2018-05-16T08:31:00Z

What needs improvement with IBM Engineering Workflow Management?

Miriam Tover - PeerSpot reviewer
  • 0
  • 13
PeerSpot user
6

6 Answers

Suvajit Chakraborty - PeerSpot reviewer
Real User
Top 10Leaderboard
2023-10-31T10:40:19Z
Oct 31, 2023

There is room for improvement in the UI. The UI has to improve a lot compared to the competitive tools, like Atlassian Jira, for example. It's very easy to use. It is easy to manage and easy to use. Anybody can learn it right quickly and start with it. But IBM ELM is something where somebody has to have good knowledge, training, and understanding and then only start using it. But there's a big known knowledge curve for IBM ELM. But once that is there, it's normally; organizations do have their own internal team to basically manage it IBM ELM portfolio, the tool chain. So if they have internal teams who are doing it for quite some time, not something new, then it is definitely better. But if there's if somebody is starting new, definitely there is a knowledge curve time it can take at least a year or maybe a couple of years before they can start realizing the benefits.

Search for a product comparison
DS
Real User
2021-11-18T03:58:14Z
Nov 18, 2021

One of the downfalls of this product is that we are not able to customize it for our specific requirements. I'm not sure whether that's an issue with the product or with the company's implementation.

Suvajit Chakraborty - PeerSpot reviewer
Real User
Top 10Leaderboard
2021-02-24T15:33:46Z
Feb 24, 2021

Unfortunately, the solution is very heavily vendor dependent. It requires a strong partnership with IBM, and you rely on them for fixes or access to certain things. There are new fixes all the time and each new fix can bring in a new functionality. The development aspect is not well aligned. There's a requirement tool, a testing tool, a project management tool, a reporting tool. They are separate but all work on one platform although they don't function that way. It can take some time to figure out where the responsibility for a problem lies. They need one team rather than inefficient multiple teams. Another issue is that the solution is not yet supported on Docker.

AH
Real User
2019-09-24T05:43:00Z
Sep 24, 2019

We are currently using version four, but we looked at versions five and six and they are getting better and better. They're making planning easier. In version six they have something called a Quick Planner which would be nice to have in our version. In fact, if many of the features they have in five and six could be offered in four as well, that would be beneficial to us. Some administrative tasks are difficult to perform. These could be simplified. For example: setup sprint/iteration period - start and end. It may be simple to have a button to End Sprint / Start new Sprint and the application handle setup and definition. Another example in user holiday's handling to have one click to apply general holiday that applies to all team members.

NK
Real User
2018-08-14T11:13:00Z
Aug 14, 2018

A lot of room for improvement: * Report generation (.xls, .pdf) from filters. * "Contributor list" and "enumeration list" in plans and reporting. * Extending JavaScript support. * Team availability calendar on dashboard and plans. * Automatic subscription of users to dedicated types of work items, but not all of them. * Plan modifications from widgets to dashboards, if the option is displayed.

it_user872193 - PeerSpot reviewer
Real User
2018-05-16T08:31:00Z
May 16, 2018

Upgrades, even minor versions, seem too labour intensive, especially with the enhanced objects, which is why the Jazz platform should be so good.

Compare products