Jira Reviews

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. 

We have different software projects. I primarily use Jira to define and plan projects for agile-based project management. We use different aspects. We have scrum-based management for some projects and different systems for others.

The agile framework works well, and I pretty much live by that. Everything, such as sprint management, is laid out.

It is easy to use and implement. It provides me with pretty much everything that I need to be able to do day-to-day planning, task management, and work log efficacy.

It is a great centralized tool for everything. You can use it for your local team management to communicate with your developers. You can also use it for your management team and for communicating with subcontractors to keep track of work products, work logs, and perform at the minute status.

For how I identify tasks and break down use cases, I wish there was the ability to drill down Stories multiple levels deep. You have Epics, Stories, Tasks and Sub-tasks. Each of which can go one level deep. It would be nice to be able to be able to define Stories multiple levels deep in order to break down super complex use-cases. That is my only pet peeve. Other than that, they've been improving year to year, and each new version seems to have increased levels of improvement.

I use another product that synchronizes well with Jira called Worklog Assistant, by Sohail Somani, which runs separately to Jira. It is a great product that allows you easily keep track of work performed and generate all respective Jira worklogs at the press of a button. I've been using it for years, and it just makes it very easy for me to keep track of what I am doing with an accurate time tracking mechanism. I think this would be a nice tool to integrated with Atlassian Jira.

I've been using it since 2008.

It is pretty stable. They've improved things over the years. Back in 2008, when we were starting to use it, different issues used to come up from time to time. It was still relatively stable. Now, I rarely run into a problem for which I can say that it is a problem with the tool, as opposed to user error.

It is pretty scalable. I was actually kind of surprised at how much data I can put in. It doesn't slow the tool down. It is quite scalable, and it worked well for the projects that we've done.

We're a small company. I can't compare myself to IBM or Raytheon. I can talk for a small company with up to 45 employees with X number of projects. Because of COVID, we've had to pare down, and currently, we have two users who are using it. I myself use it on a regular basis. Four or five years ago, we had subcontractors who used it with us. At that time, we had seven or eight users, including clients and subcontractors.

It is being extensively used at the moment. The only increase in usage would be to include other individuals on it.

We used their support early on, and they were helpful. At that time, we were using the enterprise product, which was a purchased product. So, as a paying customer, you got straight-up support. They were good. There were some bugs and issues early on that were difficult to get through, but they worked them out. Now, we have fewer people, so we use the one to 10 person option, and I haven't had any reason to call support. I haven't had a need to use their support in years.

They self-use their product for defect management. You can always go to their website and find what's going on. They have forums, et cetera.

In the previous company that I've worked for, I've used Bugzilla for defect management. Task management was in-house, but I don't remember the tool that we used to do task management. For building up sprints, etc, we used a Wiki-based system. It probably was TWiki at the time. We had set up our own Wiki-based environments for doing management, et cetera. We also had Excel spreadsheets. I didn't know about Jira back then in the previous company.

We did some research when I started with this company, and we chose to use Atlassian. It wasn't just, "Oh, the company was using it." It was one of the things that I was part of instituting. We did what we call Decision Analysis and Resolution (DAR) to determine what was the best bang for the buck and what covered our needs, and then it evolved from there. After I started using Jira in this company, a lot of things were easy to do.

Its setup is semi intuitive. There are certain things for which you need to look at the instructions. It also depends on how complex your environment settings are.

Initially, back in 2008, it was a little bit more difficult, but they've improved the installation process. If you have a very basic setup, you can just pretty much install it right out of the box with maybe one or two changes. There're certain things for which you need to have some IT knowledge of your environment in order to be able to set it up. Other than that, they have really automated it pretty well. Jira is one of their keystone products.

Its initial deployment took hours or maybe days because there were things that I needed to understand, but they've improved it a great deal. You can pretty much be up and running within an hour, but it also depends on your environment.

Its implementation was an in-house job.

In terms of maintenance, I take care of its maintenance. Its maintenance is minimum, and only one person is required. You can easily run backups. We use Microsoft SQL Server for backend data management, and we automate the backups. We do daily backups, etc. If anything goes wrong with the tool we have, we can just rebuild it from scratch, and we will be fine because our data is there.

They also have built-in backup utilities that you can use. There is an XML-based one, which I do like to use from time to time just as an alternate. So, you do have different options.

We've seen a return on investment when it comes to Jira.

For very small companies, if you have less than 10 individuals, it is $10 a year for each of the products. When we were a part of the enterprise and had more than 10 people using it, or before they came up with this solution for small companies, it was $2,500 a year for the license for Jira and Confluence, and I believe something like $600 a year to perpetuate the license. I can't remember if it was $600 or $2,500 annually. It was for up to 25 people at the time, and this was in the early 2000s and mid 2000s.

There are a number of add-on products that you can sync with Atlassian Jira. Confluence, FishEye, Crucible, and Bamboo are different Atlassian products, but then there are sub-products. They have what's called Atlassian marketplace, and you can buy products for certain needs. Tempo is a perfect product for doing time management and timesheets. It was also $10. So, you have a bunch of different types of add-on products that different individuals have built that work well with the tool, and they are quite stable.

One piece of advice, which they also give in their documentation, is to use your own database management system. They give you something that you can use. It is called HSQL or something like that, but you can use what your company can afford, such as MySQL or SQL Server, and manage that yourself. It will help you to do better data management and backup management. I would use the built-in backup management system as a backup, although I haven't had any problems at all in years. Just for a warm fuzzy, it is always good to have a backup system.

I would recommend looking into primary tools depending on your needs. If you're doing software, FishEye and Crucible are great products to utilize with it. You also have Confluence and Bamboo for continuous build management. Tempo, of course, is good for certain types of management.

I would rate Jira a nine out of 10.

I have used Jira for defect management and issue management. This includes defect categorization, defect analysis, and defect summary, as well as exporting the defects. I have primarily used it from a user side perspective in both ITSM and agile delivery contexts.

Jira provides substantial analytical aspects, especially in defect categorization and routing. These features contribute to significant effort savings, roughly between ten to 15 person-days. Additionally, it aids in program management and overall effort management.

Jira provides substantial analytical aspects, especially in defect categorization and routing. These features contribute to significant effort savings, roughly between ten to fifteen person-days. Additionally, it aids in program management and overall effort management.

From an automation perspective, there are more aspects that could be needed, especially regarding natural language reporting in the generative AI context. I did an integration with UiPath on Jira, focusing on defect routing, however, the API documentation was not adequate.

I have used Jira for almost eight to ten years.

Jira is definitely recommended. I'd rate the solution eight out of ten.

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.

We use Jira for project management and tracking. 

I want the tool to integrate connectors. 

I have been using the product for five years. 

Jira is stable. 

The solution is scalable. My company has 300 users. 

Jira's deployment is easy. 

The tool's pricing is reasonable. 

I rate the product a nine out of ten overall. 

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 use Jira for project management. I track all my projects through Jira, including the resources, the time, the deadlines, or the roadmap. For me, it's the tool to check the status of the project. If we have time to get more people on the team, we can use it to show the up-skilling and the availability of the team.

They offer 24/7 support.

It's easy to set up.

There's lots of documentation to help you learn about the solution and troubleshoot issues.

The stability has been great.

A company can scale Jira if it needs to. 

It includes by default all the necessary tools for a project manager to work and make their work more efficient.

The reporting tool and the approval tool need work. The basic reporting tool includes only a few basic reports. If you need an advanced report you need to download a specific plugin, install it, and customize your reports on it. Sometimes you need to know SQL, let's say, in order to get the reports. It's not user-friendly.

With the approval tool, it's complicated in order to create the flow in Jira in order to achieve the approval process among different people. That needs to be simplified.

I've been using Jira for almost now seven years. I have used Jira from 2015 until now.

It's a very stable solution; we've had no problems at all with that. There are no bugs or glitches. It doesn't crash. It's reliable. 

The product is quite scalable. If you want to expand it, you can. 

We have hundreds of people on the solution in our company currently.

I've used customer support in the past and have found them to be helpful and responsive. 

Positive

The initial setup is not complex. From what I understand, it's an easy setup and it's straightforward. They have a lot of user manuals as well, and they have also 24/7 support across different countries if you need help at any time.

While there is a cost associated with the solution, and licensing needed, it's not an aspect I deal with directly. 

I'm not sure which version I am currently using. the admin team handles the versions and updates. 

I'd advise new users to read the user manual first, before jumping in. They are really helpful and informative. 

I would rate the solution at a nine out of ten. It is one of the best tools that I have used. It's helped me a lot in my daily job. For me, it's the best tool in order to track teams and projects. 

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.