RQM Implementation planning the right way?

I will give it a shot off the top of my head.  Hope some of these ideas help.

RQM implementation planning in CQ/CC/RP environment:
Many of our true blue Rational shops start here.  As each of these tools are enterprise level tools, they each are seen as a sharable backbone resource of the organization.  Their integrations can be as shallow or deep as you want with very resource intensive customizations that must be maintained and migrated to each new tool release.  With the Jazz infrastructure the hope is to address some of these difficulties with project leaders performing most project based administration using the GUI based tailoring of things like pick lists, process template choices, and even adding custom fields to work items.  The need for deep programmatic customizations by tool administrators should be minimized.
My experience is that you may want to implement work items in RQM for tasks planning but hook CQweb up as your defect provider for all your testing project areas.  If you aren't going to take advantage of the development planning and work item system for your development shop then there is little need for representing your development projects in RTC given you are leaving your source and build support to ClearCase.
I suggest that starting with RQM and integrating ReqPro for requirements and CQ for defects will work pretty well.  You will be missing out on a lot of RTC value but those elements (source control, dev project planning, and build support as well as moving change management to work items) can be done in a stepwise fashion.
The integrations allow functionality, traceability, and reporting with Insight.  By adding RQM on, you can get visibility into your testing coverage, your progress, and collaborate on your testing tasks.  However the closer collaboration with development and the analysts (requirement owners) is not achieved with this configuration nor is a migration to agile very easily achieved.  Migrating your developers and analysts to RTC and RRC with improved the cross functional collaboration and therefore enhance your overall project productivity.  By hanging on to the older tools, you localize the impact of adoption to your testing team but also continue to incur the administrative overhead and high costs of forward migration imposed by having them in your infrastructure.  Moving to an all Jazz infrastructure as soon as it makes sense for your projects will speed your organization's collaboration and flexibility to adjust to the pressures of delivering projects at a faster rate with better quality.
I know that this sounds like marketing hype but in reality support for agile planning, collaboration across disciplines, and project self administration are worth the training and tooling costs of moving to a full CLM environment.
The product information center includes tutorial and role based scenarios that help you get up to speed about how the tool works and how the projects are constructed.  Deploying and walking through the Proof of Technology using the Money that Matters project area that is complete with linked example assets of a project at a particular midstream development point can help you completely visualize how the moving parts work together.  Along the way, you will have questions about how to use a test plan, do I need test environments, who and when to Test Execution Records need to be created, and how do I get the reporting and dashboards to reflect project status the way we want.  These can be best handled through more targeted questions to the forum.