Jira Reviews

The solution is primarily used in a scrum setting for creating all the features, topics, epics, stories, backlogs, and helps manage the scrum.

It's a very powerful product. It works well with Confluence. It interacts with it well.

There are very advanced features in Jira compared to, for example, ServiceNow.

You can record your unit testing, regression testing, UATs, et cetera. With a wider universe of applications, it's very flexible. 

I'm not totally a business analyst, however, a business analyst, can really, really use it very deeply due to the fact that you can register the results and create your test cases, run them, and document the results. All the testing is very advanced in Jira and it's very nice.

While it's very powerful, it's very complex sometimes. You can do many fancy things and have connections between features. With so many options, it's easy to get lost and it's not as easy to be on top of all the features and changes. In that sense, ServiceNow is easier to keep up with. Its configuration is more complex than ServiceNow.

The interdependencies between objects sometimes are not easy to trace back and to have a clear view of. That's why starting with small configurations is very important; we don't create very complex structures between objects in Jira. That said, sometimes when updating a history that was linked to an epic we would not understand why the epic didn't change when we changed the history. The relation sometimes can become complex. This is not a problem of Jira per se, it's a problem of how you configure Jira.

I worked with the solution for a while, however, I stopped using it. My last project was about 12 months ago.

The solution is stable. I cannot recall any issue with bugs or glitches. Jira never went down. It was reliable.

It is a scalable product. It can be applied with much more deepness, especially for developers.

Normally if I had some questions and issues on how to do what on Jira, I'd look for local support. We didn't have any Jira consultants or anything like that.

We also use ServiceNow. We use both products in the same way.

The configuration process is pretty complex. It's a pretty advanced product. You'll want to understand how to use it and what you want it to do before jumping in.

I would advise potential new users to start with simple cases in terms of configuration and to build on top of that in order to add complexity by identifying the need and not working from scratch.

I'd rate the solution at an eight out of ten. You need to get used to using it. It's a solution that can et very complex. 

We primarily use the solution for project management. 

What I like about this product is how you can manage from the project to the deployment, even using Bamboo or using Bitbucket. 

Being able to automatize the deployment of the solution has been great. 

We're not only managing documentation on the project task, but we're also handling the technical assets that are under the project. 

What I don't like is that perhaps there are not so many different apps that can add value over the management side of the product. They're not able to develop over Jira, even for normal technical activity signing. For managing the project better or for task documentation or even managing tickets or service needs in another way, there needs to be better customization or better apps.

I'm really obsessed with the idea of reducing the number of activities to have a general retail workplace. However, if we need to expand the use of the Atlassian suite to all the teams, all the people, we need something that can be, easier to use and has the ability to offer more guidance to those users that usually don't work with these type of tools. For example, ServiceNow doesn't fit all the needs in the company, however, it can be configured. You can develop so many different functions over it. I don't want to increase the payments and the number of licenses that I have to buy from ServiceNow. I would prefer to have my own developed team and try to define everything on our side - including the functionalities that I would like to build for those proposed functionalities.

I've used the solution in a structured way for about 18 months now. 

We have looked at and worked with several content-managed solutions in the last year. We're trying to build our retail workplace using ServiceNow, and, at the same time, increasing the use of the Atlassian suite. ServiceNow, we use for post activities such as service ticketing, service managing, and so on. 

The introduction of agile has moved us onto the Atlassian suite, which has been really very, very useful. At the same time, we have a partial solution that has been built over Salesforce, using the Salesforce development environment. 

Fortunately, we have so many different solutions for file management. We have FileNet, we have OneDrive. We have SAP. In terms of file management, we have so many different solutions, even Dropbox.

We are using the Jira service center and we are using Trello and Confluence as well.

The deployment is pretty straightforward. It's not overly difficult. We are able to automatize a lot of it. 

We're an Atlassian partner. 

In terms of project management, Trello is not enough of a solution to manage complex projects and maybe some new functions can be developed. I'm not saying that Jira has to develop that, or that Atlassian has to develop that. Perhaps there is something that we can do to create a referring community to develop those new use cases and more simple use cases, and, at the same time, use them for more general purposes in the company. Atlassian fits in the technical side, in the IT side really well. It just needs to move to become friendly in a retail workspace environment, outside of its traditionally technical background.

Overall, I would rate the solution at an eight out of ten.

I would recommend the solution to other users and organizations. 

We are using the recent version.

We use it for story and sprint planning, as well as for reporting. 

The solution benefits our organization with its agility, planning and visibility in respect of large teams spanning different geo locations.

The tool is well known and popular to use. 

The sprint planning is pretty good, as are the reporting piece, retrospective reporting and the planning board. 

It is a great tool from the planning perspective, such as that of capacity and sprint planning. 

As the solution is highly configurable, it has very poor governance. There is nothing which comes out of Jira to go into the product. It is free for all and anyone can create with it. This means that the responsibility lies with the user community to create some form of governance. 

Moreover, the solution is geared to small teams. It lacks scalability. 

The tool is not good at the enterprise level. This means that, depending on how the person installed the software, the issue of performance may increase commensurate with the number of projects. While plugin for x-ray exists, it is not that mature in test management. Although it's a good tool for many of the smaller clients, once a person goes deeper into it, it's not there, even though it will get the work done. 

It is a less desirable solution in controlled environments, such as science, banking and finance, in which there is a need for certain compliance supports.

The solution is not that great for audit histories. It's a great tool when much integration is involved. With cold products, things can always be achieved through other means. 

When the teams collaborate, they need multiple metrics to be tracked. With this comes the issue of direct impacts, such as the appearance of one's UI and its usability aspects. The screens have changed greatly in appearance over the last ten years. This is an issue which every software dealt with in line with the growth of usage and complexity. 

I have been using Jira for nearly ten years. 

The solution is stable. 

The solution is good for small teams. It lacks scalability. It does not work well when it must be used across multiple domains and multiple teams which need to collaborate. 

The Atlassian strategy is that the solution be open to all to encourage collaboration. But, this raises the issue of how to control the data input and the tool and all that it comprises in respect of the reporting that is generated. This means that poor data quality in the geo projects will equate with poor reporting on it. 

As such, supplementation by the teams or organizations using it is required. They must come up with their own rules of governance about who can do what. 

The product is not being extensively used at the moment. It is a niche product. I have not seen usage behind it. It involves ID users for certain teams. 

We do not have plans to increase usage. This will depend on the feedback we receive. 

I have not made use of technical support. 

We did not switch to Jira. It is simply one of the products that we also use in addition to an in-house micro focus ALM. 

While I was not involved in the initial setup, my understanding is that it is simple. Atlassian puts out many different products and I cannot say for certain how I would have handled ones which are on-premises, compared to those which are cloud-based or server products. 

I am not in a position to comment on the licensing. 

We make use of the solution on Jira Cloud. 

While I cannot say with certainty, I would estimate the number of users in our organization at a thousand-plus. 

This figure contemplates different departments, such as that involving support. 

My advice is that someone in a large enterprise first give consideration to the issue of governance before implementing the solution. For a small team it is ready to use straight out of the box. One need just try and stay with the default workflows. There is no need to overengineer the product. 

The product is good, stable and very cost-effective for small teams. These are some of its advantages. 

I rate Jira as a seven out of ten. 

We use Jira every day for tasks like tracking product deployments, mapping it to the tools that we use, and sprint tracking. We also used it for audit purposes, where everybody goes back to that for details about each user story.

Each sprint tracking is done in there, as well as the other product-related activities

All aspects of Jira administration help with respect to QA development and deployment.

This solution allows us to use customized workloads for different projects.

The sprint tracking is really helpful and very convenient.

Scrum boards are very easy to follow and we use them every day.

The roadmap, to understand what our team is going, is quite helpful when it comes to understanding things in a visual format. It provides good visuals such as the Burnup Chart.

Requirement traceability is easier to do with this product.

It integrates well with other tools.

We have been working on integrating Jira with Confluence for the past months but it is not yet working. Having more seamless integration with Confluence would really help us track our product management activity and other product details in one place.

Integration with BitBucket would allow us to have a better deployment process.

I have been using Jira for between four and five years.

This product is very much stable, and we have every tracking option being used.

It scales well, from what we have seen. We have more than 350 users that are in groups, and perhaps another 150 in addition to that. We are onboarding a lot of teams.

When I need support, I contact our in-house technical team. I have not spoken with anybody from outside the organization or anybody from Atlassian.

We were using the on-premises version until a year or two ago when we migrated to the cloud version.

The initial setup was simple and it didn't take much time to complete.

We have an in-house team to deploy and manage our IT solutions. There may have been some outside help initially but everything is now done in-house.

We have an enterprise license that includes cloud service and support.

Overall, this is a very good product and I think that it is the best project management tool. It is used company-wide and I recommend it.

I would rate this solution a nine out of ten.

We are basically using it to register all the requirements and issues so that we can track them and control the flow and different states. We also use it for reporting and configuring dashboards for portfolio management.

It is a SaaS solution, and we are using its latest version.

The flexibility to create different flows is most valuable.

It can have a more high-level view of portfolios. It has quite detailed views, but I would like a high-level view of portfolios.

We want to integrate Jira with Microsoft Active Directory, and I don't know how easy or hard it is going to be. I don't know if Jira supports this. We are starting that integration in the last quarter of this year. I hope to find all the required tools for this integration.

I have been using this solution for two years.

Its stability is very good. I have no complaints.

It is scalable because it is a SaaS solution. It is the best choice for us because it responds to our needs all the time.

We have around 100 people in our organization who use this solution. They are developers, QAs, and managers.

Their support was very good for some of our questions. We didn't have too many issues.

We also have a partner who helps us with all the contracts, payments, and other things. If there is an issue, we contact them, and they provide support.

It was easy because the person who helped with portfolio management had previous experience with Jira. So, it was easy for us. It took about three weeks.

The most important thing is to precisely decide your flows and different stages and cycles. If all these are very clear, you won't have a problem setting up Jira.

I would rate Jira a nine out of ten.

Our primary use case is ALM, which is very well supported by Atlassian.

We have realized an improvement of 30% in terms of the duration of our small projects (six months with three to four people).

The most valuable feature is the full integration between Work management, Source code management, and Test Automation.

This integration allows a full traceability during the development processes, which is mandatory for some industries like automotive, or security

The hierarchy for Jira tickets is too flat.

Our primary use case is executing the SDLC.

This solution has improved our organization by enforcing transparency and communication. Individual roles and responsibility are defined and followed.

The features that we find most valuable are the Workflow, Scrum workflow, and Dashboards.

We have found that improvement is needed in their customer support (communication, which is ironic).

It would be very useful to have drag and drop time tracking.

The features of the Technical Account Management (TAM) which have been most valuable for us are understanding the limitations of tools, suggested sizing and approach for operation teams, and suggested approaches for onboarding and educations.

The TAM provided good insight as to how we can more effectively perform troubleshooting, and scale down operational costs.

Co-location. Working out times with someone on the West Coast is painful. Also more ROI material. Big blue can spin out ridiculous documents that executives love as to why spending millions of dollars on IBM will somehow make us richer.

The TAM was able to assist us with issues we had involving deployment.

It was a struggle with TAM vs. Premier but eventually we were able to address some stability issues. We had an app crashing every other day for several weeks before it got the attention we thought this contract would bring.

In terms of the TAM and scalability the only issue was just an upsell to datacenter really. But the TAM is helping look at forecasting triggers etc to understand the need for more instances. It is really difficult to get any sizing recommendations for horsepower though. The feedback is “well every customer is unique, so it’s difficult to say” and push to Premier Support for that.

A few mismatched tools. The Atlassian ecosystem has tools that do one function very well, but pull together nicely as a platform. Would like more consistent navigation and provisioning integration though like what is seen in On demand/cloud offering.

We had setup well before the TAM agreement. Pretty straightforward other then lack of sizing recommendations across the board.

Yes, TeamCollab, Home grown tools, Redmine, Jenkins, XLDeploy, Jazz/BuildForge and RTC. RTC and XLDeploy/Jenkins combo is still widely used and seen as an internal competitor.

I would recommend buying premier support for half the price and training your folks internally. It’s really not at all what we felt was advertised.