Jira Reviews

It's pretty much for engineering development, Scaled Agile purposes for engineering development, for managing basically the epics and the stories and the capabilities and everything that we have to deliver in sprints. We're not using it as a ticketing tool or anything like that, for operations. We're using it purely for managing the development stuff in a Scaled Agile manner.

The solution is easy to use. It's pretty dynamic. It allows us to basically handle everything that we need in terms of a backlog, and we're trying to do it in an organized manner, so we know who works on what and how to size the story points so we can ensure that our epics burn down from sprint to sprint.

In terms of the general way that the tool functions, it seems like it's a pretty good fit-for-purpose for what we're trying to do. We've never thought about replacing it with another technology. 

The initial setup is pretty straightforward. 

The stability is pretty good.

There are a few things about it that I think need to be improved in terms of the ability to build reports. We would like to be able to use the data from Jira to help drive Gantt chart roadmap-type views of not only what we're building, but rather where we're going.

What we've elected to do in a couple of cases is just pull the data out of Jira and then pull it into Power BI so that we can try to get some of the more sophisticated information that we want out of it. We actually experimented with building portfolio views so we can see stuff in real-time. In some ways, it's okay. In some ways, it's just a little lethargic for our purposes.

We'd like to be able to manage things in real-time and by looking at stuff. We're doing PI planning, Program Increment planning, and that kind of stuff, and it's not always a good facilitator for that. We tend to pull it out and put it into other tools to manage that, and then we get it back into Jira as that's our system of record for where all the stories are kept. That's probably the biggest headache with it.

For some of the portfolio stuff that we did, the queries were so complicated that it was just taking forever. It was like watching paint dry for the results to come back. We would be in a meeting and then we'd hit a refresh and you're waiting for what seems like an eternity.

The solution could use API integration to take feeds from other tools so that we can read them better. We got one camp using an ITBM tool from ServiceNow. We have Jira running in this other area, and having an API between the two so we could actually collaborate between the two tools. However, API integrations with other tools would be helpful so we could either take data out of it or put data in it, thereby making it more of a data-driven platform that integrates nicer with other platforms. That, I think, would be something I would like to see.

I've been using the solution for four years or so. 

I haven't heard people really complain that it's unstable. We haven't had very many performance issues with it. I don't know if it was a network problem or what it might have been, however, I haven't really heard people talk about performance problems other than when we were trying to use it for portfolio views and that got kind of weird as queries were just complicated. Beyond that, the stability has been fine.

The issues that we have with scalability aren't necessarily with the tool as much as it's how we're using it. We're a big company so there are a lot of people using Jira, however, we don't really see how the projects correlate across different activities within the company. When we're trying to get two integrated roadmaps and trying to get to a point where we're collaborating, doing inter-sourcing of a solution, and we're all in Jira, there are times where we're in it and yet we can't collaborate and work together, and so we start replicating things across the two projects.

I don't know how much of that is the issue with using it how we are versus the product itself though. 

We have 8,000 to 10,000 people using the solution currently. That's across many departments. We are a company of around 150,000 people. There may be people using it that I am not even aware of. I only have visibility of what I'm doing and what I'm exposed to in terms of integration with offerings and that kind of stuff. I know when we were managing licenses, we used to have a DevCloud team. For their scope, it was in the 8,000 to 10,000 user range. 

The solution is being pretty extensively used. Likely usage will grow as the company grows and takes on new business. I don't know if it's going to organically grow exponentially as it's already being used where it needs to be used and currently we're only using it for development activities across the different offerings and platforms. It's not used as a day-to-day run-and-maintain ticketing system to manage customers or issues or anything like that. I'm sure there'll be some incremental growth as we take on new business and grow as an organization.

We use Jira. We use Confluence as an extension of that, and then we also use ServiceNow, the ITBM capabilities of ServiceNow as well.

We had a DevOps team that ran our cloud environment, and they basically spun up a project for us, and it was pretty straightforward. It's not like we were installing it in the cloud. People just said, "Here you go, and you can just start using it." After that, we just created a project for what we were doing, and then we were on our way. I wasn't really involved with any part that was problematic or anything.

In terms of maintenance, pretty much everybody is maintaining their own instance. We've got somebody that manages what's in the cloud for the company, however, it's pretty much hands-off in terms of day-to-day support issues. We had a few people that were supporting it when there were problems, however, it's just a handful from what I understand.

We're just customers and end-users.

We are likely using the latest version of the solution. I don't know what the latest version of Jira is, however, I'm pretty confident we are.

The advice I would give is it's not a solution for a novice person that doesn't know Scaled Agile. Users will get out of it what they put into it, and if you don't know what you're doing you could set yourself up for a nightmare when you're using the tool. My advice is that the better you structure yourself and understand Scaled Agile and how you want to set up the project the more successful you'll be at using it for your organization's purposes. If you're going in there as a novice that doesn't understand anything about Scaled Agile you could create a mess for yourself and then it won't give you the value you are seeking.

I'd rate the solution at a seven out of ten.

We use Jira for project management.

Our team really needed something to help us track the progress that is made against our system-level requirements, and this solution helps us in that regard.

The most valuable feature is Jira Align, which is a plugin that helps you to understand the progress that is made against each epic. I have had limited exposure to it but by using Align, we can also see the progress concerning Initiatives, including progress made against the requirements.

In general, Jira Align is very useful for management. It allows them to see the big picture and what is really happening from a team-execution point of view. Being able to see progress against their Initiatives is a nice feature.

The UI is good, and it helps us to see what needs to be done to complete our sprints.

Nowadays, many organizations are moving toward the Objectives and Key Results (OKR) framework, and this is something that Jira should be able to accommodate. Jira should understand that at the leadership level in an organization, such as the C-level or even below that, they don't like to have an epic creator. Rather, they are interested in observing all of the corporate objectives that are being turned out by the team.

OKR is a very important feature for them to add, and it's a big investment. There are separate tools that are trying to support and enable people to use this framework. If Jira could do that, it would be great because we don't want to integrate multiple tools. For example, we don't want to use one for OKR and another one for Agile backlog items. If we can have support for everything using one tool, it would be helpful. That said, it would require a big investment to implement.

The biggest drawback that Jira has is that they don't have a separate chart to show metrics for lead time, cycle time, and throughput. We use the control chart as a workaround but it's not giving us the correct metrics. The metrics are skewed because the chart shows us some items that are still in an open state. This is something that needs to be fixed. By comparison, Rally Software has a feature that enables people to understand the lead time, cycle time, and throughput as separate metrics in different charts. Having Jira implement that capability would be helpful.

We are unable to enter an explicit agreement below the kanban board, which is something that we would like to be able to do.

I have more than five years of experience with Jira.

Stability-wise, Jira is good.

Jira has no problem with scalability. It's far better if you compare it to Rally.

I also use Rally Software. Some times are more on Rally, whereas other things are more on Jira.

Rally software has some better charting features, whereas Jira is more scalable.

Between these two products, it's very difficult to say which I would recommend. Rally has some good features that are not available in Jira. For example, in Jira, we can't put an explicit agreement below the kanban board. This is something that we can do in Rally. Rally Software, on the other hand, does not have the feature that allows us to understand the progress made at the feature level or the initiative level. This is something that Jira gives us with the Align plugin.

I would lean toward Jira as the market leader. If they improved some features, such as the metrics available on the charts and support for OKR, I would prefer and recommend it over Rally and other products.

The pricing for Jira is reasonable, although I think they can bring it down because the plugins cost extra. Jira Align, for example, is available at an additional charge.

Jira should understand that there are now competitors in the market, and they should lower their prices to expand the user base. As sales volumes increase, the price should naturally be brought down. In this case, people are more likely to retain their licenses instead of switching to a more cost-effective solution.

I would rate this solution an eight out of ten.

Its use case just depends on the company I've been with at the time. I have used it for defect management, development processes, and status. At one point, we ran our entire risk platform out of it as well.

The dynamic communication and the ability to customize it the way we want are the most valuable features.

Its ability to perform true executive-level status reporting could be improved. There are a lot of benefits there, but there are also a lot of things they can and should expand upon.

I have been using this solution for about eight years.

I have not interacted with them. I've struggled with getting Atlassian resources, but that could partially be my fault.

It depends on the type of license. In terms of subscription, it is cheap, and it works pretty well.

You need to investigate and understand dynamically what it is that you're looking to do. Don't just dive in and start creating. Before going into it, you should really organize your formatting or direction of the cause. There are other tools that are like cookie-cutters. Jira is so customizable that you really need to define what you're going to do with it.

I would rate it a nine out of ten.

This solution focuses on lean methodology which we have found useful and it can also be used on any device. 

In Jira Code, you can create workflows easily and distribute them within different departments. The user interface is easy to use. This is a simple solution for a new business that is not familiar with technology.

Jira's collaboration and integration with other apps and tools could be improved.

Jira does not focus on ITSM documentation and procedures. It is more advanced in user-friendly workflows but is missing the functionality of artificial intelligence AI which could be embedded in the ASM management.

I have used this solution for six years.

We are using the on premises solution which is very stable. There is a team that is currently working on its performance tuning. This solution is suitable for mid-sized companies.

Jira, compared to other market leaders like ServiceNow, provides a lot of features but focuses on service management only. I would rate it a three out of 5 for scalability. 

We have not had any issues with Jira support. There is an online knowledge base and a growing online community which helps with troubleshooting. 

The initial deployment was straightforward.

We implemented this solution internally. 

The licensing model for enterprise users is costly. We have more than 2000 users and it is becoming expensive to use.

I would rate this solution an eight out of ten. 

Our organization is a software development company. We serve financial institutes that have between 8,000 and 13,000 employees.

We use Jira for process automation and as a workflow engine on the client's side. For example, a customer can fill out a form and ask a question, which is operated by Jira, and someone will be prompted to contact you with the answer. We created the forms designer and the roof engine and handle the process with the customer contact.

We are using Jira for automatic tools, so it is run on-premise.

The most valuable feature is that it has different APIs available, with good services, and it is completely by the books.

Jira could improve the documents management level. Our customers compare it to Office 365 and Sharepoint Online. They are focused on versioning of the document; Jira is missing this in their environment. It is missing functions for collaboration, like instant messaging. Currently, we try to connect the systems, we use Jira workflow which is connected to Office 365. 

Jira is trying to push for the online version, however, our customers are not ready to do that due to safety concerns.

The features are not intuitive. It would be good if there were templates.

I have been using Jira for eight years.

Stability at the beginning had some troubles, but it is okay now. To maintain a large network, we divide it between operations and development. We have approximately six people involved.

Jira is scalable.

The initial setup depends on the project. Smaller projects where we are using minimal functionality can be quite simple. On the other hand, we have a monthly deployment process where we extend the solution, which is a complicated process because it's running a system with a lot of users.

Pricing of licensing is too high.

From a user perspective, Jira is simple to understand if they use its data functionality. If you want to extend it to custom feeds then you need further education.

If you are considering Jira, take a look at the online versioning and online pricing.

I would rate Jira an 8 out of 10. 

We are using Jira mostly for the workflow dashboards for our projects. For example, for now, we are using the Kanban boards at team levels and also between team cooperation levels.

The links between tickets are very valuable and the boards I found to be configurable and usable.  The boards allow some level of extended configuration and they can be customized according to our project needs. Additionally, it is easy to use.

I'm mostly focusing on the requirements traceability with my thesis, the integration could improve for other tools. The companies are not only using Jira. For example, for the test cases or for the documents templates, we are using Polarion and we have been having some integration issues.

I have been using Jira for approximately four years.

Jira is easy to scale. We are implementing it for our team and for other teams, such as the relations teams. If you look at the different levels, such as the coordination levels, we are using it extensively on a daily basis.

In my team, we have less than 100 users using this solution but we also have other teams in our large company that could be using the solution. Our company has thousands of employees.

I have not contacted support.

The initial setup of Jira is straightforward.

We have a team in my organization that specifically handles the support of Jira.

The stability and performance are good, I have not had any complaints from people using Jira.

I would recommend Jira to others.

I have not used many tools to compare Jira with.

I rate Jira a seven out of ten.

The primary use cases for this solution are backlog management and sprint planning. Customers deploy this solution on-premises. 

The two features that have been most valuable have been backlog management and sprint planning and tracking. 

This solution could be improved by including a different model for the overall planning perspective. There's a Jira portfolio that we aren't using. The only challenge we're facing is that we cannot see the overall planning. 

I have been using Jira for almost three years now. 

This solution is stable. On-premises, the stability is okay, but when it's cloud-deployed, I think it will be more stable. 

This solution is scalable, but I think it will be more scalable when we go with a cloud deployment. 

I have never contacted support directly, but our team that takes care of maintenance, support, and customization connects with them. 

I previously used Micro Focus ALM Quality Center for around five years. 

Installation was done by someone else. For deployment and maintenance, we have a DevOps team of two or three. 

I implemented through an in-house team. 

We don't pay for licensing because we are using the Open Source version. 

I rate this solution an eight out of ten. I think it's much better than other competitors' products. 

We use Jira to create releases, tasks, sprints, and collaborate within teams. The solution can be deployed on both the cloud or on-premise.

Jira has a useful user interface and overall is easy to understand and learn.

Performance is something that can always be improved upon in a feature release. Additionally, it would be a benefit to add Markdown in Jira because sometimes it might be better to describe everything in Markdown because it is a common language structure.

I have been using Jira for approximately eight years.

Jira's stability could improve. We have experienced times when we were out of memory which is possible due to a memory leak. It is hard to pinpoint the cause, it could be the operating system.

I have had to contact the support when I had some questions about the upgrading process and they answered in a timely manner.

I have previously used a comparable solution to Jira and the largest benefit was it was free.

The setup is not difficult. I have done it a few times in Kubernetes and did upgrades, the experience was straightforward.

There are other solutions that are free making this solution seem expensive in comparison.

I have found the cloud deployment better than the on-premise. However, for those wanting to implement this solution, I would advise them to compare the pros and cons of each before making their selection.

I rate Jira a ten out of ten.