Jira Reviews

We use Jira as a communication tool for tasks and epics. Everything is in one place in the ticket, and it's helpful to communicate with the team. We don't have to use Slack and other platforms to track information related to tasks.

The most useful features are the Kanban dashboard, the ability to create tasks, bugs, epics with child issues, time estimation, and Jira reports. The dashboard helps in tracking tasks and projects easily. Time estimation is crucial for my team to estimate tasks accurately, and the monthly reports are helpful for monitoring progress. We can see everything in one place, which improves communication within the team.

Sometimes it's hard to set up the dashboard for the team lead. For example, I can see tasks selected for development but not UAT tasks. It would be beneficial if the setup was easier. I understand Jira is a comprehensive tool, but dashboard setup could be made more user-friendly.

We've been using this solution for about two years already.

The stability of Jira is good. I have faced issues only once. I would rate it nine out of ten.

Jira is pretty stable and scalable. On a scale of one to ten, I would rate it nine for scalability.

I haven't contacted customer support yet.

Positive

My company also uses Azure DevOps dashboard. I prefer Jira because its interface is simpler and easier to use than Azure.

I am just a user of Jira. The dashboard setup is done by our team lead, so I'm not sure how to set up Jira.

The price is regular for this kind of tool. However, my company hasn't bought Confluence integration because of the price. We are fine with Jira, but would like to have integrations if it becomes cheaper.

Feel free to try it, and you will love it. The biggest advantage is that you can see all of the project in one place on the dashboard, track your estimation and time, and see your progress. I rate Jira nine out of ten.

We use it for project tracking. We do software development. We implement software development lifecycle, and we use Bitbucket for CI/CD pipelines.

We have a lot of vendors operating on multiple projects, so in terms of operations, we need to maintain the backlogs of different projects. The sprint approach for roadmaps is cool in Jira, but we are looking at whether the same option is available in Azure DevOps because one of our clients is looking into using Azure DevOps.

Jira has a good reporting system. It also has an API, so we can do all sorts of reporting. 

There are a lot of things. A lot of features, such as time tracking, are only available through the marketplace. If multiple users are working on a user story, we aren't able to pull out the reports. So, there are many things that they aren't offering. They are available only through the marketplace. That's not good for a product.

I've been using this solution for five years.

It's stable. The stability on the cloud is 99%, but we have deployed it on a virtual machine. 

Both cloud and on-prem deployments are scalable. I'd rate it an eight out of ten in terms of scalability. 

Our clients are small and medium enterprises.

I'd rate it a nine out of ten.

Positive

The setup on the cloud is easy. I'd rate it a nine out of ten in terms of the ease of setup. The on-prem setup requires some work. I'd rate the on-prem setup a five out of ten in terms of the ease of setup.

We have four people who are working on Jira maintenance.

It's not very cheap. It's also not very costly. I'd rate it a five out of ten in terms of pricing.

I'd recommend it to others. Overall, I'd rate it an eight out of ten.

The solution allows us to escalate issues from the end-user customer very easily. For example, if they're trying to access our PayPal page, and they're getting an error, we will do the basic troubleshooting. If the problem persists, then we will file the case and we will send all the stuff to reproduce the issues, including the ID, everything, using the Jira tool. We will create the task and it will go to the Level Three engineering team. They'll create that bug and route it to the Product Development team. Since the time I've raised the ticket, there are lots of options and there are lots of products that we may be using. That includes understanding what is the issue, what is the SLA, what is the issue criteria, et cetera. We can create and submit issues based on multiple types of criteria.

I can collaborate on issues that I've escalated very easily, even if they were escalated to different groups. I can segregate as well. It makes it easy to track bugs and issues. 

My experience with Jira has been great. Jira can track bugs and records improvements clearly. 

It's easy to escalate the issues to the product development team. 

It's not that difficult to create and file an issue. It is very user-friendly.

The ability to include attachments and assign reporters is great. We're able to easily delegate the task. That's extremely helpful. 

In every email, there is a way to track who is looking at a specific issue. If you look into Jira, there will be a crystal clear communication chain from the start to end of any issue.

In Jira, sometimes developers are not getting alerts when Jira is moving out of the SLA to the product development team. Or, for example, if you're sending a Jira ticket to me, I should get an alert if I've not worked on the ticket for a long time. I should always get an alert within 24 hours. For example, there should be three kinds of alerts. If a Jira ticket is raised and does not have any steps, for example, if I'm not assigned, it should be in green. If one day goes by, it should be in yellow. If the SLA is about to end, it should be in red. That way, I will know what needs to get attention. I'd be able to say "Oh, I should work on my task." There should be some color-coded alerts to keep me informed in a more visual way.

Sometimes I might get an attachment from the user through email that I need to download and save to my local desktop. What feature I would like from Jira is the ability to have an attachment field option open Outlook. Right now, when you click an attachment, you can only attach the items which are stored on your desktop or documents that have been downloaded. However, there should be an option to attach a file to a Jira issue directly from Teams or Outlook.

They should offer free online training courses to users. 

I've been working with this solution for seven years. While I joined the organization seven years ago, the company had already been using Jira for quite some time. 

The stability is good and the solution follows the agile methodology. We've never had issues with its reliability. There are no bugs or glitches. It doesn't crash or freeze. the performance is good. 

It's my understanding that the solution can scale. 

We have more than 5,000 people using the solution right now. They include IT specialists, product support, developers, product owners, technical lead, and architects.

I have not faced any Jira issues. I have not raised any tickets to the Jira team directly. It works very well.

The company may have previously used ServiceNow, however, as I recall, it is difficult to expand, and therefore the company has used Jira for quite a long time. 

I'm from technical support. I'm not a part of the development team and therefore have not helped implement the solution. Therefore, I cannot speak to how easy or difficult the process is. 

Jira maintenance is taken care of by the product maintenance team and the change management team. While we own the product, they respond to it. 

I'm not aware of the pricing or costs. It's not an aspect of the solution I deal with directly.

I am aware, however, there is a bit of a cost to do the online training.

We are using the latest version of the solution. 

You can use both cloud and on-premises deployments. Cloud deployments can be on various clouds, including Amazon, Microsoft Azure, et cetera. We are using GCP, for example. 

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

We use Jira for the overall issue management in development projects. We use it to maintain a high level during each sprint, which is a requirement. We also use Jira for issue management during testing. We create a test plan and manage it all with Jira.

Jira is very user friendly, easy to install, and easy to access. The most valuable feature in Jira is release management. You can also manage a consolidated dashboard that can be accessed globally by all the team members. We can do all this with Jira while engaging in development. 

One of the key benefits is that it's a single repository for all your SDLC. Based on the user ID and password, anyone can access it, and they also have a single sign-on. It's not that very complicated to do issue management with Jira. We can also pull Jira data and generate quality metrics that can be used for the overall optimization of the test execution. 

Although it covers the overall requirements and measurements, it'll help if they had their own test execution feature. Because right now, we're using third-party tools to test executions.

If there are multiple projects, it could be a good thing if they had a reporting method where you have a portfolio view with predictions and so on. If there were a way to manage all the SLAs, that would be helpful too. 

Jira is stable and meets our requirements. You don't have to use it out of the box as you can customize it to your requirements.

Scalability isn't a problem because we have used it with over 200 users. You don't have to stick to any out of the box features as you can customize them.

Almost everything is covered in their documentation. As payment is required for support, we mostly follow the documentation.

We used Microsoft DSP before. We were looking during a licensing phase for something where the non-licensing cost wouldn't be more, and the system requirement would be minimum. That's what qualified Jira, and we went with the data.

The initial setup is very good. I wouldn't say that it's very complicated. They have customization options for things like issue management. You can customize it based on your terminology and project.

For a simple set up, it may take around four hours. If it's a 20 member project, it's quite easy to set up Jira. But if it's to be made available enterprise-wide, it takes longer. I had complex projects where it took anywhere from three to four days or a week to set up. You should also note that it may take new users a week to understand it properly.

We tried to do a total uniform deployment, but it's not always possible because every project has some customization. A single user can deploy Jira. I have deployed and managed 20 to 22 users in a Jira instance. Basically, the Jira administrator creates the template. But if the project requires customization to write queries and run tests, that will require some additional skill.  

As a company, we get a subsidized price, and it's lower than what's quoted on their website.

To a certain extent, maybe 70% to 80%, Jira will meet your project development budget. It has integrations with other platforms, so if you want to put it in your DevOps continuous integration flow, it can be done.

If you're engaging in software development, there should be a single repository where you store everything. Then you can start managing it with Jira based on the business requirements and the user stories.

On a scale from one to ten, I would give Jira a seven.

Multiple features make this product a delight to use. Using this for backlog prioritization is the key to either kanban or scrum processes. JIRA does a great job of articulating the story and adding elements to the story to help in the prioritization. If you are overseeing multiple projects, it allows you to easily follow the teams progress.

Another feature is the ability to incorporate add-ons. It’s great to have for those one-off processes you need. For example, the integration with Confluence.

Working in a dev shop that is 100% scrum, this tool is invaluable in its insights to how the process is working. Are the stories written well? Is the team executing on the highest priorities? How is the team executing sprint by sprint? All these can be found easily within JIRA, either with their out-of-the-box reporting, or the ease with which search queries can be downloaded to CSV to manipulate in a data visualization tool.

The reporting out of the box is minimal; I would like to see a report-building capability out of the box. Teams have access to more than a dozen out-of-the-box reports with real-time, actionable insights into how their teams are performing sprint over sprint. Examples include Burndown, Sprint, Cumulative Flow, Epic , release, Velocity. However most will find these reports too simple and want some sophistication. Luckily Jira gives the ability to export results where you can work offline with them in a tool like Google Sheets, Microsoft Excel or other preferred data parsing tool. For additional spend you can purchase their reporting plugin.

I have used this application for approximately five years over several different roles: product management, development manager and delivery manager.

We deployed on premise. The amount of time to deploy was simple for a trained technician. Would highly recommend if installing on premise to shy away from any customizations in workflows; will make upgrades a pain in the future. If you considering using this, I would recommend the cloud option first.

No issues with stability.

Like any application installed on premise, you must be monitoring server and application logs to ensure the right level of performance. Scaling up is easy.

Most of their customer service comes from the community. Robust community of evangelists who respond rather quickly. As the application is highly stable, contacting customer service has been few and far between. Responses came thru within expected timeframes and were helpful, even if pointing to already published articles.

I would rate their technical support high.

I've also used Microsoft TFS (Team Foundation Server) for another development team that was .NET based. Used both Jira and TFS at the same time, though for different project teams.

Atlassian built their reputation on building applications that were easy to install and using a community model to improve. The setup of JIRA was straightforward, just as the documentation indicated. Us technology people have a hard time reading thru user guides, but these were easy and quick.

It was implemented by one of our developers.

Development teams, especially scrum teams, need some type of tool. For geographically dispersed teams, the ROI has a quick payback period, less than three months. Geography could be the dev team in one city and the product team in another.

Look to their cloud offering first; get using it quickly. Be wary of some of the add-ons, as there are cost components to them; if you need them, add them in.

As indicated above, we used Microsoft TFS. We tried to have a JavaScript team use TFS, but it didn't really fit into all the other ALM tools a JavaScript developer uses, so we quickly scrapped TFS and moved back to JIRA. The same was true for a .NET team; tried to have them use JIRA, but it was difficult to break the Microsoft eco-system. Not impossible in that case, just a culture shift you want to address carefully.

Review all your use cases for the tools to see if Atlassian matches up nicely to those you need; makes integration easier when all are from one provider. Be sure you understand what you are licensed for and what costs extra. For example, do you need portfolio management? Because, if you do, it's an extra cost.

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.

We use it for project and sprint planning and day-to-day bugs. We also use it for documentation, engineering, and enhancements tickets and for creating the feeds, which are like new features.

We are most probably using its most recent version.

It has been very helpful for feature enhancements, release planning, and sprint planning. We have been using it for creating bugs, enhancements, and all the tasks for a sprint. It helps us in looking at the quality aspects of the product along with the volume, burndown rate, and a lot of other things.

As an engineer, I like that it provides you blocks to put in comments, code, etc. It helps in giving better information. 

It is very configurable, and we can do whatever we want. Jira dashboards are also good, and we use them extensively. We also use the tracking mechanism extensively. 

Another thing that I like a lot about Jira is that in the dashboard, you can plug the modules that you want. You can enable certain sections. For example, you can show trend history, open Jira tickets, etc. Some of the managers have created a dashboard for each engineer. So, it allows you to do all sorts of things.

There should be a way to look for specific comments. When we have thousands of comments on a Jira ticket, there is no way to look at the comments of a specific type. In the comments, if there is a way to put a tag, it would be helpful. For example, when there are a lot of lengthy discussions happening on a particular ticket, there could be a conclusion tag or something like that to indicate a conclusion. It would help in sorting the comments based on a certain category, such as conclusion. I should be able to tag a comment with something like ##dev_conclusion##, and someone looking at the comments should be able to expand all the comments and search based on this tag. Some of our tickets can go up to 100 or 200 comments, and it currently takes a lot of effort for someone to go through them. It would be good if there was a way to preview the comments.

We want Jira to be the single tool that people use. We lose a lot of information when working at the ticket level in Jira. We don't want to have discussions in Confluence and design docs somewhere else. Currently, we make some decisions outside, and we make some decisions in Jira, and there is no combined way. There should be a way to integrate documentation into this, and I should be able to directly update the documents. They can also incorporate a review mechanism for documentation. I should be able to assign a sub-comment to someone to say, "I'll respond to it," or I should be able to tag someone to say, "Can you please look at it?" We should be able to use a workflow. There should be some built-in intelligence where when there is a design document in a Jira ticket, the signoff should be done by certain people. Currently, the documentation is completely separate. If there is a way to get the documentation into this whole workflow, it would be useful.

I have been using this solution for seven or eight years.

Its stability is really good. There is no doubt about it. Sometimes, we have performance issues. That's mainly because a lot of people have standup meetings between 8 am to 9 am, and everybody is using Jira at that time. The number of connections is at a peak in the morning hours. If I was a Jira development engineer, I would be thinking about a mechanism to ease that. Other than that, it is pretty stable and reliable.

We didn't have any issues with scalability. We create hundreds of tickets every day. We have between 1,000 to 2,000 users across all departments. It is being used extensively, and its usage might increase.

I didn't have any contact with their technical support. We have a Jira maintenance team. We have a Slack channel, and if there is an issue, we send it there, and the team looks at it.

I'm not a part of the team that takes care of its deployment. We are a big organization, and I am an end-user of it.

I would advise having proper planning because you don't want to clutter your Jira. Without proper planning, you would go on creating a lot of labels and other things, which would be of no use. You need to do release planning and then accommodate things into Jira. 

A lot of companies have a separate release planning team, and then there is a separate Jira infrastructure team. All these teams should think and work together. Otherwise, everybody would be creating their own tags, which won't make sense. I might create a tag for daily bugs, and someone might create another tag for the same thing, which would result in cluttering.

I would rate it an eight out of 10. Jira is an amazing tool. There is no doubt about it. We have no thoughts of using any other tool.

We use it for client ticketing. We have managed services agreements with clients, and we use it when they have issues. It consolidates well with their IT ticket system. We are the first pass on the ticket issues. If it seems that a ticket belongs to them, we can easily pass it onto their system and their people. So, it is a ticket system for our clients.

We are using its cloud version, and it is hosted in Atlassian's cloud system.

It is not problem resolution by email. It consolidates everything in one place. We have unique cases that don't fit a particular engineer, and we're able to assign those on an ad hoc basis. It is a good process. For example, if it is a network issue, it goes to engineer A, and if it is an Azure issue, it goes to engineer B. So, we are able to quickly route it to whoever needs to resolve the situation without overview intervention. I like that feature.

I like seeing which tickets are open and what our response rate is. They have a lot of good metrics in their system to see what's going on.

I interface it with Slack, and that's a positive. We get our notifications in Slack, so everybody doesn't have to be an agent in their world for us to see everything, which is a positive.

I would like our clients' IT group to be able to have oversight without setting up agents. We're managing tickets, and I'd like their IT group to see everything we're doing without having to set them up as agents. There should be a better way of managing their users. I've got such requests, but Jira is expensive, and it is difficult to pay an agent fee for somebody else to view these tickets. Currently, the only way in which I can do that is by setting a user up as an agent, and it becomes cost-prohibitive. They need to do a better job on ticket viewers.

If they had a customizable dashboard, it would be great. There should be one with a public URL so that I could share it amongst other viewers. This is the beauty of Smartsheets. With Smartsheets, I'm able to have a customized dashboard. I can bring everything into Gantt charts for budgeting, performance, etc. There is one point of accessibility for our clients so that they can see the program in a snapshot and get whatever assets they need. I love that about Smartsheets, and I wish Confluence had something similar.

I have been using this solution for about two years.

Its reliability has never been a problem.

It works for us. We're probably managing about 25 to 30 tickets at a time. It is not like we're pushing the system.

Across the board, we might have about 100 users. Its usage is currently moderate. I would love to focus on one tool, but I use Smartsheets a lot for project planning. I know Confluence and Jira provide reasonable project management, but they're short in some features. So, unfortunately, I have to pretty much go with two tools. Confluence and Jira together make one tool, and Smartsheets is one tool.

I would rate them a five out of five. They are pretty good.

We did Freshservice for a bit. We got a client on Freshservice, and it was good for the time. We didn't really utilize Freshservice at the time. We had set it up for a client, and while setting it up, we customized it. We did a lot of front-end GUI tasks to make it work with their world.

A client pushed us toward Confluence and Jira, and that's how we started with them. I knew about Jira, but I never really used it internally. We had a client with whom we got a managed service agreement, and they said, "Hey, we're using Jira," and that's how we got in.

I did the setup, and it was easy. In terms of the setup, everything was intuitive with Jira. The setup is not intuitive with Confluence. It is not at all intuitive while setting up SSO.

It only took a few hours. It was really quick.

It was set up in-house. We didn't use a consultant.

I don't have the number, but I sure wish Jira was less expensive. Its price point should be a little lower, and it should be more flexible for users who are just ticket viewers.

I would rate it a seven out of 10.