Jama, but reporting out requires some customization to get it right."
"t is rather slow, so the speed of the process and consuming information should be improved. It doesn't have a nice way of viewing information. We would like to see better interfaces for consuming information."
"I have inquired about pricing for this solution but have not yet heard anything, so their response time in this regard is something that should be improved."
"The initial setup could be better, it's complicated."
"The user interface could be modernized and the product lacks project management functionalities."
"Polarion Requirement needs to have a feature where we can track changes and compare documents. Currently, we do it manually."
"The one thing I would mention is the license policy is a little bit difficult. For different roles, you will need different license models. That seems a little bit difficult for us. Especially when you introduce such a complex system, you want to know the right way is to do licensing. It's not clear what that best way would be. The solution will be here for a long time, and I just think it could be more clear."
"The usability of the solution should also be improved."
"It is stable enough but if you would like to work with more requirement objects, then you will get timeouts."
"Integration can be a little tricky if you're not aware of basic computer science or programming language."
"The risk assessment functionality needs improvement, like FMEA risk management."
"In my opinion, the main area for improvement in Polarion Requirements is its user interface. It should be easier for engineers to understand how it works, as many features are not very easily understandable for end-users."
"It is not a stable solution, as we had issues with shared licenses."
Jama Connect is ranked 5th in Application Requirements Management with 9 reviews while Polarion Requirements is ranked 3rd in Application Requirements Management with 13 reviews. Jama Connect is rated 7.4, while Polarion Requirements is rated 7.4. The top reviewer of Jama Connect writes "Agile, well structured, and has a great review module, which makes the design reviews smooth". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Polarion Requirements writes "Defines, builds, tests and manages complex software systems". Jama Connect is most compared with IBM Rational DOORS, Jira, IBM Rational DOORS Next Generation, Microsoft Azure DevOps and Polarion ALM, whereas Polarion Requirements is most compared with IBM Rational DOORS, Jira, IBM Rational DOORS Next Generation and Helix ALM. See our Jama Connect vs. Polarion Requirements report.
See our list of best Application Requirements Management vendors.
We monitor all Application Requirements Management reviews to prevent fraudulent reviews and keep review quality high. We do not post reviews by company employees or direct competitors. We validate each review for authenticity via cross-reference with LinkedIn, and personal follow-up with the reviewer when necessary.