Jira Reviews

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.

I am using Jira for some programming-driven planning and PI planning system, but I have just started using it for that. I am primarily using it for some projects.

I'm serving as an enterprise agile coach, so I work with a team to help them use Jira. I'm not really sure what the exact data subjects are, but I mostly look at what the team is doing and if they have updated, then they let me know. I'm not using Jira for my own instances, but for my team's. I'm helping the scrum masters and the product owners.

The solution is deployed on cloud.

In terms of scrum teams, I find that usually, the product backlog depends on charts and especially reports like Sprint Reports. I find the reports to be very useful. With regard to SAFe Agile, I was looking at having a proper program board. So far, I have tried using the portfolio feature. Something that I have been looking to understand or learn more about is how to integrate Scaled Agile and their work types into the Jira.

I'm still exploring the solution. I think the knowledge is a challenge because most people are used to Jira for teams, but not Scaled Agile. I think that is an issue with awareness. We are looking for some YouTube videos and help pages on finding that. Maybe there are features, but sometimes we aren't aware of them. We are still in the exploration stage.

I would love to see transparency in terms of how the program is displayed when you are working in multiple teams, especially how the dependencies could be tracked. The most important thing at the moment is that it is easy to do.

Something I would like to see improved is the traceability feature. When you have a user story, if you can see all the test cases, it would be an improvement if you could see any design documents or any change management. If you can see the traceability nicely, that is also something that we are looking for. Today we can link and do things like that, but sometimes the solution has a bit of a challenge with attaching test cases, so I think we have to use some plugin. Traceability with the test cases could be improved.

I have worked with this solution for five years.

The solution is stable.

I'm not able to comment on the scalability because I work with different types of teams. Some teams are really big, and they haven't said that they've faced any challenges. I haven't specifically asked, so I'm not very able to comment on that because I don't know for sure.

I'm working with a couple of teams made up of 20-30 users or 100-150 users, and maybe more for certain accounts.

I haven't had a lot of experience with technical support, but for the questions that I have raised, I received a pretty quick response, so I'm happy with that.

Setup wasn't that big of a challenge.

Implementation was done by Jira administrators, which was good.

The license is yearly. It is a large, long-running program.

Some of my teams have been using Version 1 and Rally. Because of that, I have been exposed to those tools for some extent.

My experience is much more with Jira. That's why I tend to go for Jira, but we haven't used many other solutions. Based on teams and what the people are saying, they find Jira to be more user-friendly. For Scaled Agile, I have also heard that they have found certain features in Rally more useful. But I don't know, I haven't used Rally to that extent.

I would rate this solution 7 out of 10.

I'm from a QA background and we used to do automation. It was far easier to link JIRA with our QA automation frameworks because JIRA has a lot of public APIs that we could use. Also, the burndown charts and the ability to manage different frameworks of the adjoint model are helpful. We could use scrum in one project or Kanban. So it was easy to manage the transition from one framework to another. Those are the things I found useful, but I haven't seen the case of TFS yet.

JIRA could simplify the query mechanism. Running a query for tasks, stories, and so on is far easier in TFS. The algorithm is easier. In JIRA, it's a bit complex in terms of what advanced search queries we use. Sharing them is also a problem. Because TFS is on the cloud, we can easily save that query and share it with our team members. So that is one area where JIRA has some room for improvement.

JIRA is pretty much stable.

JIRA is far more scalable in terms of using different frameworks, burndown charts, dashboards, etc. The size of your company doesn't matter. JIRA has the capability to work for smaller organizations and larger ones as well.

JIRA's technical support is absolutely fantabulous. I had used it in the past when I was working at my previous organization. And when we wanted to link it with a framework, they helped us out with the API we were looking for. There were certain areas where we were looking for a specific API. And also they have a lot of options in terms of packages that you can choose according to your company's needs. They had custom packages available. You do not have to buy a larger package. They have smaller packages for smaller organizations. So that's something exciting.

JIRA is fairly easy to set up. That is not a problem.

JIRA's pricing is very economical. I would say that JIRA is a great deal more economical than Microsoft. So pricing-wise, JIRA is also good.

I would rate JIRA nine out of 10. From a technical background, it depends on what you would like to use — which stack you want to go for. In other words, it depends upon the kind of infrastructure you have right now. For example, say you are developing software on Microsoft's .Net framework, then you are obviously already using Visual Studio and Microsoft Stack. In that case, it's a lot easier to integrate with TFS. But if you are using open-source solutions, like a Java platform, you can go for JIRA. So it totally depends upon the technical capability, or technical infrastructure one has.

I personally use Jira for project management and agile software development. I'm an information technology program manager and we are customers of Jira. 

We're a software development company and Jira is an essential element of our daily work. We wouldn't be able to function without it. 

Jira is a very comprehensive and flexible product. It's easy to set up, easy to learn, and is very user-friendly. If you're using the cloud version from Atlassian, there are no issues with maintenance or performance. I especially like the advanced planning features in the premium version and there are plenty of apps available if any functionality is missing.

The only complaint I have about Jira is that there is no field-level permission for the issues in the Jira cloud version. You can get an app for the server version, but the cloud version doesn't allow that type of functionality. For example, I write a user story that goes to the customer for approval. Once approved, I would want to be able to lock the description for that user story so it can't be changed, but I'm unable to do that. I can lock the whole story but not the description alone. It creates a problem because when I need to add the story to a sprint, I need to change the sprint number field. It can't be done because the whole issue is locked or lacks the properties to be edited.  

The other thing missing is a straight connection to the pipelines and the source control. I think it should be integrated with GitHub and other products that developers use. It's the lack of integration that's the main reason we are considering moving to Azure DevOps.

I've been using this solution for several years. 

I haven't had a single issue with Jira.

Jira is easily scalable to any level you want. Our company has 60 to 70 users working on multiple projects and we have a second installation specifically for one of our customers which has around 25 users. The users in our company have traditional roles; developers, business analysts, QA engineers, project managers and customers. We're using it constantly. 

Jira has a two-tier pricing system; a basic level and a premium level, which I think could be broken down a little more, but the pricing and billing are reasonable. You can add or remove users and they bill you dynamically month to month based on the number of users. It would be nice to have tiered pricing based on user numbers because, for large companies with hundreds of users, it's going to become expensive really quickly. It's acceptable for us and we have what we need.

We are considering switching to DevOps and are currently carrying out an evaluation. The main reason is that our offshore team uses DevOps for everything. We started with Jira so they had to use it for us, but we're hearing that DevOps is better integrated with source control and releases, so it's something we're considering now. 

I've had a look at the pricing of DevOps and it's really strange. Basic pricing is $6 per user per month or if you want to include test plans it jumps to $52 per user per month, which is an astronomical jump. I'm not sure whether it's $52 for every single user on the system. Jira charges $7 per user, per month for the basic version or $14 per user, per month for the premium one.

The product is very useful. As a program manager, I recommend it wholeheartedly. The cloud version is easy to set up, and there's no maintenance required. I haven't incurred any issues with performance or updates being applied incorrectly or any bugs. 

I rate the solution nine out of 10. 

I am generally managing development teams in a position of delivery lead. I have also been involved in several positions where I acted as a Jira administrator, setting up delivery processes and production support.

I appreciate the openness of Jira. It is based on a concept that is well understandable and works in a logical way, allowing customization of any process that needs to be applied. Jira dashboards and support for JQL queries allow navigation through any data that customers have put in. It has open standards for integrating Jira into other tools.

The only issue I see is the licensing model of Atlassian for Jira. Many customers face issues with this model, often resulting in solving the issues in a nonstandard way, which may double the cost of the product. This can block many customers from utilizing Jira Service Desk, as it doubles the cost compared to the regular software management Jira.

I have been working with Jira for twelve years.

It is not a problem at all. The solution is very stable.

Jira has a good community around the software. They have a good forum where you can find most of the issues that others have already experienced. However, there are specific cases where you need to contact Atlassian support directly, and the responses are not that great.

Positive

The price is average, and it's definitely worth being paid because it is an industry standard in software delivery these days. However, there are specific use cases where the price isn't acceptable for clients.

I rate the overall solution ten. I am hesitant to use anything else for project management. There is some AI integration available on the cloud instance of Jira, which helps compiling JQL queries, particularly useful for business people who do not know the syntax.

Jira is used primarily for ticketing, escalations, and tracking work in progress. It is also integrated with other tools within the company. Additionally, we open Jira to customers for ticketing purposes.

Jira is very useful and allows me to know who is in charge, who the owner is, and monitor and track work in progress.

Jira is quite easy to use and very simple from my point of view. It is very useful and direct and allows monitoring and tracking of work in progress. 

It integrates well with other tools in the company and is opened to the customer for ticketing. It is stable with no scalability issues experienced.

The user interface could be improved from a user experience standpoint. It needs to be more visually appealing and customizable to display key data effectively. 

There's room for improvement in the search tool, as it can be challenging to locate tickets directly.

I am quite new to the company and joined one year ago, however, Jira has been used for several years.

It's stable. I have never experienced any trouble concerning scalability or heard from customers about issues related to performance or usability.

Jira is stable, and I have not experienced any issues with scalability. Customers have not reported any problems related to this.

We use Teams officially at the company level, while the engineering team uses Slack.

We use Microsoft Copilot alongside Microsoft Office, integrating different AI engines according to customer choices.

The user interface needs improvement in terms of visual appeal and customization. The search feature could also be enhanced for better efficiency. Rating the overall solution would be nine out of ten.

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. 

Similar to the whole solution stack, we use Jira for security and for operational data storage. We also use it for custom-made API structures, moving data from the cloud to legacy on-prem infrastructures so we can use it to develop failing interfaces. We're customers of Jira and we license the solution. Our company has a form of strategic alliance where we buy the product, pay the fees and use the solution. I'm a senior technical project manager.

The benefit of Jira to our company is that the product is extensible. We can integrate other tools and different interfaces into it. You can look at what's being done, how it's being done and know how to improve it. That includes things like optimizing performance or scanning the structures we build for security vulnerabilities. Extensibility is the most effective way we can create products and services for our clients.

The value of this product is that it offers a common language set so we can bring people into projects and get them up and running almost immediately. We know the language. It's the training and education content that's key and there's enough out there, whether it's paid training or free training, that gets people up to speed pretty quickly. Following on from that is optimizing the training for a given initiative or project. 

Although this is a somewhat old-school approach, we'd like to see some common building block approaches to certain things. We do a lot of coding and swapping things because there's a lot of common non-functional capabilities we have to share based on our own company policies. In that sense, it would be helpful to have some sort of modular building blocks that are in some of these up-and-coming extensible capabilities, like how you interface the next level of security scanning code or cloud to cloud capabilities, anything like that would be an improvement. These are expensive things to build and give out for free. At least knowing what's in the headlights for the products together with some good specific industry demos would help, whether related to the financial sector, healthcare sector, whatever. There isn't a lot of that; as things stand, they're generally offering demos with people talking about how you could have a secure way of developing a code for a HIPAA mixed standards or whatever. More documentation on how to precisely use the solution, particularly in a given industry sector, would be helpful.

We use a lot of third-party monitoring and although the extensibility is there, a monitoring tool suite as you get in production would be helpful. 

I've been using this solution for 10 years. 

This is a good product, it's served us well. I don't really have a lot of issues with it so I rate the solution eight out of 10.