Jira Reviews

Jira is used by my clients across their organizations. They use it for everything related to IT solutions.

Jira has been a good, powerful tool for collaborating across large groups of people.

I use structures as well as the reporting features, personally. The JQL feature is powerful and easy to use. 

The Jira dashboards could be more useful. The dashboards have good widgets but the comparison of data over time or extraction of trends from the data is not easy. This is important for us from a governance perspective. Currently, we do this outside of Jira in Excel manually or using other reporting tools. 

Secondly, it would be useful if the graphs in Jira could be more customizable. If you draw a graph on Excel sheet, you are able to do a lot of customizations. Those kinds of customizations are not possible with the current implementation of Jira. 

When you create structures such as hierarchy, including epics and stories, if you change something, the fields are not correlated. This makes the tracking of changes a manual process.

I have been using Jira for more than a year, but I'm working on a project which has been using it for five years.

This is a stable solution but it can be quite slow. The speed at which Jira operates depends on how it is implemented. 

I would rate this solution a seven out of ten. 

For the past two years I have been administrating Jira for our enterprise organization, in which there are about 300 end users. Apart from an administrator, I'm also a hands-on Jira user now.

Our main uses for Jira include asset management, project management, Scrum project tracking, Kanban projects tracking, and cost tracking, as well as productivity measurement.

I feel the strongest feature of Jira is its workflow engine. It empowers us to automate our workflows within our organization. It's the one characteristic of Jira which I think can help any organization, be it in any domain. Also, its Scrum tracking capabilities are a great help, and these come out-of-the-box with Jira.

In the way it is deployed, I think Jira is too dependent on the third-party applications that are available in its marketplace. If we could get some of the basic functionalities which are offered by these third-party applications, that would be ideal because each time we need a new functionality, we have to purchase a new plugin as an add-on.

Then, on top of that, we have to keep paying the maintenance charge for those third-party applications along with Jira's maintenance cost. The functionalities of some of these plugins are pretty basic, which a user would expect out-of-the-box, instead of having to pay repeatedly for it.

Also, on the security front, if Jira could have a default, inbuilt encryption mechanism for all the data it stores, it would help organizations which handle sensitive data like healthcare or financial sectors.

I've been using Jira since 2020.

It's pretty stable and I haven't had major issues with it.

The current deployment is not that scalable. But when we go for an alternative deployment model such as the data center model, it's scalable.

We were on the server model for Jira, which is being discontinued in 2024. The data center model is pretty scalable. I think that shouldn't have any issues, but it is limited. I think the data center is limited to only two instances of Jira running in parallel. That should be sufficient, and I think with data center being the only on-premises deployment model, I think it's all right to have that.

Overall, I'd rate the support an eight out of ten. I don't see any glaring shortcomings but I do see certain things which could be addressed better in their support rather than just providing documentation and saying, "Please follow this documentation."

If they could provide on-call support for some of the issues and give us a path to follow, that would be sufficient. They don't need to sit down and resolve the issue for us. But if they could point us in the right direction, I would be satisfied with that.

That said, we do get that kind of support, sometimes. There is personalized support and we have a dedicated Jira expert who helps us with our tickets. But if we are stuck, and we are not able to find a solution for our problem, then we should have a second level of support, which could be an on-call support. That would help us better.

Positive

It was straightforward to set up Jira, even though it was on-prem. But to set up the supporting modules for Jira, like the web component (e.g. Apache) or the database component, requires a little bit more effort. The Jira application does provide support on that front, but the support is pretty limited, because they do not vouch for the other modules that aren't built in to Jira.

Apache is a web server that interacts with Jira and I think they should better support the deployment of Jira with web servers at any enterprise or cloud-level. That should be provided as part of the deployment journey itself. As it is currently, their support that helps us integrate Jira with Apache comes off a little short.

We have our own compliance team who applies security patches and those patches are available from Jira directly. The maintenance is pretty easy and we pay a maintenance fee for Jira software. If there is any issue with downtime or service is completely stopped and we are not able to handle it, Atlassian provides us their support. Maintenance is not much of an issue with Jira.

The license model which we were on was a perpetual license model, which is the server edition of Jira, but that is being discontinued by Atlassian, which I can understand from their standpoint (in order to better compete). The server model means that we buy the license and we do not pay anything for the licensing part year-on-year. It means it's a lifetime license, but we do pay 50% of the license fee for the maintenance with the server. That is the recurring cost for us.

When we go into the data center model, which is the only on-premises model that we have, and the cloud offering from Jira, Jira Cloud, then you can see that both of them are subscription-based models. Data center is a yearly license, and as for the cloud, you can either pay monthly or yearly, depending on your requirements.

But this kind of licensing structure is actually a little heavy on the organization when it comes to the budget, I would say. The licensing which we had was a perpetual license with a year-on-year maintenance charge which we had to pay, which was half of the licensing fee.

I would rate Jira an eight out of ten.

We use it for project organization, workflow, and team collaboration. 

I like it for team collaboration and task management. I also like its analytics and dashboards.

It is easy to use. Our junior people find it easy to create tasks in Jira. It is intuitive if you've been using similar products.

Their support should be improved. They should be faster and more knowledgeable.

In Jira Cloud, integration with Excel is missing. Previously, I could import our Excel files into Jira, and I could also download a big Jira report in the Excel format, but now, it needs to be manipulated after that, which is not good. It looks like they've done that on purpose, but I don't understand the reason for it.

I have been using this solution for 10 years. I have used it in different companies.

It seems stable to me. 

It is scalable. It can cover many projects and a lot of job delegations.

We are a company of 2,000 people, but we all don't use Jira. All IT departments use Jira and Confluence together. They are always paired together because documentation is important.

Their support, in general, could be better. In my recent experience, people who were allocated were slow, and they didn't have the knowledge. They ask you to read the help and documentation about an issue and do self-service.

We also have Teams because it is given to us, but we don't use it because it doesn't have that richness, and it lacks the features that people need. It's very light for task management.

For me, it is straightforward.

We have a corporate license, and it is probably based on the number of people.

I would recommend this solution. It gives you the best if you investigate a little bit and maximize your use by using all the features.

I would rate it an eight out of 10 because of the support.

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 primarily use the solution as an ALM, an application lifecycle management tool. 

I like the entire workflow customization, which we could set up for our usage.

There are some really great in-built reports.

The solution is stable and reliable.

The scalability is great.

In terms of the initial setup, the solution is easy to implement. 

We've had zero issues with the product. It's been great.

Even though I like the reporting part, we have some issues. I don't know whether there is a Jira problem or a test risk problem, however, sometimes, we face issues on fetching the reports. This is when in-between integration comes into the picture. There could be easier integration. It used to be easier in 2016.

We've been using the solution for more than three years now. It's been a while. 

The product is reliable in terms of performance. It's stable. There are no bugs or glitches. It doesn't crash or freeze.

The solution can scale well. If a company needs to expand it can do so. It's not a problem.

We have 250 or more users using the solution. We might go up to 300. It's not likely we would pass 400 users. We might increase the usage a little bit.

We've never had issues with Jira and therefore have never reached out to technical support. I can't speak to how helpful or responsive they would be.

We used to use TFS.

The product is quite straightforward, especially since it is on the cloud. It makes it very easy to set everything up.

We have three people able to deploy and maintain the solution.

We did not use an integrator or consultant for the deployment of Jira. We handled the process ourselves. 

We pay for a yearly license. 

We primarily use the solution ourselves, as customers. 

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

I would recommend the solution to others. It would be ideal if it offered better tool integration, however, other than that, we've never had issues. 

I use Jira for the development of different versions of software, upgrading it from one version to another, and developing and collecting specs for the new versions.

I like that Jira keeps track of time and is good for how it organizes.

Jira has a lack of graphical interface that maps the different cases to the space or in the project. For example, if you have a project that has a big diagram of component systems, people, and use cases, each of those Jira cases usually can be mapped to a specific location. This can be enhanced by a curve set of Jira, or a curve set of screens, where you can map on which pieces of the project you were working on at that particular screen. When working on the left side of the diagram, or the right side of the diagram, you should be able to request all those Jira that are related to that part of the project.

If a system has ten different steps of data flow and the components are clear. You should be able to map those Jira cases to different steps in the process. This would show you how a field or component is related to a location in the diagram. The diagram then would show all the cases waiting to be done or already done.

Jira works too slow, especially when you are in a big organization with thousands of users. It is also too slow when integrating with other components like SVN or with a built system. I would like to see everything that Jira does is under have a second response time.

I have been using Jira for about one year.

Jira is a stable solution, other than planned downtime, it has no downtime.

Jira is integrated with other components in our system, like the build and release systems. 

We use internal technical support.

I would recommend that an organization implementing Jira ensure that someone gets training both at the developer level and the project manager level. The developer needs to know what needs to be done, what are the components and why are they there. The project manager should join the training and determine if there is a relation between multiple projects to see that they are really integrated well into other components of continuous integration and continuous delivery.

Because of the slowness, I would rate Jira an eight 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.