Jira Reviews

We have a development team and we use Jira to manage our projects. We use several products by Atlassian whenever we create and work on a new project.

We have scrum masters who write new project stories, which are tracked by Jira.

The most valuable feature is project management.

The integration and management features need to be improved.

When you first start to use the interface, it is confusing.

We have been using Jira for about one year.

In my company, we have a lot of knowledge and experience with Atlassian products. We have not needed to contact technical support.

I have also used ALM Synchronizer and I find that it is better because it is easier to manage and it is a more agile tool.

My advice for anybody who is implementing Jira is to install the plugin from Micro Focus because it is a better way to manage the interrelationship between these two tools.

Overall, my experience with Jira is pretty good.

I would rate this solution a nine out of ten.

We use it to trace our business needs development.

We have some nice dashboards out there where we can track needs for clients or track internal projects.

This is our way of communicating with different teams. We are a global company. I am based in San Diego, for example. A lot of the BAs are based in Paris. The development team is based in Minsk. We absolutely need to be in constant communication and on the same page.

With the time differences that we all have, it is very hard to kind of get on a call and centralize the information in person or during meetings. This solution makes it possible. 

One of the most valuable aspects of the solution is the fact that everything is traced on one ticket on Jira. We know exactly what has been done and what is left and we share the same feasibility we are assigned. We don't have to wait for team updates or emails or calls or even reminders. We just need to look at the same ticket and we know in real-time exactly what is happening. Without Jira, I don't see how we would be able to manage and trace in a very consistent, effective way.  At least, not across all of our development initiatives.

I have never been trained on Jira, to be honest. However, it's easy to navigate. Even for somebody who is never on it, it's very simple to pick up and understand. The only caveat is that when you get a bit more in detail, or you have some business requirements, you don't have documentation that you can just go and consult to enrich your portal or access.

One aspect of Jira that is very nice is that we are able to integrate other tools that our company is using. For example, we do use Salesforce for our support team and that's linked to Jira. Slack, as well, is also integrated into the system. It makes everything so much easier.

Jira has recently updated their UI, but more can be done to make it even better.

One thing that is missing is notifications that we can send out in an automated fashion so that we don't have to log into Jira every single time. We do have dashboards on our navigation pages, but we need to log in to see the current status. I can't just click reports every once in a while to trace or track projects, I have to log in to see. I'd prefer it if the data automatically came to me instead of having to go seek it out. 

It's possible the dashboards and the reports are something that can be properly configured on our end. However, I'm not the Jira administrator in our company. I probably just don't know how to do it. Jira may actually be able to trigger these kinds of reports. However, if they don't have this functionality, it should definitely be added.

 I have been using the solution for four years now.

We've never experienced any downtime with the app. I can't recall any bugs or glitches. There haven't been any crashes of any sort. It's very reliable.

I would say the solution is pretty scalable. Every single project team in our company uses it. Our staff, our BA, our developers. We do also have DevOps teams using it. Everyone uses it for different purposes. Our company, over the past ten years, grew exponentially. We've tripled our size and we never had any downtime with Jira. 

We have business owners, developers, quality testers, business analysts etc. on Jira. We have internal consultants from professional services teams, who trace the needs as well so that they can transmit information to their clients. All the top management personnel go to Jira to consult the dashboards as well. If they wish to trace the progress that their teams are making, they can do so. The solution is basically used in every aspect of the company, and as the company grows, so does the usage.

I've never had to reach out to technical support, so I can't speak to how they are.

When I joined the company, we already had Jira. 

I wouldn't consider it complex at all.

I wasn't here at the initial setup of Jira, however, in our company, we have a Jira administrator. Whenever we have a project to review and need to know how it's laid out and how we can place them better, etc, it goes through this person. She analyzes the needs and does it for us. 

 She knows the tool pretty extensively, but we don't rely on external consultants to do it. We have somebody from our company who does it for us and acts as our own Jira professional. They would be the one that basically helps you with the setup for your project needs.

I don't handle the finance side of our relationship with Jira.

As far as I know, no other solutions have been considered as we've been pretty satisfied with this tool. 

I'd advise other companies to go for it and try using it. Jira is one of the biggest players in the market. It's a scalable solution and very user-friendly. The onboarding is quite simple. I have never been trained and I've been using it for the four past years. Whenever there is a new release on Jira, we get a guide, which is helpful, and instructions as we use the latest version that comes in the form of pop-ups on your screen. If you want, you can just disregard it, but once you discover them, you can just hover over with your mouse and you can see the new features. If an organization is looking for something that will be easy for its workforce to adapt to, Jira would be a smart choice.

With the communication and the bridges that we've established with other tools, it's helping other teams get the information they need without having to get the Jira license or get them to go onto Jira. They just need to find their tool and they get the update from Jira in real-time.

We have various use cases for it, one being for object storage. It's a government entity so that's what they use. 

It has improved my organization because it gives us collaboration. 

The most valuable feature is that it is somewhat flexible. 

It's a pain getting it on the public, it costs too much.

It's also difficult to migrate through, things don't always tie-up. It's not easy to use and it's not as intuitive as it should be. I stay away from it as much as possible.

I have been using Jira on and off for ten years. 

I would say that it's stable.

I would rate it a five out of ten because it gets the job done. 

We use Jira to manage scrum projects for the different projects in our company. Our business is a development company that uses the cloud version of Jira to manage the sprint and releases for each project for each client. We manage scrum and cascade projects with our clients.

Jira allows us to manage the project in a visual way, where you can easily see your sprint board and you see the status of your project, as well. It helps us to finish the sprint on time and easily move issues that are not finished to the backlog or to the next sprint. 

The most valuable features in Jira are the dashboard, reports, and boards that help us to control the advancement of the project.

The boards also help us to determine our velocity, and if we reach the release date it helps to determine which issues need to be moved in the event they will not be finished on time.

We would like to see the integration of a lite-version of Confluence, just to manage some of the templates and documents.

Without a plugin, implement the Route in projects created before this feature did so in the most recent versions of Jira.

I've been used Jira since 2016, and it helps us a lot.

I use this solution for general issue management, software planning, and change management.

This solution is a one-stop-shop for issues and plans.

Issue linking has enabled teams to trace issues.

I like the dashboards and Kanban boards.

The development links to GitHub are critical.

The only thing that JIRA doesn't for us is release management in a way that I can create a list of versions easily.

We use JIRA for software development projects and the implementation of business workflows. Our company runs more than one hundred projects on a single instance server. Besides core IT projects, we have implemented business processes on dedicated JIRA instances to manage high volume (greater than five thousand issues per month) non-conformities for some business lines. 

Transparency of development projects, as well as approval processes for some business projects, has improved massively. Interaction of business units and IT happens very often via JIRA and considered to be very helpful. As many of our developments are requiring some level of compliance, the workflow and documentation of approvals are very handy. 

There is a very flexible configuration of "issues" and related life cycle. On top of it, the number of "add-ons" is overwhelming and of very good quality. I would consider the reporting capabilities to be the best feature, as ultimately the visibility of issues allows management of the projects.

My main concern is the administration of projects, especially user groups, and this requires root access rights but there is no concept of layered admin rights. Projects can be managed by a limited admin, but the creation of projects needs root admin rights. In decentralized project ownership, this gets tedious.

We used an open-source system called Mantis, which was considered unsuitable for use outside the IT world.

The setup of JIRA is straightforward.

To try this solution, use their cloud offering to get familiar. After that, it's in my view worth the money.

We went right away to JIRA without evaluating other options.

JIRA, its add-ons, and the Atlassian product world are already very powerful and it is difficult to name significant blank spaces.

This is a very powerful solution. Get some advice and training to make the most out of it. You may miss out on some of the capabilities if you don't.

We use this solution for product development and issue tracking.

This solution provides us with a centralized view of issues, simple time registration, and excellent integration to Bitbucket.

The most valuable feature of this solution is the source linking on the commit level to git.

The speed of this solution needs to be improved.

Backlog pruning and visualization are poor. 

Uupdate:

Speed has improved slightly in backlog view with Jira 8.0, but there is still room for speed improvements.

It's difficult to group and manage the backlog and priorities on multiple simultaneous epics to get clear overview of how the backlog reflects a planned roadmap. (perhaps due to the fact that we have too many issues in the backlog)

We use this solution for our scrum team and user story management.

This solution assists us with being able to quickly and easily start sprints and keep accurate track of them, including billing using a time-tracking add-on.

This solution is very easy to set-up and use. It is very intuitive.

The permissions can be challenging to get right.

We use this solution for Agile project management and BAU work delivery in sprints / DevOps.

This solution has helped with team collaboration and task delivery.

The most valuable feature is the Burndown Chart to see work that is outstanding.

The reporting needs to be improved.

We use this solution for Agile Scrum-Based DevOps on AWS with a Linux, Cloud-Based SaaS environment for mission-critical applications.

JIRA has increased the transparency of DevOps and it has enforced systematic, process-driven, communication.

The most valuable features are the customized Dashboard, Sprint Planning, and Automatic Notifications.

This solution would be improved with the inclusion of integration with SVN, and auto-sync with the build release number. I would like to see a more customized workflow, as well as support for the Google Doc storage of Documents.

Our primary use case is ALM, which is very well supported by Atlassian.

We have realized an improvement of 30% in terms of the duration of our small projects (six months with three to four people).

The most valuable feature is the full integration between Work management, Source code management, and Test Automation.

This integration allows a full traceability during the development processes, which is mandatory for some industries like automotive, or security

The hierarchy for Jira tickets is too flat.

Our primary use case is executing the SDLC.

This solution has improved our organization by enforcing transparency and communication. Individual roles and responsibility are defined and followed.

The features that we find most valuable are the Workflow, Scrum workflow, and Dashboards.

We have found that improvement is needed in their customer support (communication, which is ironic).

It would be very useful to have drag and drop time tracking.

Our primary use case for this solution is work management and task management.

We use this product quite extensively, and we're planning to roll out a module for the Accounts Department to be able to map manpower costs to project work, directly. That is something that we're working on right now.

Based on the flexibility that it offers us, we can adapt to different projects with different cycles. Based on whatever cycle we are working on for a particular project, we can configure the solution to suit us. This helps us to manage the work, essentially in one place, and we have visibility of all projects that are going on in the company.

The most valuable feature is the flexibility of the configuration, being able to configure it to suit your own needs.

The plugin management needs a lot of work. Sometimes you have issues with plugins and it stumps the vendors, as well as the Atlassian support.

I think that more extensive reporting would be very good because sometimes it is a hassle for us.

It is pretty stable. I would give it a ninety-five.

In terms of stability, it is pretty impressive and I would give it ninety-five. We have not had any load issues.

We currently have between twenty-five and thirty users, whose roles range from Software Developer to Chief Executive Officer.

I would rate the solution's technical support an eight out of ten. 

I have used a couple of solutions, but I have used this one for my entire career in working with different teams. I have had to integrate my own solution as well, but the majority of my work has been using this product.

I have worked with both the hosted application and the cloud version. For the cloud, the initial setup is very easy. You can do it in basically two minutes and you're out but for the server, the setup entails a lot more.

This is quite understandable because you're going to be managing it by yourself, onsite. For the Cloud, it's pretty straightforward, but if it's the server version then you need a lot more focus and experience to be able to configure it correctly.

The last time I installed a server instance we had to do it overnight and it took me between four and six hours.

The deployment was done in-house.

There is no maintenance required for the cloud version.

I would say that we have seen ROI with this solution. When we are looking for some sort of information, it just makes our lives much easier because we are able to do things without having to talk to anybody. You know exactly what is going on. It limits personal interaction but helps us to get our jobs done quickly.

Licensing is on a monthly basis, and it is based on what you use. There is a base cost and then as you include other items, the cost rises. Our last payment was perhaps $1600, which includes both user licenses and add-ons.

There are no additional costs beyond the licensing fees, and it covers support.

Before choosing this solution we evaluated SmartShift for work management, and we also tried Trello.

My advice for anyone who is implementing this solution is to ensure that your in-house processes are clear. Things have to be clear, as much as flexible, because if it is not correctly configured then it could just be a mess. So, you have to be very clear on what your processes are in-house, and then based on that you can translate them into Jira.

Knowing in advance what kind of information you're looking for from Jira will help you in being able to set it up correctly.

I would rate this solution an eight out of ten.

Our primary use case for this solution is development ticket status tracking. We use it for managing different kinds of projects. This is an online tool, where teams from anywhere in the world can use it.

This product has improved our ROI. Without this tool, our projects cannot be completed fully. Dependency cases among the teams cannot be resolved.

The most valuable feature for us is the capability of assigning a task to a developer and resolving it. This tool can be used anywhere and on any device.

The user interface and views on different devices should be improved. The customization feature can also be improved.

In terms of stability, there are very few failures.

Our impression of the scalability for this solution is that it's good.

We did not use a different solution prior to this one.

The initial setup for this solution is straightforward.

We used a vendor team for implementation.

Good. The return of investment is something that we have found to be very valuable.

We feel that the product is a good value for the cost. 

We did not evaluate other products before choosing this solution.

It is an excellent tool for project management.

This software is implemented in the different departments of the company since it allows us to plan, organize and verify or monitor the different projects we develop day by day, thus improving communication and workflow.

The implementation of JIRA in the different business departments has allowed us to increase labor productivity since the teams work much more efficiently thanks to the tools provided by this powerful platform, which has made the communication much more specific and better. And when planning any task, the whole team is aware of every detail.

The most valuable features or functions that I have found in this software are several but mainly that it is a platform that gives the user the option to customize its interface to the point that it can be fully adapted to the team that implements it. This generates a great advantage since it is much easier for users to adapt to it and be able to work in a much more comfortable and highly effective way, in addition to providing tools that can be followed up on tasks or projects and give priority to them. It is really useful because in this way the team can focus on those who need a much closer delivery date.

This product or software still requires improvements, especially in its interface since its learning curve is somewhat high because it offers so many features that the user tends to get confused, or the software adaptation time is much longer than it should be. Besides, its configuration is not very simple, and its support team sometimes does not respond immediately, so it is often necessary to solve problems on their own.

Although it still requires many improvements, it is a software that is kept updated to ensure that its users can be much more pleased when using it.

Its scalability is somewhat limited since it is based on the number of users, and when wanting to obtain a greater number of users, the prices are somewhat high.

Their customer service sometimes tends to fail because problems are not attended to immediately, but it is something that is not consecutive. But nevertheless, I believe that in an emergency this could bring problems.

We have not used another solution previously.

The initial configuration was complex because it is not simple, and that's because the software does not provide enough information to understand it.

It was initially implemented by the suppliers since it is somewhat complex and the team was not yet ready to perform it, but they had a really positive performance.

The investment has been fair since we have obtained advantages from its implementation, mainly because productivity has increased.

It should be very clear about the plan that you want to implement and what number of users will use it. In this way, you will pay for what you really need and will cover your needs since this software is based on the number of users implementing the same plan.

We did not evaluate other solutions.

This software is ideal for tracking problems, managing, planning and carrying out real-time monitoring of the tasks or projects you want to develop in a much simpler way and in the shortest possible time. So I think that if you are looking for a solution that is based on more than the management, this is the indicated choice.

Full SDLC, from software development to quality assurance tracking and project management. The applications of JIRA workflow management are endless. 

Tracking and accountability have been improved, as with the advanced workflows, one can ensure processes are followed, and it is easily seen through one of the many reporting options exactly who is doing what and when.  

Workflow management as very specific workflows can be configured to serve any number of business processes. 

The downside to JIRA is the constant push for the changing of the user interface. This can remove valuable features and increase the learning curve. Especially for business users, the change in interface design instantly reduces productivity and buy into the tool.  

• Agile, scrum project/sprint planning
• Bug tracking
• Workflows which help track the current state of tasks.

• The organisation is more flexible and agile.
• Tasks are easier to track. 
• Generally faster and more focused.

• Sprint planning
• Overviews over tasks and which assignees are doing what
• Specific workflows for projects.

• Add relation for workload estimation between stories and subtasks
• Linking to Confluence could be implemented. At the moment links can only be created from Confluence to JIRA, not the other way round.

Requirements management.

It enabled us to track and manage product commitments over the entire enterprise.

One form for each feature/item.

Better ability to add numbers in ad hoc queries and search results, e.g., total development cost estimates.

We didn't use a different solution.

Jira is the best project and defect management tool. It works very well for all types of software methodologies or cycles. Communication is very clear to the whole team members. My team relies on this software to keep track of what we are doing. It has lots of nice features that we use such as to link issues to one another, link tickets, put labels of versions to be released, and story points. As a QA person, I also use the filters a lot to find issues that are assigned to me or have been reported by me.

JIRA has helped us to organize our projects and keep them organized. It has also allowed a great deal of transparency into the development process for management which has greatly reduced the workload on project managers by automating some of the report generation necessary to show progress.

This software helps us to follow the process the team agreed to and see the progress on issue and sprint level. With the help of this tool, we will be able to track the progress of the issue and sprint.

The reports and dashboards do not provide for reports in a graphical way. The tickets cannot be simultaneously assigned to two or more users.

Jira makes life easy — best tool to use in agile projects!

This product enabled us to grow and not lose productivity in the process. We were able to maintain a good line of sight to what teams were producing and which ones were on track and which teams were off track.

I have not used any different solution.

I have used this tool as an in-house one.

Team level agile project management.

Agile teams work with this tool. However, scaled agile support of this tool is limited.

• Dashboard possibility
• JQL query
• Workflow management.

Tree view of linked issues.

It is easy to assign books, story styles, move across platforms and to different stakeholders while using this platform.

It has an easy UI that can easily plug-in to every level.

The CACD solutions on JIRA has some plugins, but they are not easily understandable or workable. 

It is definitely a stable product.

The scalability is fine.  

Tech support is good. 

We had a JIRA administrator help us with the setup, as well as an administration team. It took a bit of time to integrate the JIRA to our system.

In comparison to other solutions on the market, it is cost-effective. 

We looked at Micro Focus ALM vs JIRA, but it was quite expensive in comparison.

It is a user-friendly solution that is simple to use. 

Some of the features that are most important to me of JIRA Agile are the sprint planning, being able to write user stories and being able to use task management. JIRA appears to be constantly evolving, developing, and adding new features throughout the process. 

I have had problems with performance and unresponsiveness. All of a sudden, the performance slowed down and I had a number of users that could not use the tool but, JIRA support responded immediately. Within a couple of hours, the problem was resolved.

I would give tech support a rating of eight out of ten.

I have prior experience with what was originally called HP Quality Center but is now called Micro Focus ALM. In comparing Micro Focus ALM vs Jira,I did not find it as intuitive or user-friendly as JIRA. I also have experience with and have compared CA Agile Central vs JIRA, but my preference is always JIRA because it is more established and very intuitive to work with.

The setup was on-premises and it was basically installing it on a server. I found the setup relatively easy and straightforward to install from scratch, in-house.

My advice to future users is to check out sources like YouTube and look at the main features you want. Potentially with JIRA, particularly with the cloud version, they have a seven day trial. I suggest that future users sign up for the free trial to make sure the features of JIRA meet their personal requirements. Also, the user should make sure that JIRA is a good fit for the user's organization.

It possesses excellent customization and serves the basic requirements: multi-project, products, customers and multi-level of users.

• We now have an excellent helpdesk ticketing system with follow-up and escalation.

• We used to have add-ons for remote support but it's not working, and it does not have powerful CMDB to help in building our KB and self-service for our clients.

Ticket management: We have our custom-defined ticketing number for each customer/product which helps in identifying the issue from the ticket number.

• It should be able to open a channel with a customer through chat or remote desktop.

• It should be able to define my KB articles and link it with a self-service ticket.

We use it mainly for Scrum management.

Most of the projects which we have taken in were using a waterfall model, which is very hard to convert into an agile or Scrum model. It helped our customers have visibility into requirements and reporting, since they were mostly using spreadsheets. We could help give them a clear cut view of what was happening on ground with development and the test database.

Reporting: It gives a nice report of my backlog and what my team has currently spent its efforts on.

JIRA still has their own backtracking tools. It should have a better visibility into HPE UFT. Most people use functional testing tools, like QTP. They need to improve their integration to make it seamless. 

You can do a lot with the tool but again, but it is not a 100 percent solution for everything. We have a lot of acceptance criteria coming through it, but JIRA doesn't support it. Therefore, we have go to different user stories and break them down. 

Using a cloud instance, it is always stable for us. It is not a problem at all.

We use a cloud instance for most engagement, so scalability has not been an issue.

My company has a 100,000 people, so we always can find someone within our organization who can help fix an issue.

I was not involved in the initial setup.

I understand JIRA is quite expensive.

Most important criteria when selecting a vendor:

1. Usability: It should be easy to use. People should not have to undergo a lot of training because it should be intuitive.
2. It should be scalable and a cloud solution. 
3. It should not be expensive. Cost is a major driver because I work in pre-sales.
   

We are working in the safe channel process in the IT part of the bank. It is a good experience overall, but the look and feel for the user is not good.

It benefits us because we have globally located teams. Our team members work in different geographies, so the product is a better way to manage progress and see the status of different tasks. Otherwise, it is not possible to work in different geographies.

I can drag and drop to the different statuses. I can go into the task and change it, then I can directly drag and drop it from one status to another.

There is a difficulty viewing all the attachments because they are shown in one place. I would like attachments to be shown at the comment level. Right now, if I attach something, it will go into a single attachment pool for the task, not at the comment level. I.e., If I want to attach the new version of a document, it creates confusion because I have to remove the existing attachment.

When writing comments, there are not many options for formatting. We were expecting formatting something at the level of Microsoft Outlook or Microsoft Document.

When creating a task, there is no place to add our estimation.

Sometimes, it is slow and hangs. We faced some stability issues where JIRA was down for a day. Also, we have lost some of our comments made in the JIRA because of downtime.

I don't have any issues with scalability.

We haven't used it.

We did not have a previous solution.

I would tell a colleague looking for this type of solution to look at Microsoft TFS and VSTS. 

Most important criteria when selecting vendor:

• A well-known vendor for the software.
• A good reputation.
• Compare what other companies are using.
• The look and feel of the user interface.

The primary use is task management. It has performed okay. It is easy to configure and maintain. It's quite simple to track tasks, then link with other applications/solutions from Atlassian, like source codes.

• Visibility
• Avoids emails and exchanging information in an informal way. 

I would rather have a tool that we do everything on. Also, we have access to end user policies where we can configure them and give access to the correct person. We have tracking of who works on what and why over the history of a project.

Workflows, because we cannot employ a different approach depending on the speed of the project or customer. Whether it's research, engineering, or maintaining the process, we can cope with processes easily without adapting the tool, but adapting the tool to processes.

There are no fields to search or to filter by, mainly the ones which use a data around a date and time when something changes. So, you have to use some add-ons and create a lot effort to obtain information from the tool. Thus, you have to adapt to the lack of search that the tool does not offer.

So far, so good.

I don't see any problem with it.

In the past, I had training from the distributors and it was okay. 

The tool is very easy to use. What is important is that we don't have to wait so much for contracts or more hours to have support. This is something that we have, and it is good for this solution.

Everywhere that I worked, we started by using spreadsheets, then we moved to some free tool, and finally to JIRA.

As far as I know, the initial setup was very simple and straightforward.

Understand your own process: What you are looking for, the size of your company, what your budget is, and the larger plans for the future. There are tools that scale better than others and there are solutions that fit to both small and big teams. There are tools which scale better for larger companies. 

Most important criteria when evaluating a vendor: 

• We evaluate the company's strategy.
• If they bought an legacy solution to add to the portfolio or if they are developing from scratch.
• What are their plans for the future?
• What type of support do they have?
• What is their business model? 
• Do they have domestic experience or not?
• Are they focusing only on a few customers, and the size of those customers?
  

We use JIRA for maintaining tasks and bugs. Overall, we love using JIRA because it performs very well with a lot of tasks and a lot of dashboards.

Having a tool to manage all your tasks and all your bugs is very useful for any company. We use it a lot to keep track, to see how our development is going and how automation is going.

We use a lot of dashboards and a lot of queries to search for specific bugs related to specific versions. Also, we can provide it to all of our users throughout the company.

The ability to change and rewrite tasks is valuable. You can add a lot of columns, change the owners and the change the components. It gives you a lot of flexibility between the teams.

I would like to see it connecting to Git. That could be useful. We use it for Stash, but I think there is one for Git also. I don't know if it's a plug-in that exists already, but that could be nice.

We have had no problems with stability. We're doing maintenance upgrades, but it has working well all the time.

We're not dealing with the scalability because we're not IT, but I don't think there is a problem with scalability.

We used Bugzilla but its UI was not as user-friendly. The end-user experience was very basic because it's a free tool. It's important to us that QA be able to track the issues and, of course, for the developers to be able to track all the tasks. So we're looking for the balance between performance of the user interface and the UI for the other workers in the company.

I would rate it at nine out of 10 because there is always room for improvement, but we love this tool and we use it a lot.

I would recommend JIRA. Compare all the tools for bug and task management. After that, you'll see that JIRA is by far the best.

The primary use case is task management within the team and the company, as well as version management and bug management.

It makes the work process transparent, visible to everyone who needs to know about the current state of the versions, and all that happens. It helps to communicate among different teams, like support, R&D, and QA. Everything is in one place and everything is communicated in the same form.

JQL, which is JIRA Query Language. I can filter all the issues, display the items as I want.

It's very flexible. I can define workflows and custom fields and dependencies between issues and projects. And every project can have a custom configuration with my fields, my names for fields, my validations, and my workflows. It's very customizable.

I'm using the old version. I haven't upgraded to the new one, so maybe a feature I would be looking for is already there. I don't know. Something I had been looking for was pasting screenshots into issue details, but this was already implemented in the new version. 

Better user management features could help.

I have no problem with stability.

I don't have problems with the scalability. I know companies that are much larger than just projects or teams, that are much larger than my current team, and they work with JIRA and it works well.

I used the support from JIRA several times and it was good. I had questions about licensing, I had questions about upgrading from an old version to a newer version.

When I am evaluating a product or vendor, I have some intuition about it. I see how the thing is built and works, and I go by my own impression. For me, that is important. And, of course, price and maturity of the product, along with flexibility, are important criteria.

I would rate this solution a 10 out of 10. It's an excellent product. It has already improved. It has good support. From the beginning, it was very smart and customizable and built well, works well. There are almost no bugs that I have discovered. It's a good product.

I just saw an advertisement on the street for a product called Monday.com. I read a few lines, a few words about it. I hadn't heard of it before that, but I understand it does something similar to JIRA. Obviously, I can recommend using JIRA but if you are searching for something else, the first impression I got from reading the home page of Monday.com was good, so maybe it's worth evaluating.

Overall, everything with it is great. I found it super useful, as it is customizable for different teams and users.

The following definitely need improvement:

• UI 
• Speed 
• Mobile app functionality.
  

It is consistently slow.

• Running agile deliveries with dispersed teams. 
• The projects were typical agile, changing requirements frequently.
• JIRA facilitated story management perfectly.

• Overall, it has good viability. 
• Relatively easy for everyone to pickup and use. 
• It improved communication, as it was a popular tool, and most people enjoyed using it.

Kanban board: The board is easy to use and visually impressive to non-IT users, who found it easy to relate to.

• Report customisation could be improved. 
• Out-of-the-box reporting is limited. It would be helpful if more customisation was possible.

We use it for backlog management, sprint planning, requirements management, Scrum, conducting Scrums, and all of our agile stuff.

It handles all of the issues that we need it to do.

It is very flexible, so we can do pretty much what we want with it. 

I would like integrated requirements management, so we do not have to buy plug-ins for JIRA, since it was hard to get requirements management for it.

It is stable.

It scales up well.

We have a team who administrates technical support. They handle this interaction with JIRA. Sometimes it takes a while to get a solution, but they solve everything. 

Before, we used a homegrown solution. 

Almost everybody uses JIRA nowadays because it is the most cost-effective solution.

I was not involved in the initial setup. 

I do know the initial setup was pretty complicated. The user interface could be better organized and easier. 

It does not cost that much.

We did not really evaluate anything else. All of the other products were way too expensive for our purposes. Also, JIRA is the de facto standard.

It is very capable, but also very complicated.

Most important criteria when selecting a vendor: reliability.

It's really for Agile projects with storyboards, and then defect management.

The performance has been okay.

It has improved the Agile process in our company.

A lot of people in the business work with this tool so when you are searching for a new employee you don't need to train them on this tool. 

The reporting and the view, from a story to a defect, should be improved in the next releases. For example, how many boxes are assigned to one story, or how many tests are run on one story, and so on. This is what I miss in the tool at the moment.

The stability is very good.

We are about 700 - 800, and it works. Not all use JIRA but in IT we are 100 people.

I have not personally been in touch with support, but I think the support is very good. I haven't heard anything wrong with it.

We have two organizations. One is development, and they work JIRA. And the other is the business, which is responsible for testing. At the moment, we are going in the direction of DevOps and more Agile, and we would like to merge our tools together.

The important criteria when selecting a vendor, in my opinion, are that the vendor should be flexible, cheap, and the support should be excellent.

I rate it an eight out of 10. It's easy to use. People can become productive with this tool in a short time, and it is really the right solution for an Agile environment.

A lot of solutions show very well on paper. When you are selecting a solution, do a proof of concept in the environment.

We run pilots and product development using this for Agile and Scrum applications, in mechatronic product development.

It has performed well so far. We like it, we would like to expand it.

It's a tool that won't change the way that you work, but it supports the way that you work. Agile is changing your teams, changing your organization, the way that you work, and then JIRA will help you doing that across multiple locations, for instance. 

We don't do physical boards. I run a team with four locations, in three time zones. I need to work with online tools, and this is where the tool helps me. It helps me to use virtual Scrum boards across four locations, three time zones, and to plan my work.

The most valuable features are 

• the easy handling
• drag and drop
• what you see is what you get.

It's, smooth, accessible. It fully supports the Scrum approach, and the Agile way of working, and it has Agile thinking behind it, so this is very much helpful.

I struggle with Epics, how they are implemented in JIRA, because they don't work like any other Story, in a good way. I see a list of Epics, but although I can order them, there are some mismatches with how the Epics are used compared to what Scrum expects, or what Story mapping expects an Epic to be. 

For instance, if I rate an Epic, the Story points, and I rate the related user Stories, the Story points, they all count together. They're all summed up together. So, the overall Story points for the Epic, including the Stories, is double of the Story points. It just doesn't make sense. Maybe I'm doing something wrong, but I had to delete all my Story points on the Epics because they were counted including the Story points. This is not correct, and I would immediately improve that. 

I would like to see visualization of release planning. I can list the releases and I can give dates to releases, but to show how they are happening on a timeline, I would need to order the Portfolio part. But just for this, it may be too much to use the Portfolio for that.

The stability of the solution has been near perfect. I haven't faced yet any technical interruptions. 

There was one issue we had, technically, when we added 30 more users. The server hung. I don't know whether it was because of the tool, or what the reason was.

Scalability, I can't really touch yet. We have small scale approaches. We are about to scale. I think the idea about how to scale is not yet clear. It works perfectly for a team, that is pretty clear. How you do this for more teams, I haven't investigated this too much. Maybe the tool contains this, but currently it's not fully clear to me.

We switched because the visualization is a great help. So, really to transfer from a physical Scrum board to a virtual Scrum board implemented in JIRA, as well as so teams can work with us, and collaborate with us, on a Story to produce a result. Recently we tried to work with PDC task management. As a team, we had to learn it. It's possible as well, but not as easy and flexible as JIRA.

I'm not the selector of the vendor, but from what I can tell, from what our IT selects, the vendor should be 

• available for global support, should be accessible in 24 hours, if there's a larger issue
• able to collaborate with large enterprises, which sometimes have different cultures, different languages
• able to integrate into the existing work environment - we have this tool, and that tool; the tool should fit into our tool landscape
• able to provide training.

I would rate JIRA a nine out of 10. It's not a 10 because it's inconsistent, sometimes, in how it acts and reacts, like my example with the Epics. But it's a high rating because it's user friendly, it's easy to use, you do not need much training on it. If you know how to work with Scrum, you can easily use it for your own work in a small team. For multiple teams, I'm not sure. I can't judge this because I haven't done this yet.

Managing our entire product development life cycle, as well as all test cases and test runs. That include at least 4 developers, 2 business analysts and 2 testers, all working on sprints. 

Before JIRA we had to create our PRDs, our product definitions requirements in another feature, then using another tool to organize the combine with all the JIRA tasks.

Now with JIRA Tasks, our product technicians can use the JIRA module to manage tasks by creating PRDs and user stories in JIRA, or even in Confluence (another product from Atlassian). Then, our PBAs, our business analysts, use Confluence to create all the definitions, which we can then use to create user stories in JIRA using the combine module.

The most important is the Agile management, because we use Agile in our everyday tasks. Also, the task manager is important.

Right now, the Task Management feature and Confluence are separate from JIRA itself. So, we have this problem where sometimes these modules don't talk to each other the way we expect them. So many times, links created automatically from new tools apart from another tool which didn't work, therefore you have to manually go into the task, even though the link is right there.

Another example, in JIRA you create a test sessions with user stories, then buttons from the user stories can automatically change the status of a test session from started, completed, or paused, which doesn't work. Therefore, there is a problem there: inter-module conversations.

It's pretty stable. It doesn't go offline very often.

It works great for scalability. We have many users with more users coming. Our current users are on the road and can work.

Right now, we have a technician, a specialist, in another country that works closely for JIRA. So, we don't have technical support directly with them.

I used just Excel sheets. JIRA was a major improvement for a variety of reasons listed in other answers.

Even though, JIRA was a new thing at the company that I worked for, it was pretty easy to setup. The product is fast, so you don't have any frustration with installation. Account creation was pretty easy, too. Not too complicated.

We tried Microsoft, but it only supports task management. It doesn't support creating test sessions the way we like to them. Also, it doesn't support product definition the way JIRA supports us and Microsoft's general interface is a whole mess, so we prefer JIRA.

Learn every module you use (a lot!) before jumping to other modules, like we did, with JIRA Testing and Atlassian Confluence, because the conversation between those modules can be troublesome if you don't know exactly what it wants.

The product helps us a lot. It can handle the main features that it's supposed to in a proper manner, so we don't have any frustrations in our daily activities.

JIRA is an issue tracking application, it in global development projects. JIRA helps teams to track and accomplish the items that need to be The great feature about JIRA is you can store the activity happening around an asset in one placeJIRA is useful in project management. It can reduce the rework in enterprise projects. You can also use JIRA Core for Project management, Task management, Process management, HR, Marketing, Legal and Finance projects. JIRA Core can be as per business projects need.

JIRA is very efficient. It helps us to create benchmark times to solve each ticket's severity. Burn down charts show your effort against the estimated time.

Active sprints. It is like a Kanban Board drag and drop backlog to assign, to do, and finish the task.

When creating Epic, Story, and Task, there is no provision to set estimated time. The estimated time can only be set once the ticket is created.

No.

No.

Excellent.

We have In-house project management tool. The report generation, burn chart are not so good. We Started to use Jira to  between different projects across geographic location

Straightforward.

In House

Its very nominal  prices per the features available.

No

JIRA is very good. With another tool, like Confluence, HipChat, Trello, Bitbucket, Bamboo, and FishEye. It creates a robust project and product management process.

We used JIRA for:

• Writing down requirements and stories.
• Analysis
• Creating tasks, subtasks, and defects.

It also helped tracking the sprint process more efficiently.

It gave us control over all test artifacts in one place, along with easy traceability, mapping between stories, bugs, test cases, and test cycles.

The traceability mapping feature is something that became very useful, especially during releases and bug fixes.

The creation of epics and stories/defects is also very useful and simple.

It should have its own repository for test case creation, so that one does not have to resort to third-party tools and plugins.

JIRA is the project management system in my company. We use it on a daily basis. It is the main instrument widely used by QAs, Product Developers, Technical Writers, and Project Managers

All issues are stored in one place. JIRA stores history of changes, which helps a lot to track who, when, and why the issue was modified. Also, JIRA is very customizable, for example, you can add unique fields or remove the existing ones. Reports, analytics, and a ton of widgets, they are great and intuitive. Perfect for an agile team.

1. History of changes/activities
2. Customizable path of changing statuses of issues
3. Ability to limit access rights
4. Integration with other tools

As a Technical Writer, I would love to have more features to make nice documents, like Release Notes or a feature overview, right from JIRA.

For QA, the most interesting for me are boards, backlog, and filters.

We finally started to use Git integration, so it is easy now to find a fix of a specific issue.

Filters: I never use a simple filter because it is not enough. When I have a complex filter and switch to simple, the switch is impossible. Also, even with complex filters, not all searches are possible.

Grid: It is really strange that there is no possibility to edit an item in the grid. You need to go inside, and even then, not all items are editable, so you need to switch to edit mode. That's too many clicks and switches.

Make the product more user-friendly. It should be easy even for a person on his first day: to edit items, to select several items, to copy items. The product should be for people.

Two years.

Not yet.

Not yet.

Haven't used it.

Yes, I've used HPE Agile Manager. I switched because I switched the company I work for, and the new one works with JIRA.

I didn't install it, I only use the web interface.

Not my area of responsibility.

Not my area of responsibility.

One of the valuable features is traceability from requirements to test cases.

Traceability was not available before. This is a great advantage for audits

I would like to see test execution modules.

We have used this solution for three years.

We encountered only a few issues with stability.

We did not encounter any issues with scalability.

Technical support is good. We use Beecom as the provider.

QC was used here, but I do not know why they made the switch.

JIRA can be parametrized quite intensively. Once you understood how it works, it works well.

We started here with this product, after the decision was made.

Use Beecom as the provider.

The adaptability of the Scrum and Kanban boards for other uses, with careful use of the customization features.

It has simplified our PM work tremendously, as we switched from VersionOne. We have much more buy-in from dev teams and we see a marked difference in productivity.

Ease of administration and customization. It is really clunky in this area. Also, permissions are nice, but they need more refinement so a project admin has more capability and less reliance on the system administrators.

We have been using this solution for approximately four years.

There were issues with deployment. Because we use it on-premises rather than in the cloud, for regulatory reasons, we are often behind, but not for long. Apart from that, our PlatOps team always runs into problems, though I cannot speak directly to those issues.

There weren't terrible issues with stability, but it is easy, when customizing, to make a mistake that will "break" JIRA for all users. It takes a lot of care.

I did not encounter any issues with scalability.

Customer service is excellent, although they are only available via email.

Technical support is excellent, because they are responsive.

We used VersionOne and it was simply too powerful, so to speak. It was bulky, expensive, and simply became a mess with so many users. VersionOne isn't a bad product at all, but our IT department just isn't big or complex enough for an "enterprise" product.

We implemented it ourselves.

Our ROI is very good. Almost all licenses are taken and it is even being used by the rest of the business, outside of IT.

The licensing model is annoying. They nickel and dime you.

We evaluated Asana and even Trello, as we were trying to simplify. But those solutions, among others, were too simple.

Ensure that your admins learn by first installing to a QA server for experimentation, if you are doing it on-premises. As for those learning it in the cloud version, create dummy projects, categorize them as such, and be careful about how many changes you make at once.

The configurable workflows and boards make it easy for us to execute and oversee our own unique process. The portfolio feature allows you to conceptualize your roadmap and experiment with various scenarios before committing to execute. Once you learn how to configure the system, it is extremely powerful.

JIRA has created visibility for our IT organization that did not previously exist.

There are some minor quirks, such as zero-point stories not appearing in the portfolio scope. We often poke stories at zero points because we have a very small group that needs outside help from time-to-time. We need to track these stories without impacting team velocity, so we poke them at zero.

These stories will not appear in the scope/schedule in the portfolio because the system interprets zero points as zero scope, even though the issues are open, assigned to the release and assigned to a Sprint. It would be nice to be able to see them in the schedule.

We have been using this product for three years.

We did not encounter any issues with stability.

We did not encounter any issues with scalability.

I would give technical support a rating of 5/10. I have only asked two questions in the support forums. One was answered very quickly and the other was never answered.

I previously used CA Agile (a.k.a. ‘Rally’). My company decided to switch to JIRA because we were already using it for bug tracking. Once the Agile/Portfolio features were released, we decided to use JIRA for all IT project planning and tracking.

The initial setup was pretty straightforward. One thing I personally don’t like is how the system, by default, assumes that all projects will have a different workflow and screen configuration. This adds complexity in my opinion. It should assume that there is a default workflow and configuration across projects and then allow you to copy and customize the defaults.

It is very cheap if you forego the local instance and stick to the cloud.

We evaluated Microsoft TFS and Targetprocess. Neither had a Portfolio planning feature, which is why we decided to stick with JIRA.

Establish a basic project management methodology and workflow first, with clear roles and responsibilities, and then use this product to execute. It is only as effective as you are disciplined in your sprint planning and execution.

Perfect for keeping track of large amounts of bugs, tasks queries and releases for fixes. 

The SaaS does the job it is supposed to: helps you keep track of your projects. What I like most is the ease of adding users and the obvious nature of what they need to do -  drag and drop is always a win. 

It is cross methodology so Scrum, Kanban... it doesn't matter, you can use JIRA.

I like how it shows the sprints remaining. Being able to instantly see where you are in a project and what is coming up is invaluable. 

Also, the ability to link a programme of projects is very helpful. I can see where all of the teams are with their individual projects but also how they fit into the overarching business plan for the year.

In reality, it's allowed me to raise and keep track of 700 tickets (bugs, queries, tasks etc) effectively. I can track what tickets are in UAT and which ones are coming out in the next software release. It's very simple. 

It allows all of those involved in a project, to see what stage their deliverables are (depending on what you allow people to view, they can see all deliverables from all teams)

Keeping everything in one central place with it obvious as to who is responsible for what, is a fantastic thing. 

It gives programme managers an overview of how a slew of projects are going. This also provides information for Exec meetings/Board meetings - visuals are always helpful to instantly show people what is happening with a programme of improvements.

Basically it allows me to see what is happening very quickly. 

I have no areas of improvement that I would push. JIRA does what I need - it allows me to assign tasks and to update my project. Any problems that I have found have been more to do with people entering with a lack of details - rubbish in = rubbish out. But that is the same with all apps.

I've used JIRA for over a couple of years, in three organisations, so I have some experience of how different places use it.

SaaS so nothing to deploy really. 

There's been the odd amount of JIRA downtime (not self hosted) and sometimes tickets that can't be accessed. 

I've not had need to contact the customer support team so I suppose that is a good thing.

Easy to configure, very fast to configure, extremely powerful workflows and schemes, integrates with other Atlassian tools as well as 3rd party tools.

Collaboration and software development lifecycle were the 2 keys that JIRA served great for. We have multiple organizations in the company already using JIRA for tracking projects.

Better JIRA Agile integration and more functionality related to JIRA Agile plugin

JIRA: 10 years

We didn't encounter any deployment issues

We didn't encounter any stability issues

We didn't encounter any scalability issues

9/10

8/10

Remedy, Bugzilla, Clearcase, TestTrack and Rally have all been replaced with JIRA with my leadership

Straightforward

In-House

60%

10 years ago 2K initially and 1K for additional plugins. recently 10K for the Atlassian Suite and additional plugins.

HP QTP, Serena Business Manager, Rally

It rocks simply.

The ability to keep stories, bugs and documentation in one application is a valuable feature, as is the ability to easily create swim lanes for organizing work.

As everything is within one application, it is easy to write end-of-sprint reports.

It worked fine for my requirements.

Stability: we encountered occasional timeouts.

I have used this product on and off for about seven years.

I did not encounter any deployment issues.

We encountered occasional timeouts.

I did not encounter any scalability issues.

I did not need to contact customer service.

I did not need to contact technical support.

I have not used any other solution, before this product.

The setup was very straightforward.

We have implemented this product in-house.

This product is easy to set-up. There are many add-on applications to assist you further to manage all requirements such as Confluence for document control, Capture for testing, etc.

Customization of workflow is a key valuable feature. JIRA comes with a few default workflows, however you can create highly customized workflows depending on your needs.

Tracking more items in JIRA allows for more transparency of projects; centralized access to latest issues, risks, tasks, etc.

Improvements for Cloud version. One such item is available of nested user groups, which is available on server version. Managing a large number of users on Cloud version is extremely challenging due to lack of this capability. I wrote my own command line admin tool in order to manage users more easily.

I have used it for two years and was the main admin also.

We used the Cloud version, due to external access needs. Cloud version deployment is just configuration.

With more users and more projects, administration becomes more difficult. Administration is very manual. Thus, I had to write my own command line tool to automate some of my administration.

Customer service is good. Response to support requests were fairly quick.

Technical support is good.

Initial setup is straightforward. A large user base and/or large number of projects requires more planning and strategy, so that you can re-use common workflows, rather than create new configurations for every project (think of abstraction is object-oriented programming).

Pricing is based on the number of users. Cloud is cheaper, but choose in-house (server) version if you can, as it has more features and is more secure; overall very affordable.

We looked at RedMine (open source), but features were limited, and it is not very user friendly. Other options such as BaseCamp and Asana were not really comparable products, in my mind, even though they come up on many comparison websites.

JIRA is tool. As with any tool, it needs to be in the hands of the right person to be used effectively. The administrator and/or trainer in your company should be very competent with JIRA, as they will be leading the effort. JIRA is powerful, but what truly makes it a powerful tool is integration with other Atlassian packages and third-party software. JIRA should almost always be used in conjunction with Confluence. There are many integrations available such as GitHub and many other applications.

Multiple features make this product a delight to use. Using this for backlog prioritization is the key to either kanban or scrum processes. JIRA does a great job of articulating the story and adding elements to the story to help in the prioritization. If you are overseeing multiple projects, it allows you to easily follow the teams progress.

Another feature is the ability to incorporate add-ons. It’s great to have for those one-off processes you need. For example, the integration with Confluence.

Working in a dev shop that is 100% scrum, this tool is invaluable in its insights to how the process is working. Are the stories written well? Is the team executing on the highest priorities? How is the team executing sprint by sprint? All these can be found easily within JIRA, either with their out-of-the-box reporting, or the ease with which search queries can be downloaded to CSV to manipulate in a data visualization tool.

The reporting out of the box is minimal; I would like to see a report-building capability out of the box. Teams have access to more than a dozen out-of-the-box reports with real-time, actionable insights into how their teams are performing sprint over sprint. Examples include Burndown, Sprint, Cumulative Flow, Epic , release, Velocity. However most will find these reports too simple and want some sophistication. Luckily Jira gives the ability to export results where you can work offline with them in a tool like Google Sheets, Microsoft Excel or other preferred data parsing tool. For additional spend you can purchase their reporting plugin.

I have used this application for approximately five years over several different roles: product management, development manager and delivery manager.

We deployed on premise. The amount of time to deploy was simple for a trained technician. Would highly recommend if installing on premise to shy away from any customizations in workflows; will make upgrades a pain in the future. If you considering using this, I would recommend the cloud option first.

No issues with stability.

Like any application installed on premise, you must be monitoring server and application logs to ensure the right level of performance. Scaling up is easy.

Most of their customer service comes from the community. Robust community of evangelists who respond rather quickly. As the application is highly stable, contacting customer service has been few and far between. Responses came thru within expected timeframes and were helpful, even if pointing to already published articles.

I would rate their technical support high.

I've also used Microsoft TFS (Team Foundation Server) for another development team that was .NET based. Used both Jira and TFS at the same time, though for different project teams.

Atlassian built their reputation on building applications that were easy to install and using a community model to improve. The setup of JIRA was straightforward, just as the documentation indicated. Us technology people have a hard time reading thru user guides, but these were easy and quick.

It was implemented by one of our developers.

Development teams, especially scrum teams, need some type of tool. For geographically dispersed teams, the ROI has a quick payback period, less than three months. Geography could be the dev team in one city and the product team in another.

Look to their cloud offering first; get using it quickly. Be wary of some of the add-ons, as there are cost components to them; if you need them, add them in.

As indicated above, we used Microsoft TFS. We tried to have a JavaScript team use TFS, but it didn't really fit into all the other ALM tools a JavaScript developer uses, so we quickly scrapped TFS and moved back to JIRA. The same was true for a .NET team; tried to have them use JIRA, but it was difficult to break the Microsoft eco-system. Not impossible in that case, just a culture shift you want to address carefully.

Review all your use cases for the tools to see if Atlassian matches up nicely to those you need; makes integration easier when all are from one provider. Be sure you understand what you are licensed for and what costs extra. For example, do you need portfolio management? Because, if you do, it's an extra cost.

JIRA gives you all the features you need for organizing your work within one team and across teams in a very efficient and structured way. It is more than just a ticketing system and more than just a project management tool.

It is very user-friendly and very structured which makes it very easy to ask people from non-technical departments to come and join you within JIRA projects.

The amount of plugins is astounding, and many of them have a surprisingly high quality. While some are free, some other plugins are very expensive, but at the same time worth the money (at least this is what I think).

JIRA could be basically used to organize the work of a whole company, which is why it is so valuable.

JIRA helped us to work across teams and sites, while staying efficient and reducing communication overhead to a minimum. Since it plays very well with other Atlassian products, you can make sure that other members of the staff find JIRA issue related information much faster than in the traditional way (e.g. asking, search engine etc.).

JIRA is written in JAVA and therefore a bit hard to trouble-shoot. It also is very expensive once you have a lot of users. And since it is very flexible, it can also lead to situations where you loose overview of permissions, custom issue types etc. It also takes too long to create your own custom fields and issue types since you have to work yourself trough many layers of abstraction and features. But this is a well-known downside of flexibility and openness.

I have been using JIRA for more than 2,5 years.

No, deployment and upgrading was always straightforward.

Sometimes, it seems that JIRA gets a little slow. But is is very hard to say if the network connection, the underlying system or JIRA itself is the one to blame.

Not yet.

I used a heavily modified version of Sugar CRM, which was basically a custom solution. Never again.

The initial setup was very easy.

Since JIRA gets really expensive when having a lot of users (and maybe plugins), you should try to avoid letting everyone in by default. Maybe it is better to only give those users access who really could benefit from this product.

In terms of requirements management, the ability to write the descriptions and acceptance criteria are helpful. We can also group the stories by epic and associate stories by themes. There are tags that help us categorize stories. We can attach documents such as use cases and spreadsheets for detailed information as well as link to other stories.

We are able to track the development work for a particular story or set of stories through the Kanban board easily. The tool helps with team collaboration and raises visibility to the backlog of work to those who are interested in the project’s requirements.

We spend hours and sometimes days looking through completed stories in order to determine how to manage a defect in our existing system. We used to use Word and Excel for requirements documentation, and thought primitive, still, I was able to find specific requirements for just about any topic in a matter of minutes by using various searches and by simply knowing that a requirement probably resides in a specific document. I would ask that Altassian improve its keyword search capability and provide reports that could group information in the way I want it grouped for re-use by maintenance and production support teams when troubleshooting an existing system.

We've used it for three years for managing the product and sprint backlog of our agile projects. The product was never designed for requirements management yet our organization still insists we can and will use it to manage requirements. We considered some add-ons to the product but so far.

I am not aware of any issues with the deployment.

I am not aware of any issues with the stability.

I am not aware of any issues with the scalability.

From what I can tell the technical support is adequate. I do not deal with Altassian so I cannot provide a valid answer.

I was not involved in the decision to use this product. Our Product Owner team made some recommendations for add in products and stand-alone ones; however our recommendations were rejected due to cost considerations. Previously we used Excel, Word and Visio to represent the requirements. We stored the documents in a common share and versioned the documents each time changes were made.

We have a complex implementation. I do not know if the initial set up was straight forward. We have many, many teams across the country using JIRA. Since we have a single implementation used by all teams. I can see all the projects and the stories etc. by logging in with my credentials.

1. "Start watching this issue" which sends updates to a user who has subscribed to this JIRA when there are changes made
2. It provides us with a view of historic changes that are recorded
3. It allows universal searches, even across multiple projects in JIRA, when we want to find the JIRA where a keyword was referenced

We use this as a primary tool to record all requirements and changes. This product is absolutely easy to use and does its job perfectly. 

My opinion of this product is that it is quite complete - from a QA standpoint.

I've used it for four years. We have this integrated with SpiraTest, so all incidents raised in SpiraTest are replicated over to JIRA and vice-versa.

JIRA was the solution we used throughout. It had no competition.

This is a good product, and I would back it every time.

JIRA comes with a workflow designer which allows to design and keep track of execution of pretty much any process (similar to what a BPM solution would do but cheaper). In the new or existing workflows you can define new "statuses" which you can use as "Queues" to handle your process status or requests.

In principle, JIRA was designed to follow software development projects, but we are also using it as a solution for our call centers to follow on "Learning Administration System" processes.

It allows you to extend and define any new entities (record types), define sub-tasks, links between records as well as define new fields, screens and customize your UI based on your needs.

It also integrates very well with other applications thanks to its Restful API. In my case I integrated with JIRA from Webmethods EAI middleware as well as from SQL Server 2014 SSIS.

JIRA has a marketplace where many plug-ins are available (some for free) to extend any missing features, as well as it comes with an SDK to create your own one if needed. In fact, this is one of the biggest potentials from my point of view.

Among others Atlassian (JIRA's company) has two powerful plug-ins

• Service Desk (to control SLAs in top of your processes) - actually not a plug-in a product on top of JIRA.
• JIRA Agile which allows to follow Soft Dev Projects using SCRUM or KANBAN methodology.

• We deployed JIRA and JIRA Agile plug-in to keep track of our software development cycles using SCRUM methodology.
• It has been our product of choice for some time now in order to deploy Learning Administration Systems for our customers.

I strongly believe that ease of use for the administration part (workflows, screens, field definitions) could be improved. Sometimes it is difficult to understand "where you are" when administering JIRA.

As a Test Analyst my first requirement is to have a tool where I can create a repository for all my test activities like test cases, test execution, defects and reports. Zephyr is an add-on which provides facility to use JIRA as a test management tool. We can write test cases, add versions, create test cycles and execute cases. To make life easy JIRA comes with a dashboard where I can add different gadgets to generate reports on different criteria.

My organization uses Wiki and JIRA both for requirement gathering, but very few know the capability of JIRA as a test management solution. People in the past used to write and execute test cases in WIKI and also log the defects from there. This not only made it difficult to manage the test cases and defect, but also there are no reports which can be extracted out of it. It becomes very difficult to fetch efficiency in each test cycles. Also, we were not able to track test coverage because we couldn't link requirement with test cases in Wiki. But after JIRA provided us a feature to use it as test management we are managing all these very effectively.

Though JIRA can be used as a Test Management tool, it is not complete by itself. There are still a few niggles in it as compared to other products like HP ALM. We can export the reports in xls or pdf. Also whenever we fail any test steps, the test does not fail by itself, we need to manually select fail from status drop down. JIRA does not provide any lock feature for a test case if any person is working on that case. In fact, both people can assess the same case at the same time.

I've been using JIRA for the past 2 years.

I found JIRA to be a stable product and didn't have any issues with the response time as compared with HP ALM. Only a couple of times during last 2 years it was down for few hours.

I worked on HP QC 9 & 10 before JIRA. There were no issues with these tools to switch to JIRA, but the tool used fora project always depends on management, user benefits and cost involved in it.

User friendly, easy to set up and maintain. Great integration along other Atlassian tools. Application can be enhanced either with free plug-ins or you can create your own.

Seamlessly merged efforts between quality and R&D.

Missing a Requirement Management piece on the suite.

1. Its agile support is fantastic! Whether you are an agile expert, or just starting for both scrum and kanban teams, the whole agile process is supported
2. Requirements log
3. Story board
4. Dashboards are a great feature to stay on top of what is going on in all the projects you are managing
5. It's accessible from practically anywhere, whether you're on a mobile device or desktop across many OSs and browsers

Integrating JIRA with HP Quality Center gave our dev team and management a new window to participate/track the defects Testing Team reports from. This integration is absolutely powerful and made defect sharing with different parties a peace of cake. Now we, the testing team, can report defects on our own "beloved" HP QC, and these defects gets sent automatically or upon request to different JIRA Projects and to different project parties and teams.

I would say test management, as it's a generic issue tracking tool, and not designed specifically for test management. So, the only support for test cases is the ability to mark them as passed or failed as part of the test execution, and that's the whole test, not step by step like Quality Center. It does have many test management add-ons that can be bought, and some of them can perform close functionality to what HP Sprinter does, like Bonfire, but it does not provide video recording. It doesn't provide version control for Test Cases, and integration with Test Automation and Performance Testing tools is cumbersome.

I hate the fact that I have to buy an add-on for each feature I need. Some people might see this as positive thing since you buy only what you need, but again, not all add-ons are provided by Atlassian, and hence support and quality is subject to different providers, which is again is cumbersome, and not many people would go on with.

Reporting also needs improvement, as I need to be able to create my own custom reports and be able to export them, and screen shots doesn't work all the time.

If you are an agile development team, go for it. I would advise that f your dev team have problems accessing HP Quality Center, go for it and integrate Jira with Quality Center.

JIRA features are agile planning and release notes. We heavily use the Service Desk to support our product customers, and we also provide support for our services customers via JIRA tickets with a time tracking plug-in so invoicing, project status, are available to everyone us and our clients, keeping us on the same page.

We are now using this system for all time tracking of internal non-billable projects, support contracts, development tasks and billable work. We can see our resources utilization and track how much time was spent on each client, which is good for invoicing, on Go2Group made products. This helps with our ROI on a product by product basis, and we even track our time off in this system.

It has enabled us to be on the same page with our client’s they can see the tasks and burn downs and exactly where their money is being spent. When we combine this with the Confluence Wiki, we now have a very robust Q&A and documentation page. We use it for sign-offs and online documentation. There is a history of what folks have done, and the information is radiated out in near real time. It is all there.

We can serve multiple clients, our own internal products, projects, and operations from one system cutting the resources needed to run these systems. Compliance is much easier to achieve, documentation, you need to sort out what needs to be displayed and reported in the formats you wish.

All in all, these tools, with little effort or cost, have allowed us to provide, what larger consulting and product firms struggle to provide due to legacy products/system/acquisitions, and compliance.

A more enhanced Service Desk module, with support for more types of alarms and the like.

The product is very easy to download, and install. Once downloaded, you just click next, OK, then viola! You are a newly minted JIRA Administrator, it is too easy. Teams, company data, and processes end up growing from grass roots movement before management realize it.

While Atlassian and TFS seem to be more of the toolsets that companies are adopting, and they are great core ALM stacks to build upon, you are still going to need tools from other vendors for most environments. For instance, you have more strenuous support desk needs, there is ServiceNow. If you make cars, boats, aeroplanes, trains, etc., you will most likely need IBM Rational DOORS. High end testing is still the domain of HP ALM/QC. Aerospace higher-end agile planning, you could look at JIRA Agile or VersionOne, or Rally. Embedded C, etc.

To summarize, MS TFS and/or Atlassian (maker of JIRA) are good core ALM stacks to run your shop on. The remaining issues are generally around how to integrate other systems to TFS or Atlassian, and also, how to migrate to TFS/Atlassian.

We are a heavy user of the Atlassian tools and are a reseller. We do VAR work for other competing ALM solutions as well, notably Microsoft, IBM, HP, Perforce, etc. This is just the toolset we have grown into.

Then they look into the systems and realize what risks there are and are usually slow on the uptake to designate these systems as Class A or B critical systems. They may be surprised at how many individual systems have sprouted across their organizations. You can find yourself in an organization with multiple JIRA instances due to the grass roots nature of adoption, with dozens of workflows and hundreds of custom fields in each instance.

It can be a lot of work to pull these together under compliance and DevOps. Would be much easier to accept these tools as mission critical, or at least realize their importance, and grow them correctly.

Defect Management, Issue Management, and the GreenHopper plugin with Agile.

They should provide CLI or some other deployment mechanism that improves productivity by avoiding duplicate efforts.

6 years as a user, and 1 month evaluation period

During an upgrade we found an issue.

Yes, this is not stable as compared to other tools I managed.

Yes, scalability is an issue. Performance decreases.

7/10

7/10

Straightforward

Ourselves

I would rate it a 5 on scale of 10, but again it depends how large is the team, company size, overall features needed and the instance you want to manage.

When we used it, it was a low-cost solution but now the costs have increased. The team has to look into long term costs.

Yes, other defect management tools available on the market when I first evaluated JIRA 6 years ago.

UI of this tool is good.

Small teams and small projects may consider this as good option.

The features mentioned below were quite useful for me -

• Project tracking

• Planning

• Defect management

• Code integration

• Service Desk

• Email notifications

• Reporting

In my organization, we have so many diverse projects, that the flexibility to integrating JIRA with other tools has been a helpful feature. It has streamlined and channelled our project and test management activities. This has helped all my organization's departments as we now have a data-bank that means anyone can access the required information with a few mouse clicks; be it someone from sales, QA, developer, or management.

The only problem area for me is applying filters, and for new users it is very complicated work. I hope they can come up with a better filtering functionality, as this is one of the most basic, important and most widely used features by all categories of users.

I have been using different versions of JIRA for the last three to four years.

No issues encountered.

No issues encountered.

No issues encountered.

It's very good.

It's very good.

We previously used Quality Center, but JIRA offers better value for money.

The initial setup was straightforward if you know the basics of installation.

Through a vendor team and they were real experts in JIRA.

I can not give you details but the ROI is excellent.

JIRA's pricing and licensing is the best in the market with the features a user gets.

• Quality Center
• Mantis

This tool has some good bug tracking, issue tracking and project management features. One of the best feature is its integration with other tools which I love, but at the same time, it has some limitations as well.

This is a great product, but I always say before jumping into using it, go through the user guide. Also, if possible, look for some tutorial videos to get the full use of its functionalities.

Usability for our users and flexibility for our admins.

JIRA and Confluence have taken off here like wildfire. Our users enterprise-wide have made excellent use of these tools.

Performance and Scalability in a large enterprise could be improved.

4-5 years.

Not with deployment, but growing pains as fast as we have grown in the last few years with JIRA. We now have 7 different instances of JIRA.

Yes – we wished we would have stayed on the simple path of using the product with fewer add-ons and customization. Most of the complexity is add-ons and customizations that we have chosen to do and likely we have taken some of those too far.

Yes...We would really like to see JIRA scale into 10-100 millions issue range.

Took some getting used to but great!

Took some getting used to but great!

We switched because we wanted to remove over 3000 Lotus Notes applications. 30-40% of those applications were replaced with JIRA or Confluence.

Atlassian products seem to be very simple and straightforward if you use it simply and stick with what comes with the product. The complexity and complication comes when you introduce add-ons and customizations. The other observation is that Atlassian products seem to be less ‘conditioned’ for larger enterprises.

The ROI on Atlassian products has been tremendous. It’s been well worth the investment!

We chose JIRA/Confluence as they were solutions we can get up and running quickest, and also cheap.

Keep it simple. . . minimize the add-ons and customizations!

The features of the Technical Account Management (TAM) which have been most valuable for us are understanding the limitations of tools, suggested sizing and approach for operation teams, and suggested approaches for onboarding and educations.

The TAM provided good insight as to how we can more effectively perform troubleshooting, and scale down operational costs.

Co-location. Working out times with someone on the West Coast is painful. Also more ROI material. Big blue can spin out ridiculous documents that executives love as to why spending millions of dollars on IBM will somehow make us richer.

The TAM was able to assist us with issues we had involving deployment.

It was a struggle with TAM vs. Premier but eventually we were able to address some stability issues. We had an app crashing every other day for several weeks before it got the attention we thought this contract would bring.

In terms of the TAM and scalability the only issue was just an upsell to datacenter really. But the TAM is helping look at forecasting triggers etc to understand the need for more instances. It is really difficult to get any sizing recommendations for horsepower though. The feedback is “well every customer is unique, so it’s difficult to say” and push to Premier Support for that.

A few mismatched tools. The Atlassian ecosystem has tools that do one function very well, but pull together nicely as a platform. Would like more consistent navigation and provisioning integration though like what is seen in On demand/cloud offering.

We had setup well before the TAM agreement. Pretty straightforward other then lack of sizing recommendations across the board.

Yes, TeamCollab, Home grown tools, Redmine, Jenkins, XLDeploy, Jazz/BuildForge and RTC. RTC and XLDeploy/Jenkins combo is still widely used and seen as an internal competitor.

I would recommend buying premier support for half the price and training your folks internally. It’s really not at all what we felt was advertised.

JIRA: Product is well liked but we have had performance issues. Premier Support: Knowledge is very good and they are willing to bring in other people when they need to. The Premier Support team was very thorough and very responsive.

I think that if you look at how we troubleshoot, Premier Support has allowed us to not waste our time with dead ends, to have better focus, and get to root case much faster. Even though we still have monitoring in place, for root cause analysis we rely heavily on Premier Support and don’t waste as much time.

For our Premier Support, We would like to have on the call interaction all the time. The session we’ve had recently has been valuable, but we would like to see more live sessions/interactions.

Purchased Sept. 27th 2014.

Our Premier Support engineer was extremely helpful with deployment. I was pleasantly surprised, the engineer gave us guidance, looked for any potential issues, and was above and beyond in terms of service. They did a really fantastic job.

From the beginning that has been the main thing we have been working on and thru Premier Support, they have done a good job working on our side, and escalating to a larger team when needed.

The Premier Support team was very thorough and very responsive.

The Premier Support team was very thorough and very responsive.

We previously used the standard Atlassian support and then jumped from standard to premier. In terms of tracking, we had other defect tracking, but now JIRA has been a replacement – it is the tool of the future.

The initial setup was straightforward.

Yes, we have other vendors and tools – evaluation is ongoing.

I would tell people to understand your growth and usage up front – really comes down to understanding that and keeping it under control. We grew too fast and weren’t prepared for the issues that came with that; you want to make sure you have a good performance testing environment in place, datacenter etc. so you’re not scrambling afterwards.

Having a Technical Account Manager gives us someone who I can email about any of my questions or concerns about products, roadmaps, configuration and scalability options, etc. If I have an idea for something I want to do he might say "that’s a terrible idea", or "you might want to try it this way instead", because he has a depth of internal knowledge and context which most end users are unable to attain. This internal advocacy, contacts, and ease of communication are each tremendously helpful.

Collaboration on open action items and active ongoing projects. I spoke with my TAM about this issue and he completely agrees. There is no one system on which TAMs and their customers can collaborate on action items, ongoing projects, meeting notes, etc.

Began using Technical Account Management (TAM) in Nov 2014.

Yes. We were having an issue where we have to take one of their products offline to do a backup every night. I was certain there was a better way that it could be done, but on Atlassian Answers, other users were giving vague, hand-wavy responses. Our TAM was able to give us a couple different options, each of which will be able to save a department of 300 roughly 4 hours a night.

No.

We are just in the process of dealing with future scalability issues and having the TAM in place now puts us in a good place to address those concerns.

Very high.

Well above average. Their response time is good, and we are able to escalate what we need to escalate.

Yes, we have used several throughout the growth of our part of our organization. Most recently we moved off of Rational Team Concert from IBM. There is not enough time to tell you why I hate that product! It is one of the worst products I have ever used for ALM. It is not set up to encourage self-directed teams, despite its name. It says it can do whatever it wants, but it is not designed as a product to make people happy, just to make IBM's consulting organizations more money. Atlassian products are the exact opposite. A new team can be brought on and be working efficiently within minutes – with Team Concert could be hours or even days, if ever, before a team can be working well together.

The initial setup was very straightforward. The only complexities had to do with our own infrastructure. With Atlassian, either you can run the programs open to the world or behind the firewall. The default state for our systems is locked down, but Atlassian works best when their tools are able to connect to one another. This isn't a problem with the products, just an issue with our own infrastructure. I run local development versions of the tools on my laptop with no issues.

Completely in-house.

We did not look at any other complete suites of tools. We evaluated Rally Enterprise and VersionOne for project/defect tracking. Both of those options had decent levels of integration with our CI tools. Ultimately the value that the Atlassian suite gave us as a total package of discrete, but connected, components was above and beyond the piecemeal approach we would have had to take otherwise.

As an Enterprise customer, evaluate what you really need. If it's tech support above/beyond what comes with the subscription, go with the Enterprise tech support instead.

TAM is when you really need/want an advocate within Atlassian. For instance, our program and product management groups set up an on-site meeting with our TAM to discuss JIRA Portfolio, and they were able to ask questions of the Portfolio product manager as well as the TAM after a solid demo. Without a TAM in place, this type of thing would have been impossible short of sending everyone to the Atlassian Summit (User Conference) every year. That’s invaluable.

Another recent example is that we had a problem with a plug-in owned by Atlassian, but because we have our TAM in place he was able to get us in touch with the plugin developer directly and we've skipped weeks of struggle.

It's all about advocacy, insight into product roadmaps, best practices, etc.

For the most part the system is simple to use and simple to administer.

When I began I was part of a very small development team that did not have any formal bug tracking in place. Jira has gone from being a simple bug tracker to a full development planning suite, in addition to tracking our support and production tasks.

There are so, SO many areas that I couldn’t even begin to count. A cursory glance at fixes and improvements requested by users would speak volumes. The most basic of requests have been allowed to languish for years, many over a decade. (really) The most basic improvement would be to offer WYSIWYG text editing. There are open source packages that could easily be integrated, but Atlassian wants people to buy Confluence. Bulk editing multi-value fields should not be limited to overwriting what is already there. There should be an append mode offered.

We’ve had Jira in place for 6 ½ years.

I have not had any issues.

None to date.

None to date, though we did need to move to a new server to meet our growing needs.

Atlassian’s customer service used to be wonderful. There was phone support that was always accessible. Support is absolutely terrible now. All support is performed via email and the response time is long. Often multiple messages need to be exchanged before a point is made and understood.

Not the worst but definitely no longer the best.

No solution was in place prior to Jira.

Our initial setup was fairly straightforward, though all we run on the server is the bare minimum needed to get Jira up and running.

IT put the server together for me and I took care of the rest.

In the beginning it was fantastic. The annual license renewal was definitely worth it for phone support and significant improvements in Jira. Nowadays the “improvements” are lackluster at best, and phone support is gone. The annual renewal would be worth it to stay current with the latest releases, but Atlassian’s plugin support is lacking; lack of plugin support has stopped us from upgrading, and continues to.

I don’t recall the original start up cost. The initial license fee was considerably lower than it is today, and had no limits on the number of users. Today, apart from the general costs of maintaining the server, we have the annual license renewal fee.

I looked at Trac, Bugzilla, Test Track.

Before making a decision have a look at the requested features and bug fixes – see what has not been addressed and what the plans are to address the features of greatest interest to you.

• Great user interface - it is light and very user friendly
• Web technologies - no need to install any local ("thick") clients on PC, just web browser
• JIRA is very customizable and has a modular structure - this is very important, when an organization has often changing workflows
• Powerful reporting and filtering systems
• Time tracking and workloging
• Fully customizable desktops

• Employees stopped to write on colourful stickers and leave its at their monitors
• My friend and his manager can see what each employee is doing and find lazies
• Each project participant began to think before writing (earlier someone could say something but after some days his/he worlds were forgotten, or he/she might say that he/she didn't say that, etc);
• Employees started to plan their time and try to work faster and better
• Customers of the organization now can create tickets and requests via JIRA, no phone calls, no email conversations. The result - most of requests from customers are processed faster.
• A customer can see the time tracking of his tickets, so he can plan future requests and calculate current and future payments (and all that without phone calls).

Workflow configuration (escalation, workflow chaining, conditions, validators, post-scripting, etc)

• Enforce role- and group-based permissions re: who can drag tickets, and when, on the agile boards.
• Instill true SLA-based reporting and escalation to keep work moving seamlessly through the process flow.

• Workflow management
• User permissions
• Native reporting capabilities in workflow
• Ticket status, etc

6 years

No

No

No

The forums and online documentation have been fine. I haven't needed to escalate beyond that.

The forums and online documentation have been fine. I haven't needed to escalate beyond that.

At my previous company they used Assembla. I switched them to JIRA which is more open in its project sharing as well as far more configurable.

JIRA has been very simple to use, no issues.

I've always done the implementations myself.

As an enabler of process and procedures, JIRA's ROI can be measured in that regard. Because we treat it like a tool and not an end unto itself, I've never measured it separately just for JIRA.

Including all plugins in my last job, ~$15,000 and $7,000 annually thereafter. That was very plugin-centric, however, due to the complexities and user interface solutions I implemented. Other deployments have been less expensive.

Bugzilla and other bug tracking tools were on the docket. We ultimately chose JIRA because of its UI polish and wide range of configuration options. When JIRA added Greenhopper, now JIRA Agile, that made the choice very simple going forward.

Read the online documentation, know what processes and procedures you wish to implement first, and keep it simple. Workflows can collapse under their own weight if they're overly complex for the sake of complexity, simply because "that's just the way things have always been done". Simplify simply simplify.

- A very good project management platform which can be used for issue tracking, as well as bug tracking. - Can be very easily run on in house servers as a hosted solution. - Can be very easily integrated with various source control platforms like CVS, Git, Mercurial, Subversion etc. - Due to its plugin architecture, it can be very easily integrated with various software IDE's, like Eclipse. - Has support for integrating with various cloud based tools provided by Atlassian.

- The inbuilt search functionality is quite buggy and lacks even the basic features. - You'll end up struggling when searching for a particular JIRA item, if you don't have the JIRA number. - There's no regexp support, and you can't do arbitrary AND/OR/NOT queries. The search feature needs a revamp. - The product lacks stability, as it occasionally runs out of memory. - The user interface is far from perfect.

Having used JIRA for the last 2 years, I can definitely say that having this tool with you is a big plus when it comes to project management. Plugin architecture and support for the popular version controls systems like SVN, CVS, etc., which makes it even better. Although, there is still room for improvement in areas like user interface and the search functionality which doesn't support arbitrary AND/NOT/OR queries.