Atlassian Confluence Reviews

I'm working on a project in a Standards organization that's using Atlassian Confluence as a tool for collaboration.

The organization integrates Atlassian Confluence with another Atlassian product called Jira for the concurrent development of documentation for the project. Jira is used to raise issues you implement and trace back to Atlassian Confluence for collaborative development.

My organization primarily uses Atlassian Confluence for the collaborative development of projects. The organization has plenty of projects in development, and there's a space in Atlassian Confluence for sharing documentation, raising issues, producing documentation directly on the tool, and exporting documents using some filters my organization developed because the final document is in Word format.

What's most valuable to me in Atlassian Confluence is that it allows the concurrent development of documentation. I also like how you can add comments offline and implement changes directly on the document. Atlassian Confluence is a very nice platform for my purposes. It's a good tool.

An area for improvement in Atlassian Confluence is encouraging more vital interaction among the project members or users involved. I was researching a tool, but I forgot the exact name of the tool, and that tool could be used for better interactions offline among users on a specific topic, development, or discussion. I want that feature to be present in Atlassian Confluence. If there's a possibility to integrate Atlassian Confluence, Jira, and that other tool, that will make Atlassian Confluence better.

My team had problems accessing Atlassian Confluence a couple of times, but I wonder if that was due to a network, server, or tool issue. I have to say that I've been working with Atlassian Confluence for years, and it has been improving its functionalities, so I feel that as a tool, it's working very well, but some features could still be improved.

For example, the search engine should allow you to define some keywords you could use when searching, though I wonder if it's staff-related or setup-related, or lacking in the search engine function itself.

I also want artificial intelligence added to Atlassian Confluence where you're working on a specific issue or argument, and Atlassian Confluence, through its AI, can propose some improvements based on what has been done on the same topic by different teams or different projects within the same infrastructure, similar to an internal reference, which can be helpful. Through AI, it would also be great if Atlassian Confluence could advise you on what has been done outside your specific project, and maybe there's the possibility of an installation where you have several projects installed and working together.

Another feature that would be good to have in the next release of Atlassian Confluence is the tool recognizing a keyword or two that's fully developed in project B, which you can use in project A, for example.

I've been using Atlassian Confluence for many years, though I don't remember exactly when I started. I've been using Jira far longer, even in my previous organization, then I moved to my current organization, which uses Atlassian Confluence integrated with Jira.

Atlassian Confluence is a stable tool.

The initial setup for Atlassian Confluence isn't easy. It would be best if you had some time to understand how to approach the tool entirely, but it doesn't take up so much time. Atlassian Confluence has many features, which is why it's normal if it's a little bit complex, though Jira is even more complex.

Atlassian Confluence is similar to Jira because it takes more than five minutes to create dashboards and tickets, for example. It also takes time to involve the team and understand Atlassian Confluence and its functionalities. Though the tool is flexible enough to start using it without complete knowledge, the more you use it and get more involved with it, the better you can understand Atlassian Confluence and use all features it provides better.

I'm not aware of how long it took for the tool to be implemented because it was handled by a different team, though I believe the team in charge customized Atlassian Confluence with the help of some experts or third parties.

An in-house team implemented Atlassian Confluence with the help of third-party experts.

To my knowledge, Atlassian Confluence had a pricing approach which is a commercial open-source solution, so that if you are a company, you had to pay an amount. This fee was not huge compared to other traditional solutions, and it was free for personal use or if you were an individual. I'm unsure if Atlassian is implementing the same pricing approach for Atlassian Confluence nowadays.

I evaluated Microsoft Teams in my previous organization, but I found Atlassian Confluence far more flexible and useful than Microsoft Teams. There is no space for comparing Microsoft Teams and Atlassian Confluence because Atlassian Confluence is undoubtedly more effective and efficient, in my opinion.

I remember that I'm using the latest version of Atlassian Confluence.

To my knowledge, maintenance of Atlassian Confluence is handled internally, and the organization also pays a team from Atlassian to do maintenance.

Thousands of people use Atlassian Confluence, but I cannot give the exact number because my organization has thirty to forty projects developed concurrently, with at least ten to twelve people periodically working on it, then some active and not-so-active people using Atlassian Confluence. Thousands of people use Atlassian Confluence, particularly for the write mode, document production, etc.

My advice to people who want to implement the tool is not to renounce it if they find difficulties initially because you can start using it from scratch with the basic functionalities. Then, when you discover other functionalities within Atlassian Confluence that can be useful, you can explore those at best.

I'm still determining exactly how much customization my organization has done in the tool and if that's relevant. I'm uncertain if it's different if your tool has the standard features versus the highly customized version of Atlassian Confluence. 

Still, it's undoubtedly a good tool for collaboration, including remote collaboration. I can work with people in China and the States without any problem, and you can quickly identify any changes you or other users make. This is precisely why Atlassian Confluence is recommended for remote collaboration.

My rating for Atlassian Confluence is eight out of ten.

My organization is a user of Atlassian Confluence.

Confluence is an important tool for collaboration.

We can implement macros in documents. It is useful for document development. We can collaborate with others. The user management and role-based access management depend on Jira. All Atlassian products rely on Jira on-premise. We can also delete the number of users who can access our documents. Document collaboration is the most valuable aspect of the solution.

Indentation and other basic word processing styles must be improved. However, it is limited to editing HTML.

The tool is stable.

The tool can be deployed on-premise or in the cloud. The setup is straightforward. We have to follow several steps for Linux, but the setup for Windows is quite basic.

I did the deployment myself.

I strongly recommend the product. There is no need for scalability. The product’s collaboration features are very strong. Overall, I rate the product a nine out of ten.

We used Atlassian Confluence for product development, help desk, and product documentation. Our team uses it for setting up teams, workflow management, product documentation, HR documentation, marketing, and I even used it with my son for his school work.

We use Atlassian Confluence to create a training program for software and agile methodologies, including agile business processes. Additionally, we use it extensively for various purposes, ranging from team meetings and marketing plans to drafting and planning service offerings along with all their components.

The most beneficial aspect is real-time collaboration, allowing multiple users to work on the same documents simultaneously. Additionally, Confluence offers seamless integration with other systems and the web, enabling the consolidation of information from various sources onto a single page. These capabilities can prove highly workable when integrated with Slack, Google Drive, and Microsoft 365 tools. Additionally, Jira is used giving no integration issues.

Confluence could incorporate stronger records management and automation features. The current management structure is too open, which becomes an issue.

I have been using Atlassian Confluence for 3 years.

We have connectivity issues sometimes. Else, it's pretty solid.

I rate the solution's stability a nine out of ten.

We have more than 15,000 users on it. There were no problems with the solution's speed.

We had in-house experts. Customer service is responsive. Additionally, they have a strong online community of experts. You can simply post your question on their community homepage, and someone will promptly respond with valuable ideas.

The initial setup is straightforward, and takes less than five minutes to register and create your first site.

You can use it risk-free for up to ten users.

Confluence offers monthly subscriptions, but if you go through a value-added reseller, you can opt for annual payments. Additionally, if you add applications from their App Store, you pay for all the total users of that license instead of just those who need it.

There are no technical guys needed. You can do it as an individual, in house. as a team. Confluence is very user-friendly, easy to understand, and has many templates. It is easy and fast to use and has many features that I highly recommend.

There are so many valuable features in Atlassian Confluence. Firstly, it enables real-time collaboration, allowing multiple users to work on a single document with complete version control, making tracking changes and identifying contributors easy. Secondly, it offers the ability to index various related documents or references into a single page without moving or copying the original documents. This feature is incredibly convenient. Additionally, the web version of Confluence provides a user-friendly markup and interface, allowing for the easy creation of graphs and marketing materials. It also allows for rough layout designs directly on the screen, eliminating the need for complex software like Publisher or Adobe.

Overall, I rate the solution a ten out of ten.

The company needed a tool that project managers put their plans, documentation, and everything related to project management into, including milestones that are not available on Jira. They have to use both this and Jira in order to give a full report to management.

When you're working with Agile, you can't go through from one sprint to another without having a good burndown chart. 

I love the reports and the Confluence board. 

The search functionality is great. 

For me, the initial setup is easy. 

The solution is scalable.

It's a stable product. 

I have a problem with the burndown chart, for example, if I put a time only on the estimation block, it'll not show on the burndown chart. It has to be the points.

I'd like to see better reporting.

The UX is a little bit all over the place. From my experience, people really find it very hard to cope with Jira when they start using that.

The setup could be streamlined further. 

I've used the solution for about 12 years. 

The stability is great. There are no bugs or glitches. 

The product scales well. 

We started at 100 users and have since scaled to 300 users. We will continue to increase usage. 

We previously used a local tool. We needed something better for handling project management. 

The implementation process is easy for me. People sometimes find it easy and yet there is room for improvement in the process. 

We advised a third party on how our workflows needed to be implemented and they implemented them on the cloud. Then they moved the project to our cloud and set it as a base for everything there. It was actually really smooth. It didn't take too much time.

The full implementation strategy took two months. 

There was a little bit of complication from the bank side. We have a lot of security, unblocked IPS, et cetera. The two months weren't the full implementation time. We had areas that were blocked due to our security control. A couple of times we remained blocked for one week. I want to say the ideal time for the implementation was one month and a week. For us, of course, it took longer. 

We had five people in total ding the deployment. There were three from our side and two from the third party. 

I'd rate the entire process a three out of five in terms of the ease of implementation. 

We have a contract for handling maintenance. The vendor partners are handling it. 

A third-party handled the implementation process. 

I can't speak to the exact cost of the solution. 

We are users and work directly with a vendor partner. 

We are using the latest version of the solution. 

I'd rate the solution nine out of ten. I love Confluence. I'd recommend it to other users. People should try it out. It would be very helpful. 

We primarily use the solution for software engineering.

We document all of our software development workflows and the test cases around each software feature, which has been quite helpful for our organization.

The integration capabilities are very useful.

The initial setup is straightforward. 

It is stable and reliable.

I find the product to be scalable.

The cost of the solution is too high.

I've been using the solution for ten years. 

The solution is stable. There aren't bugs or glitches. It doesn't crash or freeze. It is reliable. 

It is scalable and expands well. 

We have 42 people using the solution. We do have plans to increase usage. 

Technical support has been helpful and responsive. 

Positive

We did not previously use a different solution. 

The product is easy to set up. It's not a complex process. 

Overall, the product requires zero maintenance. 

We have seen an ROI while using the solution. 

I find the solution to be expensive. We pay $350 a month to use the solution. 

I did not evaluate any other solution before choosing this product. 

This is a SaaS solution. There is no particular version of the product. 

I'd advise potential new users that they cannot implement Confluence without Jira.

I'd rate the solution ten out of ten. I've been very happy with its capabilities. 

I manage the solution in my organization.

I have used the solution both on-premises and on cloud. Using the solution on-premises is easier than using the cloud version. The cloud version is a different product. The on-premises version has more features.

There were 1,500 people using Confluence at my previous company.

The trial stages, the ability to connect it to Jira, and the ability to export in PDF are all good capabilities.

I would like Confluence to include the ability to draw flowcharts and diagrams.
There's a small tool that you can use to draw, but it was very cumbersome. When you have to import or paste the pictures, you have to get that information into the table columns. When you're merging or unmerging, the table can break. Copy and paste on Excel doesn't work easily because Excel is the primary tool that most people use.

Excel is very easy to use. Confluence has issues with usability. It's slightly cumbersome. If they made it more usable with Excel and drawings, it would be a much more powerful tool.

I worked with Confluence for three years.

I would rate the stability as eight out of ten. We didn't have many issues with stability.

The scalability is fine on-premises. We had some issues with the scalability on the cloud.

We had an internal IT team for support.

We mainly use SharePoint to store documents. We use Confluence as a document creator and storage tool.

Setup is pretty simple. We did the basic setup. When we created a project, we could give access to people and start creating a trial page, parent page, etc.

I would rate Confluence as seven out of ten. 

My advice is go for more features so that the templates can be used. The base version of cloud isn't that usable. There are huge differences between the two.

We mainly use Confluence for our internal documentation work and to plan new features, design documents, and knowledge transfer documents. Most of the documentation work is done using Confluence. 

We have a separate Confluence space for our team, with public articles about our projects and how to set up our repositories, available for anyone to access. 

Additionally, we maintain private content within the team's Confluence space.

Confluence has significantly improved the productivity of our team. Previously, finding information required asking someone or searching through improperly organized resources. Now, all onboarding documents, knowledge transfer documents, and documents regarding features are within our Confluence space, making it easy to find information as needed.

Confluence is very easy to use and feature-packed. It allows us to design well-organized documents and offers valuable add-ons. Its integration capabilities enable direct linking of pull requests and certain issues across spaces, facilitating easy navigation and enhanced collaborative work.

The discoverability of documents could be improved. In scenarios where documents are managed by another department or we are looking for specific documents, the process could be enhanced for easier discovery.

We have been working with Confluence for about a year.

Confluence is stable, and we haven't experienced any disruptions with their service.

We have not escalated any questions to technical support.

Positive

Before Confluence, we predominantly used SharePoint and Microsoft products. We decided to switch to Confluence as we were already using Jira and Bitbucket, making the transition to Confluence seamless with other Atlassian products.

Properly use the features available in Confluence, such as site spaces and other functionalities.

I'd rate the solution nine out of ten.

I use it for documentation, project reports, and creating a knowledge base. 

It's used for building a knowledge base and providing status updates on tasks.

I don't see many features in the version we use. We do find the ability to build workflow diagrams helpful, but that might be through external modules/plugins.

The diagram tool is a positive addition.

However, the only integration we use is with Jira.

There is room for improvement in maybe the tree structure for articles. If you have a lot of articles, it becomes difficult to navigate. 

Having the ability to control which articles appear in the main tree structure and only linking or hyperlinking to others within specific articles could be an improvement.

I have been using this solution for ten years. 

I would rate the stability a ten out of ten. 

It seems highly scalable. There are 500 end users using this solution. 

We have IT, service desk agents, and regular users across different functions. Everyone is using it. For example, if someone needs to look up documentation or assistance with workflows, they would use Confluence.

It's used alongside Jira. Each team would likely have a Jira code for that purpose.

I've used ClickUp. It's a good tool, especially compared to Jira. Confluence still has room to improve in comparison. We also used a legacy tool called CBQ.

ClickUp is becoming a real competitor to Jira and Confluence because it's an all-in-one tool. You don't need separate licenses for project management and knowledge bases. ClickUp has a more seamless experience.  

I've heard of Asana, but I personally prefer ClickUp. If I were starting a company from scratch, I would consider ClickUp over Jira, Confluence, Trello, etc. It's really user-friendly.

I would recommend using this solution. It's not necessarily better than tools like Asana, but it gets the job done.

Jira and Confluence have strong market presence, and migrating existing systems can be a challenge. 

For new projects, I would certainly recommend considering other options. For established teams, switching tools might not be practical. But if you're starting fresh, explore alternatives and don't just default to Jira and Confluence.

Overall, I would rate the solution a ten out of ten.