JIRA Service Management Reviews

I have been working with JIRA Service Management for almost six or seven years. In my last company, I was working as a Program Technical Program Manager. I shifted all their work from different project management tools such as Asana. The team was using Google Docs, Atlassian, and Notion for content management. I migrated all of their items from Asana and from other different teams using different platforms. I was responsible for the migration on the JIRA Service Management side. JIRA Service Management was integrated with the Epic Games platform. Quixel was an Epic Games subsidiary that Epic Games had acquired. After that acquisition, I was responsible for all the management of JIRA Service Management and Atlassian products on the Quixel side. There were four or five teams, and I was responsible for all of those teams.

JIRA Service Management provides comprehensive data management. I can attach any kind of data. JIRA Service Management provides different views, and I can customize my dashboards. There is a detailed level of customization at the items level. If my workflow needs to be edited, I can add my own workflow. Whatever process I am going to adopt can be added to JIRA Service Management. In that process, all types of users with different roles can be added. For each type of item, I can select multiple workflows. For example, if for some service item I don't want to add a QA or support status, I can create a different workflow for that and assign those workflows. JIRA Service Management has a very detailed level of options and flexibility. There is flexibility from the items, to the workflows, to the roles, to managing the teams. Along with this flexibility comes complexity, which is the reason for the tradeoff.

Another flexibility is the JQL, which is Jira Query Language. JIRA Service Management's Query Language is very flexible. Complexity exists in that I have to learn and experiment with that JQL syntax. However, JQL is a very powerful feature for searching items that have been pending for a long time. In many scenarios I can query the items. I can even search the items that were assigned in the past to someone. There is a clause in the JQL called "was" where I can query if someone has ever worked on a particular item. These kinds of complex queries make JQL very handy.

The reporting tools are another valuable aspect. I was able to create reports with highlighted items and graphically highlighting the items that were critical. JIRA Service Management's integration is another strength. The Atlassian marketplace has so many plugins available. For example, I was looking for a capacity management tool. When I don't find a feature in JIRA Service Management, there is definitely someone who has developed a plugin for that kind of work and that plugin can be integrated in JIRA Service Management. This is another form of flexibility.

JIRA Service Management is costly. The pricing structure needs improvement. When I add some plugins, I have to pay the cost for every user whether they are using it or not. For smaller companies, the detailed workflow editing and the kind of details that JIRA Service Management provides would be complex. For startups and smaller companies, JIRA Service Management would be complex. The cloud offering is easier because I don't have to manage the infrastructure. There are two templates of the project: company-managed and team-managed. Team-managed is a newer feature, which is good for startup-kind companies where they don't need control over data from multiple projects displaying in one dashboard. For startups, JIRA Service Management is somewhat complex with its schemes and everything.

Capacity management should be improved in terms of additional features in the next release of JIRA Service Management.

I use JIRA Service Management to provide access management and address any technical issues because it documents what we have done and how we have done it. I can check live past tickets to work on them, which is how I work with JIRA Service Management.

I use JIRA Service Management for our client support operations. Clients raise ticket requests from Slack, and the portal requests come to me in JIRA Service Management project, where I deliver assistance. I can check requests from emails as well, and clients can also create tickets. I have added several automations, making JIRA Service Management perfect for providing client support.

JIRA Service Management offers many valuable features, including automations for tickets such as automated responses and automatic workflow changes. There is also the option to integrate with Slack, which allows users to get responses there and create tickets from Slack or email. I can add fields to differentiate every ticket type.

JIRA Service Management impacts my organization positively because it is easy to use, and everyone is happy to use it. In service companies, everyone is familiar with JIRA, so my company also uses it, making it easier for new users to join and get support. It saves me time, and my experience with JIRA Service Management is very good.

JIRA automation simplifies my day-to-day work immensely. For example, if any access tickets come through Slack, I have integrated the API to automatically grant access to the user's Slack. These automations make my team's work easy.

I have saved time with the automation, and there are also automated responses to users which make my work easier. I set up workflows that enhance efficiency.

I do not feel any features are missing in JIRA Service Management that need improvement.

In automation, sometimes when I select fields, not all fields are available, which can lead me to create a complex JQL query. However, I receive help from the support team to resolve these issues.

There are no other improvements needed for JIRA Service Management that I have not mentioned.

I have been using JIRA for five years, and I have exposure to applications like JIRA Service Management, the main products, JIRA Product Discovery, and JIRA Assets and Confluence. These are all the Atlassian products my organization is using. JIRA Service Management offers many functionalities for client support, so it is very good to use.

JIRA Service Management is stable for my needs; I have not encountered any issues with reliability.

JIRA Service Management's scalability is excellent; I just need to submit an email to indicate how many licenses I want.

I have reached out to customer support whenever I face an issue in JIRA, especially when creating any automation. My experience has been great; I receive responses, but sometimes it results in wasting time.

I am not using any other solution before JIRA Service Management.

While licensing is costly, setting up JIRA Service Management is overall good because the vendor helped me, and I also received support from JIRA support, making it a positive experience.

I evaluated Zendesk, but JIRA seems perfect for my needs.

My advice for others looking into using JIRA Service Management is to go for it. I would rate my experience with JIRA Service Management a 10 out of 10.

My main use case for JIRA Service Management is tracking tasks, stories, and epics.

I use JIRA Service Management to track work items, which are mapped to the subtasks in our workflow. Our workflow is designed such that once the program is specific, the epics are defined, and those epics are mapped with a couple of stories and subtasks, meaning the work item is fundamentally mapped to the system.

On a day-to-day basis, JIRA Service Management helps me track today's JIRAs for tomorrow's tasks, showing how many items are tracked. If I utilize automation, it can interlink with other tasks, whether in automated test cases, test frameworks, CI/CD frameworks, or project management frameworks.

What I appreciate most about JIRA Service Management is that when it is properly configured based on the program for task tracking, it can be effectively tracked and projected for the workbench structure. JIRA Service Management's burn-out chart and burn-up chart are very useful in tracking how many JIRAs have been closed and how many are open, and milestones can be utilized, making it the best part of the tool that people currently use.

I find that when we are tracking JIRAs in JIRA Service Management, particularly regarding the changes deployed, it becomes essential for closure. We leverage different tools to update validation results into JIRA Service Management, and those details can create a dashboard to present to management showing how many items are on hand, closed, or in progress.

JIRA Service Management has positively impacted my organization by measuring productivity, tracking individual, group, and domain productivity, and assisting other dependent teams as part of monitoring.

I feel JIRA Service Management could be better if the APIs from the sponsoring team provided more support and flexibility in API endpoints.

Regarding JIRA Service Management's API and support, the APIs being provided should include documentation on any new tools or features added, ensuring these updates reach the customers, including beta users.

A suggestion I have for improving JIRA Service Management is enhancing the UI tool for better integration with external tools or components in the open-source market to encourage easier plug-and-play configurations.

I have been using JIRA Service Management since prior to my last company for around ten to twelve years.

In terms of stability, JIRA Service Management is reliable day-to-day as long as the data is fed in correctly.

JIRA Service Management scales effectively as the number of users, projects, and work items increases, being used extensively across many large organizations.

Regarding customer support for JIRA Service Management, I do not have direct access as there is a separate team, but based on licensing, support is available on a yearly or two-year basis.

Before using JIRA Service Management, people in my organization utilized various different tools. It was not a fixed tool, but JIRA Service Management is very powerful and its scalability is significant, as prior to this, we customized programs around IBM tools or other open-source solutions.

My organization evaluated several options before choosing JIRA Service Management, as the evaluation focused on usability based on various programs before we acquired it.

For anyone considering JIRA Service Management, I would advise that it is an excellent project management tool suitable for product management across small to large scales. It is scalable based on licensing, and its customizable workflows can meet a variety of customer needs from code integration to validation and releases. I would rate my overall experience with JIRA Service Management as an 8.5 out of 10.

I have been using JIRA Service Management for three years with our JIRA vendor.

The functionality has been particularly useful for our needs. The automated workflows have helped streamline our IT processes.

JIRA Service Management's integration capabilities with IT workflows have proven to be straightforward.

There is potential for improvement in incorporating AI tools for JIRA stories. We have many AI tools such as ChatGPT, Perplexity, and Gamma for PowerPoint presentations. We need to consider which AI tool would be most suitable for our project.

I have been working with JIRA Service Management for three years.

The stability of the product rates at seven out of ten.

The scalability aspect is rated as simple.

The technical support from Atlassian rates at five out of ten.

Positive

We utilize SLA management tools for maintaining client satisfaction. The analytics tools in JIRA Service Management assist with service performance monitoring.

Currently, we are consuming data from the Global Data Platform, which collects data from Kafka streaming applications. We work with Microsoft technologies, specifically Azure ADF, for automating pipelines and consuming data from Databricks using notebooks.

We use Azure AD for authorization through AZD accounts. For sprint planning, everything is managed through JIRA. We create JIRA stories every fortnight, assign points to each story, and share with the team the number of points to work on. The entire project follows agile methodology using JIRA boards for daily work purposes.

I would rate JIRA Service Management 9 out of 10.

We are a management warehouse that provides services to different customers in different sectors. Primarily, we serve the banking sector and the military sector. We manage all the software delivery projects through tools such as JIRA Service Management or TFS.

Confluence is a great tool for documentation and tracking. Additionally, Bitbucket is essential for controlling the source code. JIRA itself is valuable for managing tickets, user stories, and pipeline. The integration between different tools provided by Atlassian products is also significant.

The licensing model could be improved. There needs to be a different licensing model for large numbers of employees, as it remains one of the main barriers to using JIRA Service Management across our entire company.

I have been using JIRA Service Management for more than 15 years.

JIRA Service Management is generally stable. I did not face any issues with its stability.

The scalability is rated eight out of ten. It is quite scalable for our company environment.

I have contacted Atlassian support maybe once or twice, and the support was good.

Positive

We are also using TFS for several projects. TFS is good, however, it lacks the ecosystem found in Atlassian products.

The initial setup is not difficult. Since we are using the cloud version, there are no issues with the installation. On a scale from one to ten, it's rated as an eight for ease.

While JIRA Service Management saves time, direct cost savings are challenging due to licensing fees. Currently, it costs around $150 to $200 per user, a significant expense, especially given the large number of employees.

We evaluated TFS before using JIRA Service Management. It is also good, however, we prefer the Atlassian ecosystem.

I recommend JIRA Service Management and rate it eight out of ten.

We use it primarily for test case management and raising bugs. It is a centralized tool that we use to track test cases, integrate with automation, and manage bug fixing.

The most valuable feature of Jira is that it is free of cost, which is a significant advantage. Bug raising is easy, and integration with other tools is straightforward. 

The centralized feature allows us to track test cases and integrate with automation and bug fixing.

We faced challenges with integration for different frameworks like TestComplete. The support we received was not fully provided at that time. The free version of Jira does not have many features. AI features for integration, test case scheduling, and requirement management could be enhanced.

We have been using it for two to three years.

In the initial period, only 25 team members were using it, and it worked for us without requiring changes.

The support provided at that time was not fully sufficient.

We used Team Foundation Server, now known as DevOps, after we stopped using Jira due to the availability of licenses and the needs of our clients.

We used Jira's free version for some time, and we used it as an offline service without communicating with the Jira team regarding the license.

I'd rate the solution six out of ten.

I am primarily using Jira Service Management for sprint management, estimations, planning, pre-planning, and conducting all the sprint ceremonies with user stories and estimations.

It's commonly used, so we don't need to teach anyone. Any new member that joins knows Jira Service Management.

Everyone knows how to use it, so there's no need to teach new members. It's as widely recognized as word processors.

Jira Service Management could improve by offering more control similar to Monday.com, such as easier automations, file addition, and sharing with different people.

I used it a lot before stopping three months ago.

We never faced any latency or stability issues. My team had never more than six or seven people, and it was stable for our needs.

I had to use support management tasks regarding the API. They didn't help with my issue because it was something that was not supported.

Negative

I used NetSuite and considered monday.com to be more beneficial.

It returned value, but I'm not sure if it completely covered the investment. It's useful.

Jira Service Management is expensive and not worth the money compared to monday.com.

I used NetSuite and evaluated monday.com, which has more control and features I find beneficial.

I rate Jira Service Management a six out of ten. I used monday.com due to its ability to provide more control, automations, and better file management.

I'm currently using JIRA Service Management for project management, specifically for communication with different tech tools and providing services for our product. It is mainly used within the research and development department, governed by product managers and service managers in operations.

It provides real-time updates to all the stakeholders, which is the best aspect of the service. It offers the opportunity to create customized communication and service tracking, allowing for more precise real-time changes.

JIRA Service Management provides real-time updates to all the stakeholders. It also offers the opportunity to create customized communication and track services, enabling more precise real-time changes and a customized version.

The platform should be more user-friendly. JIRA's user interface needs training to understand and utilize. There is a need to limit the information in one window to avoid overwhelming users with unnecessary data.

I've been working with JIRA Service Management for about two to three months.

I would rate the stability a seven. There should be more governance for permissions and more options for customized access without frequently involving the admin.

I would rate scalability as eight or nine. It supports introducing new features or levels efficiently across our global locations, helping everyone stay informed.

I communicate with technical support monthly, but they provide the same information available online. I would rate them a five.

Neutral

The initial setup is complex. It's rated at a seven. Too much information is presented at once, leaving room for simplifying and customizing views.

I primarily handled the implementation, utilizing available videos and documentation for setup and understanding.

Pricing seems slightly expensive compared to others but offers solutions on the AWS level, which could justify the cost. I would rate it a seven on the expensive side.

New users should consider tools that are not only feature-rich but also easy to use. Many providers offer robust features, so the ease of use should be a deciding factor. I would rate JIRA Service Management a seven overall.

For every project planning, we divide each project into different epics based on the milestones. Then for every epic, we create stories and tasks to complete within a two-week sprint cycle. After the two weeks, we have a review session with the clients to showcase our progress. That's how we are doing it.

The tool is scalable. It is not mainly about administrative efforts, however, as a working user, it is easier to create multiple stories and epics. For every task we are working on, the project manager can see the status once we update the stories mentioned. It helps overall project management to understand what the progress is and if there are any blockers.

One thing I would suggest is that before we create an epic, we mention the required stories in its description. Then AI could directly create those stories instead of doing it manually inside the table, so that integration can occur.

I have been using it for more than six years.

Instability happens sometimes - although not frequently.

The tool is scalable. As a user, it is easier for me to create multiple stories and epics, which aids in scalability.

The company would have a new project assigned to it, and the team can work on it. The only effort required is during project planning. We need to organize the stories and other details, however, instead of using Excel, we can use Jira board to prepare everything. 

I have not worked directly on the pricing.

For code changes, we are using Bitbucket, not Atlassian directly. We have Bitbucket with Atlassian, and that is how it is integrated.

It's a good experience. I rate it ten out of ten.

My primary use case for JIRA is to track tickets while working in an agile mode. I use it during each sprint to keep track of all my team members. All the data is there, which makes it easy to analyze at the end of the year and evaluate what we have accomplished.

Using JIRA simplifies tracking issues and updates. It allows me to assign tasks easily to colleagues. This way, I don't need to set up meetings for every issue since there is a discussion space in JIRA. It is beneficial if someone is on vacation sincew others can follow up on the tickets.

An AI feature that enables automation and alerts for users can be an improvement. For example, users should receive weekly reports.

I have been using JIRA for the one year.

I have not checked any latency or stability issues, so I cannot provide a definitive answer.

The implementation team is different from my team since we are only users of JIRA. The updates and patching are handled by another team.

Other teams in my company are using MongoDB and SQL, however, I am not using them in my project.

We are the users of JIRA and only have limited access. I do not have any additional advice or ratings.