Rally Software Reviews

I served as both an end user and administrator. The end-to-end lifecycle traceability is adequate, but the reporting functionality needs to be updated. From a single window, I can drill down and move into another subcategory, which I find beautiful. I can view configuration item details, including what is being changed and any attached change requests or configuration items being moved to another location. The traceability is clear, and there is end-to-end connectivity for any change item that I can see easily.

The end-to-end lifecycle traceability is good. I can drill down from a single window and move into another subcategory, which I find most valuable. I can view configuration item details, such as what is being changed, and I can see any change requests attached to items or configuration items being moved to other locations. The traceability is clear, and there is end-to-end connectivity for any change item.

Reporting is my main area of concern. Additionally, the migration activity and portability are important areas for improvement. If I needed to move from Jira to Rally Software, having built-in portability or migration utilities would be beneficial. At the time of my use, there was not an inbuilt capability to migrate applications from other third-party solutions to Rally Software. Currently, I am not using Rally Software.

I have used Rally Software for around two years.

Rally Software was stable, though I did not utilize it to its full potential.

I noticed that if you have a huge database, it becomes difficult to process the data.

I would rate customer service around eight.

I moved to another domain but did not transition from a previous solution.

I did not perform the initial setup myself, but I believe it is easy at an initial level. However, if you plan it according to architecture, it can be tricky. You need to plan according to the overall architecture. For small organizations, it is easy, but for larger organizations, it needs to be implemented in a planned way with all prerequisites ready.

One person is enough for installation, so that is not an issue.

The required team size depends on the maintenance cycle. For 24/7 support, at least two or three people are needed, with three being optimal for 24/7 shifts. For 8x5 support, one engineer is needed. For 16x5 support, two engineers are required. For 24/7 support, almost three engineers are needed.

The setup cost is expensive. I was not responsible for the license part, but it was on a yearly basis.

Rally Software competes with Atlassian in the market. Migration activity is an important consideration. On-premises to cloud integration might be a challenge. I did not face many challenges with my implementation. I do not use the AI functionality. Overall, I would rate Rally Software around eight out of ten, though I do not consider it the best option available as there is competition in the market. The main areas for improvement are reporting and built-in migration capabilities. My overall review rating is eight.

I work with Tech Mahindra, where there are different practices and competencies that focus on various tools and platforms such as Microsoft, CRM, and ERP. We manage our own practices and collaborate on projects as needed. My team specifically focuses on user interface development and provides experience design inputs for SAP projects when they arise, helping to shape the customer journey for those applications. For custom development, we handle it end-to-end.

Rally Software is easy to use for Agile project methodology because it follows Scrum and Kanban, helping with sprint planning and backlog management.

Rally Software provides real-time dashboards for different kinds of stakeholders and governance, giving clear insights into project progress, team velocity, and potential risks.

Backlog management is present in the product, allowing prioritization of tasks. The dashboards provide all types of insights through analytics.

Capacity planning helps optimize resource allocation, ensuring balanced workload and realistic sprint commitments for our projects.

The solution integrates with GitHub, and we can also integrate with Excel and CI/CD pipelines.

While I'm not heavily involved in project management tools, I am familiar with these tools. One area for improvement might be the rigidity in role and access configurations, which require many process changes to fit the tool. This seems to be the main disadvantage I have observed.

We have been using Rally Software for more than five years.

It's easy to install.

I don't observe any glitches or latency problems, so I can say it is 100% stable.

The solution is easy to scale.

We haven't had issues with customer care or technical support, so I'm not sure about their support, as we haven't faced challenges that required reaching out.

Positive

The ROI is visible, as that's why we are investing in these tools and running our projects successfully through them, despite a few challenges such as role-based access being somewhat difficult. The customer journey isn't perfect.

Rally Software is affordable because our customers also prefer it, and I have never heard concerns about pricing preventing us from using this tool.

I am a Senior Information Architect and Principal Consultant, focusing on UX.

This review will be published on peerspot.com in written or audio format, and I understand I can choose to remain anonymous if I wish, while I can access terms of use at peerspot.com/tos.

Broadcom can reach me via email if they need to confirm something regarding my review.

I can help them as a reference if I am aware of those products.

Rally Software has good features.

On a scale of 1-10, I rate Rally Software an 8.

I've seen how Rally Software has improved our organization's workflow. They're constantly upgrading their software based on customer needs. As one of their top customers using Agile SAFe throughout our company, we've benefited from these upgrades. They talk to different people and add new features. In Rally Software, they're enhancing how product managers can look at value streams. They keep incorporating new SAFe terminology as it evolves.

For example, as SAFe upgraded to version six point zero with new terms, Rally added those to their software. They're not just responding to customer needs, but also aligning closely with how SAFe is developing. Their software is fundamentally based on scaled agile principles. This approach of keeping up with both customer requirements and SAFe advancements is why the tool is so well-liked in our organization.

We use Rally Software extensively in our agile development processes. We have program boards set up where we write and break down stories. We assign story points and map dependencies between different stories, showing how stories from one team may depend on stories from another team.

It integrates these functions well, especially compared to Jira, which has some limitations in this area. The tool keeps improving based on how teams actually work in Scaled Agile, continually upgrading their software versions to meet our needs. 

I find the whole Rally Software tool integrated very nicely. In Jira, we often go to Confluence for documentation using two separate tools. But in the product, it's not like that. The documentation is tightly integrated. I don't feel like switching to another tool, like going from Jira to Confluence.

The tool is designed for collaboration. It shows your organization's view, showing different teams and verticals. It helps you collaborate on various effects and solutions from the top to the bottom of the organization. It has an ecosystem that supports this. All the dependencies between different teams can be easily mapped in Rally Software. They have a program board for that purpose.

The solution is expensive. 

I have been using the product for two to three years. 

I'd rate the stability as eight out of ten. It's generally quite stable for day-to-day work. However, we did experience some issues during our quarterly sessions. At these times, when all 200-300+ users were simultaneously active in the software, we occasionally encountered performance problems. The system would sometimes hang up. In these cases, our networking team would email us to restart the software or laptops, which usually resolves the issue. However, these stability problems were infrequent, happening only about once per quarter during peak usage periods. For most regular work, the software remained stable.

The tool is to be very scalable. It worked well for our scaled agile approach, which involved many different meetings. The solution scaled to the top of our organization, not just for agile teams. It provided options to see value streams and the flow of values decided by leadership and then showed how those broke down into epics, business stories, stories, and specific work items. In terms of user numbers, I estimate that more than 200 people in my organization were using Rally Software.

The solution's support is excellent. Whenever I have issues, their support team is very helpful. The user interface is also excellent. I appreciate that they keep upgrading the software regularly, about every quarter. They seem to listen to customer feedback and make changes accordingly, releasing new versions. When I used the tool, I was very satisfied with it. It catered to all my needs, my team's, and our project's needs. I didn't feel any new features were missing - it met our requirements well.

The tool's technical support is very nice. They quickly got on the phone and shared screens to see our issues. They tried to help right away. If they couldn't help immediately, they had a backup plan. They'd set up another meeting in a couple of days to work on a solution with us. For tougher problems, they might take a few weeks to find a fix. They'd then include this fix in their next software release to solve the bug.

Positive

I didn't switch to Rally Software from Jira. In my previous organization, they used Jira, so I used Jira there. When I moved to the current company, they used Rally Software, not Jira. It's about the IT landscape of the company you work for. When you join a new company, you must use whatever software they provide within their boundaries.

I rate the tool's initial deployment a ten out of ten. 

I don't know the exact pricing, but I think the tool is priced high. They provide quality workmanship, good software, regular upgrades, and they're always attentive and listen to users. Everything comes with a price. I think it's an expensive solution compared to Jira or other competitors, but it's a complete package.

I rate the overall solution an eight out of ten. I recommend that customers should buy and start using Rally Software because it's a complete package solution. It was developed by a California-based company which is very serious about its product. They've been improving and developing this product for years. This product is likely to stay in the market long-term. It's in customers' best interest to use a product like this where the company will support the solution and promise a roadmap for years.

Rally Software is always a time saver. You can get all the information you need for collaboration between teams or leaders in different positions. It was always helpful for quick PI planning. We do PI planning quarterly, and Rally Software is very helpful for this company-wide quarterly planning. It provides a lot of value in these processes.

We use Rally Software to plan our development work. We have quarterly PI meetings, which involve team members from across the globe. The tool helps us manage product integration, set dependencies, track issues, identify risks, and coordinate handovers between teams. We also use it for planning, coordination, execution, and signing off on deliverables and demos.

The tool is very useful for generating metrics to improve our project management. It helps with productivity by allowing us to focus on small pieces of functionality and deliver them in short timeframes. The tool provides senior management with visibility on priorities and progress. 

We use Rally Software to plan our development work across global teams. We have quarterly PI meetings with members of the US, UK, Australia, and India. It helps us manage product integration, set start and end dates, track dependencies and issues, identify risks, and coordinate handovers between teams.

For integration, if a product development activity involves five global teams (A, B, C, D, E), the solution helps us understand who starts first and when activities will be completed. In Agile, we can't wait until the last day, so we need to coordinate handshakes between teams.

The major benefit is improved deliverables. We have scrum meetings with customer demos. This helps us focus on small functionalities, track progress, and determine whether we can complete work for demos. It also aids integration when multiple teams demo.

The tool works best for shorter activities and small work delivered quickly. It may not be ideal for large waterfall projects, but it's very useful in our agile environment for delivering small pieces in short timeframes.

It helps with productivity through various metrics in the tool. We use these to measure against organizational expectations. Top management can access these metrics to review progress and make decisions about priorities.

The tool allows management to stop or start activities based on changing priorities. Work that becomes less urgent can be put in a backlog for future development.

The solution helps in all aspects, from development to senior management. It provides visibility and supports decision-making across the organization.

We generate many metrics and use them to improve our project management activities.

The product itself seems to have a lot of bugs. One issue is that it sometimes allows people to modify data inappropriately. For example, team members can change numbers at will. While we have a mechanism to track changes, people can still alter numbers, create or delete tasks, and create or delete high-level activities without proper controls.

This causes problems when we try to generate reports, as we may not get an accurate picture at a specific time. Certain activities should be subject to more managerial control.

We have some control, but team members have too much discretion in creating and modifying tasks. They might put in unrealistic numbers for how long an activity will take. Sometimes, they change numbers during meetings and then change them again afterwards.

I suggest implementing a better locking mechanism and improving the security aspects of the tool. Currently, if I create a task, someone else can open it and make changes. This can cause issues when multiple team members are working on different tasks.

What we need is a system where only the owner of a task can modify it. If a task needs to be split between two people, it should be possible to break it down and assign parts to different members. But the access control needs to be more vigilant.

I have been using the product for three to four years. 

I rate the product's stability a five out of ten. 

I rate the solution's scalability an eight to nine out of ten. My company has 1800 users. 

I know the Microsoft Project plan, and I feel it's much better in some ways. We can set up dependencies, see where we stand, and see who needs to finish what. It shows the lead and lag times, where we can pull in more resources, and where we can release resources. The Microsoft Project Plan helps with all these things better. But I should note that it's more suited for larger projects.

The tool's deployment is simple. However, in our organization, we don't have access to set up on our individual machines. A separate team handles all the setup processes.

If I could set it up myself, it would be quite easy. I've done it on a standalone machine before, and it's pretty straightforward. However, the organization prefers to have a dedicated team manage this to maintain consistency.

We use Rally Software on the cloud, not on-premises.

Deployment time is quite quick. It takes about ten to twelve minutes. It's not just a matter of a few minutes. 

The tool is very good software. However, it needs to focus more on stability, security, and access control. Sometimes, it restarts unexpectedly, and there are issues when saving entries—it might throw error messages, forcing us to cancel and redo activities. These are areas that can be improved. I rate it a seven out of ten. 

We use it for our backlog and tasks within Scrum and Kanban. We use it based on epics, features, and user initiatives at various levels. 

Our group is at a lower level, which focuses on features under epics and uses user stories further down. We try to break things down as much as possible, but legacy code sometimes requires estimations. Breaking down user stories is the hardest part. While Rally tracks sprints well with good note-taking, we have challenges. 

Our team is a hybrid. We handle operational updates like server tasks, not strictly following scrum patterns but carrying tickets over sprints. There's no easy switch between Scrum and Kanban, so we adapt. 

We also handle production issues, supporting developers and DevOps in their tools. It's customer-focused and keeps things running smoothly. That's primarily how we use the board.

I like the discussion and note-taking capabilities. It's great to keep everything connected to the story itself. A lot of times, tracking changes across features or Epics that change from TI to PI can be tricky, especially with prefixes or how you phrase things. Continuity can be lost. 

That's why we use a common prefix for all things related to digital transformation, like "digital-," so we can easily search and find all relevant user stories. It's a kind of grouping mechanism, even though there might not be a dedicated field for it, like tags.

It is hard to track the changes. For example, we're in sprint 25, and then we have 26, 27, 28, and 29. Throughout that whole time, we're developing pipelines in Azure, moving to GitHub, creating pipelines, and working with teams. But sometimes, we need to revisit specific decisions made in previous sprints, like pipeline details. Maybe it's in our Azure Wiki, GitHub, or Teams, but it's not always consistent. I wish I could search for all tasks or stories related to that particular effort without needing to know everyone's individual stories or features.

So, I would like to see a tag system with prefixes like KBI for knowledge-based information or JC for Java Core to search and find relevant items easily.

It would be so much easier to search for everything related to KBI or the actual feature itself. I could even search within my group using a shared scrum team name, like "Snoopy's Developers," and then find everything related to JC or Java code. 

Another pain point for us is managing our limited number of licenses with contractors coming and going. It's a constant struggle to figure out who's still active. We have to run reports to find people who haven't used Rally for x months, like logged in or whatever. 

As an admin, wouldn't it be great if we could have an automated report emailed to someone, say another admin, highlighting users who haven't logged in for, like 12 months? That way, we could easily go in and deactivate or revoke the licenses. If someone hasn't logged in for eight months, why not have Rally automatically disable them?

So, easier license tracking would definitely be beneficial.

Those are my two main wish-list items. With the Description field, it can work for them; it's free. But they have to be diligent enough to remember to tag things there. 

And even then, it's not always clear during stand-ups unless you specifically look at it. Someone is working on "admin" or "accessories" or whatever that "digital transformation" tag is. That kind of thing helps track progress at a glance.

We have been using it for four years. 

Generally, it has been very stable. When it is down, the folks in Broadcom contact us pretty quickly. There was an instance once, but they got it back up fast. I can't remember it being down for more than a few hours in our case. It might be different for others, but overall, it's relatively stable.

We've never had any issues with scalability. We have teams come and go all the time. We have teams in India, America, Ireland, Poland, Italy, England... we are spread out everywhere! Rally is our key tool for scrum planning and our single source of truth, and it handles it all flawlessly.

We didn't need to reach out because Rally has sent us trainers and support personnel for on-site classes before. They were very knowledgeable and helpful.

The support's speed is very good. I once had an issue finding a deleted record that I still needed, and they helped me figure out where it was and how to restore it. It wasn't a major issue, but I was short on time and didn't want to bother our scrum master.

Positive

Another team in our company handled the deployment of the product. 

My team and I did an evaluation comparing Azure DevOps and Rally back in the day. Anyway, we had Northwest come down from Seattle to chat with us, and we spent a week with them. 

We were a team of folks from operations, development, and developer support. Initially, we thought since our code is in Git, we should go with Azure DevOps. 

However, another group internally overruled us because of some missing interfaces in Azure DevOps. Now, we're facing a disconnect between Rally and Azure, and we're having to manually work on traceability and observability between them. It's not seamless like an out-of-the-box integration.

There are a lot of tools out there, and it depends on what you're doing. For planning and managing at the project or program level, Rally is a good tool. 

However, at the development level, down to individual user stories and features, it can be a bit Wild West-ish in a way.

I haven't encountered it myself by breaking things down too far. But it takes diligence to do things right at that level, just like with Jira. For program-level stuff, though, Rally does a good job. 

Overall, I would rate the solution a seven out of ten. 

Regarding my use of Rally Software, it was originally called RallyDev when I started using it in 2006. However, it was later acquired by CA and renamed Rally CA. One of our use cases for Rally CA was to support our business process automation (BPA) efforts and move everything to the cloud. When we first started using Rally Software, they did not have capabilities and strategic initiatives set up, and their features and ethics had disappeared. However, we soon discovered that their strategic initiatives were now referred to as Epics, and the capabilities module had replaced the features. Additionally, they had always had users.

Unfortunately, this breakdown did not translate well to the team I took over for, and I had to restructure all of the releases and tie them to function to ensure that we could use billing codes in the capabilities. We also had to create governance settings reports to catch errors and warn us about missing features or capabilities. This was important because it was easy to lose a step with Rally CA, and we needed to stay on top of things. As a result, we developed a workflow governance system that alerted us to any issues or discrepancies in our work. For instance, if we put the projected end date before the projected start date or if we had stories without capabilities, we would receive warnings.

When it comes to the valuable features of Rally Software, it excels at burn-down charts, burn-up charts, and road mapping once it's set up. I particularly appreciated the new feature for releases and road mapping, which worked exceptionally well. 

Rally Software is highly complex, and it takes some effort to get everything tied together. But once you do, it's a satisfying experience, and the result looks beautiful. Azure, ServiceNow, and Jira do not have all the features that Rally Software provides in one place, making it an exceptional tool for project management.

It was either Optum or Rally Software that had a significant number of connections and workflows that were challenging to comprehend. As a result, the visualization was lacking, which was frustrating. One feature of Jira that I admire is the ability to view the workflows for user stories, for instance, by going into the user story settings for my team. You can see where the story is heading and what the workflows are. Unfortunately, Rally Software does not offer this visual representation, although it does have all the connections. However, to utilize it correctly, you must be aware of how to set it up correctly, and Rally Software could do a better job of splitting up workflows.

I used Rally Software within the last 12 months.

In my past experience at Lexmark with enterprise software, the support team was highly responsive. It's possible that this was because we had the SDK kit and a dedicated ALM team, including an Oracle management team in India, who could write custom reports in Rally Software. Back then, I would have rated the tech support at around 9 out of 10. However, this was about six years ago, and I cannot speak to the quality of support in the more recent past.

Positive

Instead of customizing reports to present data to executives, I could simply copy and paste the information from the dashboard, which was more appealing to them since they prefer PowerPoint presentations. In comparison, when I reported on all 35 teams in IT and other metrics using Jira, I had to rely on the teams to put their stats on SharePoint for me to query and generate reports. However, with Rally Software, I didn't have to do that.

When it comes to the initial setup of Rally Software, it can be quite complex. Unlike Jira, there is no "light" version that allows for a quick and easy setup. However, I have also criticized Jira for the opposite reason. It can be too simplistic, allowing anyone to create a Kanban board and instantly become a team, which can negatively impact the metrics of other teams. With Rally Software, there is a steep learning curve involved in the initial setup process, but it is crucial to take the time to do it correctly. In contrast to Rally Software, Microsoft Azure DevOps is built-in and part of the Microsoft Azure cloud ecosystem, including Azure Wiki. It is not a third-party tool, such as Rally Software.

I have always been a fan of Rally Software, having used it since 2005. However, recent changes have made it more complex than necessary, and I do not understand why they made those changes. While they are modeling themselves after the Scaled Agile Framework (SAFe), which many people use for scaling multiple teams, I believe they should stay more agnostic. Overall, I would rate their performance an 8 out of 10. If you had asked me 10 years ago, I would have given them a perfect 10.

I rate Rally Software an eight out of ten.

I used Rally Software for the agile process in software and mechanical products. My previous company produced software for a machine, and I embedded the software.

What I like most about Rally Software, in terms of using it for the agile process, is that it's clear, useful, and user-friendly. I also like that it has every field you can use for the Scrum process.

Another valuable feature of Rally Software is the project tree. That's a lovely software functionality because it lets you better understand the parent and child. The project tree makes that very clear.

I also like the backlog page that shows you the backlogs, and then I can move each log from the backlog page to the screen. You don't have this feature in Microsoft Azure DevOps, so in Microsoft Azure DevOps, you have to create a lot of queries to understand the backlog status. In Rally Software, you don't have to do that.

When Rally Software updated its version and added new functionality, it didn't impact the project I was working on, so that's another pro of the solution. On-premises, every time you update the server or the version, it's a nightmare.

The big problem with Rally Software is migration. If I were to migrate from Microsoft Azure DevOps to Rally Software, it would require more effort because in Microsoft Azure DevOps, every time you create a project, you have Git for each project you create. My current company has the pipeline and virtual machine for compiling code in the project, so if I migrate that, it would mean that I have to put in extra effort to evaluate the pipeline in Rally Software, so that's a big problem for me.

In Rally Software, the connection with GitLab and GitHub needs improvement because every time I evaluate Rally Software, there's an issue. When I have a lot of team members and push the code in Git, I track the requirement and the code. Rally Software needs to improve in that area because I'm a person who understands the requirement. However, I still have to evaluate the code, virtual machine, and pipeline despite my knowledge. I don't have this problem with Microsoft Azure DevOps, only with Rally Software, so this is an area for improvement.

In future releases of Rally Software, I want it to have GitHub and GitLab connectors. If it has existing connectors, then the connectors should be better.

I've used Rally Software for four years at the company. The last time I used it was six months ago.

Rally Software is very stable, so it's a nine out of ten for me.

Rally Software was scalable for my project, so I'm rating it eight out of ten.

I found the technical support for Rally Software good. Whenever I open a ticket on the website, I see a reply from the support team. The technical support team is responsive.

The team responds quickly to tickets and fixes the issues. For example, my company asked to improve the description test in Rally Software, and the team improved it.

I'm rating technical support for Rally Software as eight.

Positive

I used Rally Software in the past, and I like it because I had a good experience with it. However, I moved to another company that uses Microsoft Azure DevOps.

Before using Rally Software, I used Redmine on-premises with a Jenkins pipeline with Git inside.

Another team configured Rally Software. I wasn't involved in the installation process for the solution.

Rally Software costs $50 a month, and for a base account, that price is acceptable.

I used the latest version of Rally Software the last time I used it.

My company used the solution on the cloud.

More or less one hundred people used Rally Software in the company. The users belong to the software, mechanical, and electronic departments.

I'm recommending Rally Software to others, particularly for the Scrum process, but I won't recommend it for a DevOps project because it's not a good tool for that. A DevOps project requires continuous integration and delivery for virtual machines and pipelines, which is functionality I don't see in Rally Software. On Microsoft Azure DevOps, you can do it through the configuration manager, software manager, and continuous delivery manager, but that is not possible in Rally Software. Microsoft Azure DevOps has three extensive functionalities, while Rally Software has one considerable functionality only.

In general, if I needed to use Rally Software only for the Scrum process, my rating would be nine out of ten.

The company was a Rally Software customer.

It's good only for documenting manual test cases.

The interface isn't very good. The integration with other tools is quite complex to understand, and the reporting wasn't great. 

At least for me as a QA, the test coverage and test management on a release basis weren't ideal. I like visualization that gives me a clear picture rather than going through numbers. 

Octane gives me the flexibility to customize my reports and provides me with a different set of reports that are helpful for me to find or analyze project details.

It also has some because we have integrated our Jenkins pipeline into Octane, and we have the option to trigger automatic reports to the organization. So it has us reporting as well.

We have had a lot of issues using it.

I have been using it for one and a half years. 

Rally was stable.

We've never tried anything new on Rally. It was usually set up completely.

We have had a lot of issues using it, so it definitely might have its own advantages, but I'm not sure I can comment on that. 

I'm pretty happy using Octane over Rally any day. 

We did want to export our data from Rally to Octane, and we did find some technical issues. we kind of have a block of a technical issue, basically, and we don't have a solution for it as of now. 

We were looking for a plugin where the data could be exported into Octane, and we don't have one right now. I'm not sure if there's any other way/medium to export the data from Rally to Octane.  

Octane has offered to develop a plugin that could help in the export of data from Rally to Octane, but that would take quite a while because of the complex technical issues from Rally's side. So, it's not that user friendly.

Overall, I would rate it a five out of ten. I wouldn't recommend it. The reporting, and that we could not integrate our automation pipeline into Rally. 

It's good only for documenting manual test cases, but from a test management perspective, it should have the capability to give you both automation and manual integration in one place. And that was missing.

It took at least a few days to learn to use it. Compared to my experience with Octane, Octane is straightforward. The UI is quite user friendly. It's simple and straightforward in Octane. But with Rally, it's a little complex. I think at the end of the day, the UI needs to be a little simple. We don't want too many things, the colors, everything, that actually impacts the user experience.

We are using Rally Software in our company for agile development. We also use it for software development using agile methodology.

Rally Software provides the capability to accurately estimate the time required for building large software projects, which can be challenging to predict. In our company's experience, we have developed software projects that took months to complete, and it was difficult to determine when they would be finished. Rally Software enables us to schedule tasks better, allocate resources, and meet project deadlines.

I wouldn't single out any specific feature in Rally Software as I find the entire solution quite useful for us. About five years ago, we found a feature that gave us the team's speed or velocity, which was helpful at the time. However, it is no longer relevant, and we do not use it anymore. Currently, we find resource scheduling, user stories, and strength to be the most valuable features of the solution.

I don't have any specific suggestions for improvement regarding the solution because we are currently satisfied with all aspects. Our usage requirements are relatively straightforward, and we haven't encountered any significant challenges or complexities. Therefore, I don't have any valuable suggestions to provide at this time.

I hear from some people that it could be customized, but they don't have details on how. Customization is possibly a desirable feature, and I don't know if it is available in the system. Customization features may not be exposed or unavailable, so people may be looking for them. So, customization is an area people have told me is more desirable.

I have been using Rally Software for three years. I am a customer of the solution.

I have never faced any issues using the solution. Stability-wise, I rate the solution a nine out of ten.

Currently, we are handling small to mid-sized tasks or projects on Rally Software, and we find it absolutely scalable. We can easily expand in terms of tasks, user stories, or resources without any issues. However, we don't handle very large projects, so I cannot speak to its scalability in that context. In my experience, the solution has been good enough for our needs. Scalability-wise, I rate the solution a ten out of ten.

Our IT team provides excellent support, so we rarely need to seek assistance from external sources. The digital technology team within our organization manages Rally quite well. It addresses most issues at the first level of support, so we do not need to rely on Rally's level two technical support. Therefore, we have not used Rally's support services.

Previously, I used Jira. However, I wouldn't compare the pros and cons of Jira and Rally Software since our corporate digital technology team made the decision to switch. The reasons for the switch may go beyond the perspective of just end-users and may be related to commercial or licensing factors. Therefore, I wouldn't weigh the benefits and drawbacks of the two software solutions against each other.

The solution's initial setup process was straightforward. I rate the initial setup a nine out of ten. The deployment of the solution can be done in a few minutes.

Those considering adopting the solution should evaluate it based on their specific use cases. As for our organization, the solution has met our expectations and provided us with the necessary flexibility. So, I rate the overall solution an eight out of ten.

We primarily use the solution to scale agile and for safety.

We use all of the features. It's been a great solution so far.

It's very user-friendly.

We are able to implement PI planning for safety.

We'd like to be able to export information about the users, like rules. It's not easy to identify the teams, users, and rules. We'd like better dashboards to make visibility better. They are a bit complex right now. 

It is not integrated with the PPM. It's very difficult to make an integration with both.

I've been using the solution for seven years. 

We have 1,000 to 1,800 users on the solution right now. We bought 2,000 licenses. 

The solution helps us scale our agile projects. 

I'm at a different company now, and they use ServiceNow. 

We renew licensing every three years and pay for the solution yearly.

I was a user and customer. 

I'd rate the solution ten out of ten. I've very happy with the solution.