Jira Reviews

We used it in my previous organization for project management, product management, and release management. In my current organization, where I started working a week ago, we are using Jira strictly for help-desk tickets. We are using DevOps for our release management. So, we've got DevOps, Jira, and some homegrown stuff, and I'm trying to figure out what's going to work best for this new organization.

I've used Jira and Confluence previously, and this is my first time using the help-desk ticketing system. It is cool and not a whole lot different than SolarWinds or Zendesk, except the appearance of it is more Jira.

We were using Microsoft OneNote for systems engineering and network engineering. It was being used for our documentation, environments, and services, and it was a nightmare. We transitioned everybody and copied everything into Confluence. We were then able to tag specific tickets to the notes, and there were links between what work was recently done and the most updated notes in Confluence.

The roadmap feature and the ability to integrate with Power BI are probably the most valuable features in it. It is a great solution. I absolutely love it. It is a tool that was designed for project management, and it has been awesome to work with it so far. I also love Confluence.

They can maybe dumb down the directions for building the automation a little bit because to be able to build out the automation, I had to play around with it and learn what all the fields meant and what they were referencing. I don't have an IT background originally. My background is in biology, and I got into project management by chance. I am good at it, but I haven't really worked with coding languages. In terms of writing automation, it is easier for devs because they intuitively know what they're being asked, but as a PM who originally didn't have IT experience, it was a little bit daunting at first.

It could also have an extra hierarchy to be able to allow tasks under stories. It could be the way it is set up at our organization, but currently, under stories, you can have sub-tasks, but you can't create a task. Being able to customize your hierarchy a little bit more would be beneficial because sometimes, the devs would say, "Well, here's a story, and now we need sub-tasks," but as we were building out the sub-tasks, sometimes we had to go a step lower to dig in a little bit more, and we couldn't do that.

I have been using this solution for two years.

It has never gone down for me. It was always reliable, even from the mobile app.

It was fine. It seemed to integrate with all of our systems with ease. At my previous organization, there were probably 500 or 600 people using Jira. There were many different roles including product management, project management, VPs of IT and Ops, IT data services, developers, network engineers, systems engineers, and CBAs. It was a full scale of IT professionals.

At my current organization, where I started working a week ago, we are using Jira, but there are only a handful of people who are actually using it. It is strictly for help-desk tickets. I am trying to implement it and roll it out to the organization on a much larger scale, and I'm going to have to talk to them about pricing and other things. In this new organization, there are probably about 500 or 600 employees in total. Assuming I get the buy-in from everyone, which I don't think would be a problem, I would probably need at least a hundred licenses for users and then expand from there as needed.

I haven't interacted with their technical support, but I bet they would have been awesome.

I have used Smartsheet, MS Project, and Trello. Jira is more software-development-specific and a much easier tool to use.

In my previous organization, I believe its initial setup was complex. I was not at the administrative user level. I was given admin privileges for certain projects but not for the whole Jira. This is the first time I actually have admin privileges over all of Jira, and it was set up for me.

It probably took a few days. It would have also involved a lot of conversations and other stuff.

It would have been in-house. In terms of maintenance, it didn't seem to need maintenance from our side.

I would advise going with the entire Atlassian suite. Don't just use one aspect of Jira, unless you have a very specific need for using bits and pieces. Jira is better when Confluence and everything can be integrated, and you have source code management and all of that from the same software or platform.

I would rate Jira a ten out of ten. I love Jira. It has the ability to just do everything, and it is a one-stop shop for all of your IT software development needs.

ira is a very complete tool in the tech industry, helping in deploying software. Jira is a very strong tool for a corporation with a team to track and monitor all the tasks that have been defined within a project. It helps teams work and collaborate faster to improve performance. 

I think one of the most powerful features in Jira is the customization of fields and workflow. Jira helps in projects consisting of a workflow by providing templates with the return workflow, we can even modify the workflow and the fields. 

I think the GIS can seem too complex for some people because there are a lot of structures in the software itself. Users need to understand how Jira works, how to define Apex, how to use the storage and many other things. Each template provided by Jira has a different functionality, so users need to explore further about the functions of Jira, especially for the setting and configuration factors. There might be users out there who are unaware of the features in Jira. Otherwise, users will be confused about how to use this tool as it's very complex. 

The product is stable, and in terms of performance, it's really fast. The support team from Jira always informs users in advance, for example, if there is any scheduled maintenance or anything related to the performance tab. I believe Jira also creates maintenance schedules by considering the non-productive hours for each country. Hub fixes and new feature addition time are also planned by Jira for users. 

Jira has a great Knowledge Center, for any kind of questions about how to use the product or other FAQs. Users can check the Knowledge Center before raising a ticket to Jira support. But for some cases, if someone creates a ticket, Jira support is very proactive and follows up on every ticket to provide a solution. Thus, support from Jira is great. I would rate customer support a nine out of ten. 

Positive

Previously before using Jira, we were using Google Workspace because it also has collaborative features. But I think it was missing a lot of features compared to Jira. Jira is specifically created for product or software development, so it's suitable for our business product. Jira has also gone through a lot of improvements over the years since we are using it. 

Not much time is needed to install or configure this tool. You just need to register and subscribe before the tool is ready to use.  

I would rate this product an eight out of ten. 

We had a regulatory requirement through our legislature to collect motor or voter information for residents of California. So, if you basically wanted to sign up to vote, you could do so at a department of motor vehicles. The Jira instance was used for what we call the new motor voter, which is the online premise to register to vote when you conducted a DMV transaction, such as vehicle registration, driver's license, renewal, etc.

We had its latest version. It is online. In the cloud, we set up an account for the department, and then add users as needed. It is a government cloud.

It documented our business requirements.

It was easy to use. The consultants that we had on board were familiar with it. So, obviously, having a community that had used it before or was familiar with it was a positive thing.

If I'm comparing it to ALM Octane, the documentation is not as robust as ALM Octane's documentation. So, they can improve on the documentation side.

Another enhancement could be in the area of interfacing with other products or connectivity. It could have better integration with other tools.

I have been using it since 2017. It has been about five years.

Its stability is good. There are no issues with the performance.

Its scalability is fine. At the peak, we had about 15 users, and towards the end, we had five users.

Our usage was not extensive. We used it only for one project, which was the motor voter project. We don't have any plans to increase the usage. We have stopped paying the subscription fee from the last month because we migrated everything over to ALM Octane for our business requirements.

We didn't need to call them at all.

We were using IBM DOORS Next Generation for business requirements. It was on-premises, and we weren't able to make it available through a URL to the external consultant or workforce. That's why we basically went with Jira. IBM DOORS Next Generation wasn't flexible enough to accommodate all of our remote workforce.

It was straightforward and easy. You basically create an account for your department, and then you onboard your users. There is a subscription fee per user for each month through Confluence. 

It took us a week to get it up and running. It involved reading, studying it, figuring it out, and then doing it. It was pretty simple to set up data and add users. So, we onboarded it within a week.

The challenge for us while setting it up was that we had to put it on a credit card, which is not a good thing for the government. Typically, the government likes to pay through a purchase order or procurement process, but because it was a monthly subscription fee, it had to be on a credit card. We had to use an executive card in order for us to pay the bill every month, which was really kind of a pain because our accounting office always had to make sure and check the number of users. They would ask if I had 15 users this month. I am the administrator of the application, so, of course, I know how many users are there. I can see how many users are there and how many are using it and remove them if they don't. I think the state just needs to modify its procurement process because I think ours is pretty old school. I don't think that Atlassian needs to adapt to ours, but that was the only challenge we had in setting it up and configuring.

We had an in-house as well as a procured consultant, but he was through the state, not directly with Jira or Confluence.

The ballpark figure is about $100 a month.

It is easy to use and easy to onboard. It has got a good foundation of offerings for the business requirements if you're working on an agile project or user stories.

I would rate Jira a seven out of 10.

I use it to manage my scrum projects and some of the Kanban projects.

In terms of version, they have been updating it every three weeks. It is a kind of a sprint that they do, just like Google Chrome. So, there is no going back and forth. We use a cloud-based application. So, it is always the updated one.

The type of cloud depends on the client. I've been through all kinds of situations: completely public, semi-public, and private. If it is a public cloud, then it is directly from Atlassian. They are providing it. So, there is no middleware.

It definitely streamlined the process of managing the projects. Earlier, we had a system scattered all over the place. We had information in Excel, Microsoft Project, and some of the other applications that we have, but now, we have everything in Jira itself. So, we create user stories and groom the product backlog. We have kept everything in Jira. It is our single source for project information that anyone can go to. So, we could see a lot of transparency with Jira.

Overall, it is very intuitive. It is so lightweight and easy to use. It is easy to manage our product backlog and user stories, and it produces great reports.

It is good for single projects, but if you have to manage the portfolio level of the projects, they have a few add-ons that we need to buy and integrate. They can improve this part to manage it in a better way.

It is not capturing the number of hours for which each person has worked on certain things. We use many add-ons to let resources enter the time in the user story itself. We use an add-on called Tempo, but it is kind of a lousy add-on. It is not straightforward. Rather than helping us, it creates a lot of confusion. So, instead of looking out for the additional add-on, I would prefer to have the timesheet entered as a part of Jira itself. They are anyways capturing every information they could for each user story, and then we are able to break down all the task lists. For each task, we're also assigning a resource. So, while we're doing it, why can't they allow the users to enter the time that can be created as a report? Right now, we need to acquire the add-on, and the add-on is not great. It is not helping. The add-on is also not free.

There could also be some additional reports.

I have been using Jira for seven to eight years.

Stability-wise, it is very good. It is very lightweight. I have used other enterprise-level products to manage the same kind of scrum and Kanban projects and other projects. Other products have many enterprise-level features, but they're very slow and kind of hard to manage.

It is a cloud-based one, so I don't see much difficulty in scaling it. If you want to go from 100 users to 200 users, you will be able to do it without much hassle.

I've been doing a lot of consulting. So, I've seen from five users to the entire organization with more than 500 people using it.

I did contact them through email and discussion forums. I had a limited opportunity to work with them. So, I don't know much about their support.

Jira is a kind of the last one I settled on. Before that, I have used products such as Rally and VersionOne. These two are enterprise-level scrum and Kanban tools that are similar to Jira. 

I have also used Asana and Trello. Trello is lightweight, but I wouldn't call it equivalent to Jira. Jira has many features that not many solutions have. 

Most of the time, we are working with the cloud-based one. So, we don't have to set up everything. It is all there. You just buy a monthly subscription package. The workflow configuration, however, would be a bit difficult while you're trying to set it up. In addition, if you have to go down to the permission level, it is a bit different.

Workflow-wise, you need to plan well because once you configure it, you cannot often change a workflow. For each project, the workflow might be different. You might have a development team, a QA team, a configuration team, and a deployment team. When you start a task, you just need to make sure you are covering everyone. In terms of the workflow, you should know what would happen if someone is not there, and what are you going to do. So, you need to make sure that you are covering those things. Other than that, you need to know how much you are going to take care of the hierarchical level permissions. These are two primary things, and then, later on, you can relabel quite a lot of things in terms of how you're using the backlog product and user stories.

I would rate Jira an eight out of 10.

I have managed various projects using Jira, including tasks for the government, the environmental sector, education, and donation applications. I have also worked on multiple websites for marketing and search engine optimization.

The most valuable feature of Jira for sprint planning is the timeline feature, which allows for better visualization and planning of releases. However, there are limitations compared to other tools like TFS, which offer more flexibility with features like user stories, epics, and initiatives without extra fees. Despite this, Jira's ease of adding user stories to sprints and connecting them to releases is very good.

Jira lacks easy capacity calculation compared to TFS, making it harder to know how much work to allocate to each specialist. In TFS, it is simpler to manage capacity and reassign tasks when necessary. Additionally, a feature in TFS automatically creates relevant tasks based on a code snippet linked to a user story, saving time and effort in task creation. This feature isn't available in Jira, which makes task management less streamlined.

I have been working with Jira for almost two years.

Jira is expensive.

I recommend Jira for its usability, especially for writing user stories and adjusting metrics, though it is expensive.

Jira has improved our team's productivity mainly through integrations, particularly with Slack. This integration helps keep track of changes made to user stories, providing alerts for any updates. 

I would recommend Jira for managing projects in agile environments, but certain features are necessary for better functionality, like improved capacity calculation and streamlined task creation. Additionally, Jira can be expensive, so essential tools like test planning should ideally be included in the standard subscription rather than requiring costly third-party plugins.

Overall, I would rate Jira as a seven out of ten.

Jira is used for all the project management, on all the stages of project management. So then we create a Kanban board and move on to creating the stories.

We create the story points, break down the requirements, and then create the Sprint accordingly. Based on that, we can manage in Jira how many user stories we will pick in what Sprint. And based on the dependencies of the user stories, this is the flexibility that Jira provides. Then we have also got various, you know, sub-tasks, which we have to complete to accomplish the DoD (Definition of Done). We can mark the Sprint as complete when these particular tasks are completed. So that gives very good monitoring of the project where the project is

going on.

When it comes to the testing part, so testing is end-to-end on Jira. We can take the user stories based on the acceptance criteria. The test cases are created in Jira, and the business analyst team reviews those test cases. Based on their feedback, the test cases are updated. Those test cases are being executed. So there is clear tracking of the test execution, and all the test cases are also linked with the user storage. We have end-to-end tracking of what test case is executed for what user story. So that is the best part of Jira.

The monitoring, flexibility and tracking are really good in Jira.

When we use the plugin in Jira so, there are two different systems which we are working on, Jira and the X-ray plugin. The X-ray plugin should be incorporated into Jira because we have to fetch two reports. One report is faxed through Jira, and one can be faxed through X-ray. So there needs to be clarity about which the Jira team should reflect.

I have been using Jira for eight years. 

Jira is a stable product. I have seen the growth in the solution’s stability for the last eight years. The current version is quite stable and is a robust system.

Overall, the solution is scalable. Jira is quite easy to scale. If we have five projects working on Jira and we have about five more projects to be incorporated, it's easy to install Jira for those five projects as well. Presently, twenty five thousand users are using Jira. 

We have been using this for the last eight years and we are quite accustomed to that. We don’t need much support from Jira or Atlassian. Yes, but we have got an enterprise version of that, and their support is quite quick.

Positive

I was using HPE Quality Management Tool.

The initial setup of Jira is very easy. I have been an administrator, so I would say that because used to it. But in comparison to other systems, yeah, it’s quite easy and user-friendly. The deployment takes two to three days of time. Forty people are required for the maintenance of the solution.

I implemented it myself as an administrator of Jira.

Compared to the value Jira provides, it’s not that expensive. It has an yearly licensing cost.

Use all the reports which are generated. You have to make a system for the process. Here is a small example during a subtask. The time input via the source is not mandatory. But you have to make it mandatory either from the back end.

You’ll not be able to fetch the reports on the performance, the health of the project, capacity management, or IT management if the data is not input properly. So this is something which people most people don’t take care of as a Jira planning. But when you plan a project, you have to plan these things.

I rate the overall solution a seven out of ten.

We use it within our organization. 

It's to handle all the main technology projects. It's for managing mobile banking, internet banking, all the new products, and all technology-related projects.

We get the big picture of what is going on within a project.

The solution allows us to provide access also to the senior management, to see how things are progressing and to point out quickly what's going on, and help to focus energy on the things that are not going well.

The main benefit we got from the product is the consolidation. 

I like the roadmap or the new version with the roadmap that the solution offers. For us, the roadmap was a really great feature.

It's got very good portfolio management. 

The initial setup is easy.

The licensing is transparent. 

It's a stable solution.

Scaling the product wouldn't be difficult. 

Whether you are an expert in Agile or just it's the first time you are talking about it, it's a very user-friendly tool. It's a very simple tool. It's not complicated and even the integration and the usage is very simple. You don't need to be an expert. 

Whether you have small teams or big teams, it's the right tool.

We'd like to use it with non-Agile projects in the future, however, right now, it is a very Agile-focused product.

In general, however, as a solution, it's quite complete and I cannot speak to any missing features. 

I've been using the solution for one year now. 

At the moment, we have not had any issues with stability. There are no bugs or glitches. It doesn't crash or freeze. It's reliable. 

At this time, we are not tackling scaling at the moment. The organization is not mature enough to scale up.

That said, based on the experience we have had now, if we want to scale up, it should not be that difficult.

We have approximately 200 people on the solution currently. Those users are mainly comprised of the software development teams plus some portfolio managers and program managers and the project managers as well.

We do plan to increase usage in the future. 

I have not had any interaction with them as we haven't had any major issues. We have a contract with the integrator, however. While everything is going well for the moment, we would have access to assistance if we needed it.

I've used Clarity, however, it was used in another organization.

The initial setup was not complex at all. It was very straightforward, very simple.

The full deployment took about three months.

We have four people capable of handling any management tasks related to Jira. 

We had the setup services handled by a reseller of Jira.

It was a very good experience. It was very fast compared to what we expected from the contract. It was a nice surprise.

We have yet to see an ROI as it's been just one year, including the three months of implementation. Maybe in the next six months, we can have visibility on that. For the moment, it's still in progress. We cannot say anything about any ROI.

We pay a yearly licensing fee for an enterprise-level license. 

It's quite similar to the pricing that they have on their website. It's quite transparent from their site. They have a package that charges per user, however, they have some scalable packages, for zero to 10 users, from 10 to 20, from 20 to 50, and so on. You can choose, depending on the size of your company or the number of users. The costs are quite transparent.

While everything is included in that package, the integration or the customization is a different fee. There's a project apart from the integrator, which may vary in cost.

We are just customers and end-users.

I'd rate the solution at a nine out of ten. There's always room for improvement, however, it's a very good solution.

I would recommend the solution to others.

My primary use case for Jira is agile development as a systems integrator. The best use case is to pile up the backlog and then assign those backlogs stories to the user stories, which will be filtered into a sprint. Each story is then assigned to a cross-functional team member for tracking the dependencies and progress on the user story. You can also tag the user story to a particular team.

The most valuable feature for me has been tagging. Also, there's the option to add task lists to each user story. In addition, user stories can be grouped into one feature, which allows us to visualize our progress. The burndown chart is also helpful when it comes to reporting and allows us to know where we are going, especially during development.

I have used Jira for a total of seven months. 

Jira is a reliable solution. In fact, it is not only used for user stories. It is used as an issue tracker tool as well. So I think it supports multiple use cases, which is good.

Multiple users have logged into it at the same time without running into any issues. At my current organization, some 25 people use it. At my previous organization, about 40 people used it. We have plans to increase usage. 

I have not had to call up their tech support. They have plenty of troubleshooting documentation online. 

The initial setup was a bit problematic in terms of getting access to Jira. That goes for a few users, including me.

It is a good solution and a very popular one, as well. So I would recommend it if you are going for agile methodology. It works for both iterative and incremental development. You should use it. 

This is a solid solution for medium to large companies.