IBM Engineering Lifecycle Management vs. Arena PLM and QMS

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
Arena PLM and QMS
Score 8.8 out of 10
N/A
Arena by PTC is a cloud-based PLM and QMS platform. Arena helps product companies that rely on distributed teams and global supply chains to develop products, ensure regulatory compliance, and respond to customer demands.N/A
Pricing
IBM Engineering Lifecycle ManagementArena PLM and QMS
Editions & Modules
No answers on this topic
Arena PLM Launch
Contact Sales
Arena PLM Enterprise
Contact Sales
Arena QMS
Contact Sales
Arena QMS Enterprise
Contact Sales
Offerings
Pricing Offerings
IBM Engineering Lifecycle ManagementArena PLM and QMS
Free Trial
NoYes
Free/Freemium Version
NoNo
Premium Consulting/Integration Services
NoNo
Entry-level Setup FeeNo setup feeRequired
Additional DetailsArena's cloud-based PLM and QMS solutions include role-based subscriptions to meet diverse team needs. Their fixed-fee QuickStart™ implementations supports rapid deployment.
More Pricing Information
Community Pulse
IBM Engineering Lifecycle ManagementArena PLM and QMS
Considered Both Products
IBM Engineering Lifecycle Management
Chose IBM Engineering Lifecycle Management
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 …
Chose IBM Engineering Lifecycle Management
I would choose IBM Rational DOORS over any other requirements management tool out there. Polarion tries to do too many things and is great for some things but as far as requirements management IBM Rational DOORS is the best tool on the market.
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 …
Chose IBM Engineering Lifecycle Management
DOORS is not a suite nor an integrated tool like HP ALM or Rally. It only does one thing and cannot hold defects or accommodate sprint planning. It is older, takes longer to connect and load, and has an inconvenient timeout. It does do a basic job and can be customized to show …
Chose IBM Engineering Lifecycle Management
DOORS is the legacy and leading tool for requirements management. It is widely used by the Aerospace industry.
Chose IBM Engineering Lifecycle Management
Although Jira is getting popular in DevOps team, it does not work well with ITIL model as RTC does. RTC is still widely used for production management in our company.

CA Service Desk Manager (GSD) is integrated with TPAM which is being used for privilege account management in …
Chose IBM Engineering Lifecycle Management
To me, DOORS is like a super version of Excel and Word combined with a relational database. I have not used too many database softwares before, but DOORS does a very specific job well enough. It is so powerful that some of the tools just go unused. Some parts of the software …
Chose IBM Engineering Lifecycle Management
Requisite Pro (and Rational Requirements Composer, it's successor) is more simple and focused on requirements. Is like a part of DOORS and can be suitable to smaller projects. IT people on the other hand prefer agile tools like Jira. Of course if the project is big enough, …
Chose IBM Engineering Lifecycle Management
My organization was already using it when I joined the team.
Chose IBM Engineering Lifecycle Management
It's well integrated with IBM products so it provides better coverage across the lifecycle with first class integration. Other producst are stand alone with limited integration with ALM tools.
Chose IBM Engineering Lifecycle Management
I found [them] to be more flexible and with the possibility to create [an HTML format].
Chose IBM Engineering Lifecycle Management
An alternative which I have very briefly used is Atlassian's JIRA, which is very similar to IBM RTC, although has a modern UI, feels light-weight and is faster to respond and additionally has seamless integration with bitbucket, which is a Git platform, and other Atlassian …
Chose IBM Engineering Lifecycle Management
JIRA is simpler and much more intuitive, especially when bundled with confluence. TFS is obvious choice if working with Microsoft technologies and has superb API.
Chose IBM Engineering Lifecycle Management
I have worked on different agile project management tool like JIRA, Teamfoge and RTC. RTC is simple and has a nice UI.
Chose IBM Engineering Lifecycle Management
It is easy for the organization to identify what kind of problems there are in the project and how many change requests have been resolved and how many are pending. Thereby the employer can pro-actively arrange the meetings and address the issues to the team members.
Chose IBM Engineering Lifecycle Management
This product had many of the same features, was easier to use, which would result in less training, and had a lower price tag. Logic and reason do not always figure prominently in a decision. Sometimes there are intangible characteristics that alter the flow. In my observation, …
Arena PLM and QMS
Chose Arena PLM and QMS
Been a long time, and it was called Agile then, and I did not use it a LOT, but my recollection was the interface was FAAARRR better than Arena PLM and QMS. Simple things like 'where uses' was a graphic with lines to all items/places where an items was used, including REF DES, …
Chose Arena PLM and QMS
Arena is an easier to use solution.
Chose Arena PLM and QMS
QT9 we have used previously, and this system was much more bare bones in its offerings but was sufficient enough when we were smaller. Now, Arena PLM and QMS has far exceeded the capabilities we previously had with QT9 as it has been more seamless to integrate it with other …
Chose Arena PLM and QMS
Expandable is hard to use compared to Arena PLM and QMS. Arena PLM and QMS is great when it comes to following the trajectory/ life cycle of products. One thing I like about expandable is that it allows for the exportation of products and the BOM. This was a great feature that …
Chose Arena PLM and QMS
It is very easy to contact Arena and get response in the same day for any issue or question.
Chose Arena PLM and QMS
Arena PLM and QMS is significantly better than Mastercontrol in terms of usability. It is far more user friendly and less confusing.
Arena PLM and QMS and Agile are about the same for me in terms of general user friendliness.
Chose Arena PLM and QMS
Duro labs did not have the best functionality or connectivity like Arena PLM and QMS does. Some syncs may be missed and not everything was update to date. Other times, some parts in BOMs would not be present and a new sync had to be performed. Any small change that Onshape …
Chose Arena PLM and QMS
Arena had an easier BOM structure setup
Chose Arena PLM and QMS
This was provided by our customers.
Chose Arena PLM and QMS
Arena PLM and QMS has a lot of options to work with in hand with the current other systems use at our company.
Chose Arena PLM and QMS
We selected Arena because one of our suppliers uses it. I would say you are equal.
Chose Arena PLM and QMS
Arena PLM and QMS works as any other document control resource, but is simple enough to pick up and use efficiently
Chose Arena PLM and QMS
Arena seemed the easiest to use and the one that can best be configured to our own ways of working and set up in a way that integrates well with our company
Chose Arena PLM and QMS
No other electronic Arena PLM and QMS systems [are] used.
Chose Arena PLM and QMS
nOT WELL. eNOVIA HAD EXCELLENT INTERCONNECT FEATURES.
Chose Arena PLM and QMS
Oracle Agile was a lot more difficult and expensive to use
Chose Arena PLM and QMS
I have only used a paper system with uploads to a shared network. Paper is more time-consuming, but more in our control. It's much easier to search through Arena than a paper system, however, there is still a learning curve to Arena. Once Arena skills and company knowledge are …
Chose Arena PLM and QMS
I have not evaluated other doc control products. Previously, all tracking was done internally via Windows file system.
Best Alternatives
IBM Engineering Lifecycle ManagementArena PLM and QMS
Small Businesses
Polarion ALM
Polarion ALM
Score 9.8 out of 10
monday dev
monday dev
Score 8.9 out of 10
Medium-sized Companies
Polarion ALM
Polarion ALM
Score 9.8 out of 10
Teamcenter
Teamcenter
Score 8.1 out of 10
Enterprises
Polarion ALM
Polarion ALM
Score 9.8 out of 10
Roadmunk
Roadmunk
Score 9.0 out of 10
All AlternativesView all alternativesView all alternatives
User Ratings
IBM Engineering Lifecycle ManagementArena PLM and QMS
Likelihood to Recommend
8.8
(0 ratings)
9.1
(0 ratings)
Likelihood to Renew
8.0
(0 ratings)
9.0
(0 ratings)
Usability
2.1
(0 ratings)
7.1
(0 ratings)
Availability
-
(0 ratings)
9.0
(0 ratings)
Performance
-
(0 ratings)
9.1
(0 ratings)
Support Rating
5.0
(0 ratings)
9.1
(0 ratings)
Online Training
-
(0 ratings)
8.2
(0 ratings)
Implementation Rating
10.0
(0 ratings)
8.3
(0 ratings)
Configurability
-
(0 ratings)
8.7
(0 ratings)
Product Scalability
-
(0 ratings)
9.1
(0 ratings)
Vendor post-sale
-
(0 ratings)
8.0
(0 ratings)
Vendor pre-sale
-
(0 ratings)
9.0
(0 ratings)
User Testimonials
IBM Engineering Lifecycle ManagementArena PLM and QMS
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
Arena PLM is well suited for part number, BOM and file management. Processing changes (ECNs, ACOs, DCO's, etc.) in Arena is very easy to do and provides great visibility on the status of submitted requests. The ability to communicate with Suppliers and grant them access to files in Arena is extremely helpful. Arena does not appear to be the best suited system for managing software
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
  • It provides easy, 'login-anywhere' internet cloud-based access to fundamental PLM functions.
  • It provides secure access control for employees & vendors (but you pay per person for access licenses).
  • Data is effectively 'always backed up' in the internet-cloud.
  • There is an option to attach thumbnail graphics representative of each item and create a Bill of Materials view that also displays the graphics to help provide item recognition for BOM readers.
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
  • Arena lacks the capability to edit documents within its interface and requires users to upload new versions of documents when changes are made. This makes it a bit more challenging to collect and implement reviewer feedback
  • Arena's requirement tracking world does not have the proper functionality we need and was not useful for us.
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
We have so much time and effort invested into Arena. The history of approvals, revisions, etc. are necessary for many of our customers. We also have entire device histories recorded. Having to re-create that on another platform would be a feat requiring years of effort. But mostly, Arena just works. It's transformed our business into a much more streamlined system, resulting in a massive cost and time savings.
Read full review
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
The Arena interface is fairly intuitive, and has very complete functionality. Documents are easily accessed according to prescribed user permissions, and the navigation pane is clearly positioned and sensibly structured. Notifications are sometimes a minor distraction, and document organization and hierarchy display may be difficult to follow at first. After a brief learning curve, perceived usability quickly increases for the typical user.
Read full review
Reliability and Availability
No answers on this topic
Seems like when I need to access our workspace for an emergency situation, this is when maintenance is scheduled, just the luck of the draw, I guess, and I just wait until the maintenance is complete, and then can proceed
Read full review
Performance
No answers on this topic
We use a few other software or systems (Silicon expert) and it is seamless to us, pages load quickly and efficiently.
Read full review
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
Upon initial observation, Arena Solution appears to possess a rather intricate nature, yet this complexity was effectively navigated during the initial configuration phase with the invaluable assistance of an expert well-versed in Arena, a factor that greatly contributed to our comprehensive mastery and autonomous handling of Arena Solutions thereafter.
Read full review
Online Training
No answers on this topic
The On line training was easy to understand and was very efficient for most of our users. We used the training tools to make sure we use all of the features to their fullest and correctly! After a few weeks mos of our users were very proficient with ARENA PLM and were able to work on their own and use mos of the sections and PLM capablilities.
Read full review
Implementation Rating
No problems
Read full review
Pretty straightforward, from OOB
Read full review
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
I've used SAP, Agile in the past, for PLM, and unless the server is in your office, you cannot configure anything, and should it crash, you as the client are stuck until the issues are resolved. In my 15 plus years using Arena, there has only been one instance where the server was down, and the support team quickly resolved the issue with no loss or data or breach of any kind. Both PLMs are very light on what you can configure for your own company, most of it is out of the box, and you are stuck with it, whereas Arena Solutions gives you much more freedom to really tailor it to your company's specifics and what works for you.
Read full review
Scalability
No answers on this topic
Arena is easy to customize and therefore easy to scale. Different user groups with access restrictions can be easily created and new training plans can be created to support different user bases. Suppliers can also easily be added or items can be shared with them
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
  • Arena PLM and QMS has allowed [...] to efficiently respond to Design Changes and process them effectively.
  • Arena PLM and QMS has completely automated our CAPA process, removing all paperwork and 99% of other electronic files.
  • Arena PLM and QMS has allowed our Contract Manufacturing Organizations (CMO) to upload current manufacturing data; this puts [...]'s finger on the pulse of a CMO thousands of miles away. No more surprises.
Read full review
ScreenShots

Arena PLM and QMS Screenshots

Screenshot of Arena Bill of Materials (BOM) Management. Indented BOM displaying "in production" item status.Screenshot of Arena Engineering Change Management.  Engineering Change Order (ECO) approval with redlines.Screenshot of Arena Projects. Project schedule with status and progress.Screenshot of Arena Quality. Quality process showing a Corrective Action Report (CAR) with the issue details, affected items, and resolution progress/status.Screenshot of Arena Requirements. Tracks requirements and related product development issues for a complete product picture.Screenshot of Arena Analytics, Arena's business intelligence (BI) tool