We performed a comparison between Jira and Planisware based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Project Portfolio Management solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."The most valuable feature is the feature of assigning. Whenever I have an issue, Jira doesn't stop at just letting me describe the issue. I can also assign the issue to a developer, and the developer gets notified about it. After he is able to work on it, he can update the status and revert back to me through the same platform. It really avoids a lot of communication over email and phone. This the feature that I really like about Jira. I always use Jira with my team."
"The solution offers a lot of plugins."
"When combining Jira with Bitbucket, you have the possibility to ensure continuous integration and other functions which is highly appreciated by our software development team."
"The integration of other open source tools with Jira is very useful. It allows us to create documents and transcriptions, making it versatile beyond software development."
"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"
"We have found the structure, functionality, and how Jira handles the tickets most valuable."
"The design of the interface is clean and not too busy visually."
"It's very simple to change the workflow and adapt it. Jira is very user friendly for the agent and the user."
"Overall, our company has all disintegrated systems, and with Planisware, we are getting a very integrated view of my portfolio reporting, cost and load, and everything else."
"We have a variety of different modules, but it is mainly used for costs, risks, and resources."
"The area that could benefit from improvement in this Planisware is the project management tool. I have previously used Project Server, which is a Microsoft solution, and I found it to be more user-friendly as it included a client solution. In contrast, with this solution, the only option available is the online version, making it difficult to create activities, milestones, and other necessary components. This is in comparison to Planisware, which offers a more comprehensive solution."
"The solution is performance-oriented and easily customized accordingly to many areas, such as performance KPI."
"There are two things in particular that I enjoy. The first is the portfolio planning section. Another advantage is that it is highly customizable."
"It stands out by automating the intricate mechanics of project execution, eliminating the need for highly technical individuals to manage and reconfigure models."
"The reporting needs to be improved."
"The Classic UI is a little bit messy. UX experience is also a little bit messy and is not according to the expectation of a tech user."
"The reports in Jira can be improved, especially for test reports. I find it difficult to customize and integrate for different testing purposes."
"Not very intuitive for project admins."
"Sometimes, we create the same bug with two or three different Jira tickets in my company, which leads to duplication, making it an area where improvements are required."
"I want Jira to have more plug-ins, which will allow for more free plug-ins that help with the area of reporting."
"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."
"Reporting is something Jira could work on. The reporting capabilities should have the same flexibility we see in Excel, including the ability to manipulate data and create graphs. They need to have that, so we don't need to export to a spreadsheet."
"Its stability should be improved. Its stability is the main issue, but we sometimes also have issues with calculations."
"The solution's user experience and user interface need improvement because they are not that great and intuitive."
"They do not have anything that can assist customers with multi-year roadmap planning."
"The area that could benefit from improvement in this Planisware is the project management tool. I have previously used Project Server, which is a Microsoft solution, and I found it to be more user-friendly as it included a client solution. In contrast, with this solution, the only option available is the online version, making it difficult to create activities, milestones, and other necessary components. This is in comparison to Planisware, which offers a more comprehensive solution."
"More integration is needed with other kinds of products for better collaboration."
"The learning curve is steep and there could be more avenues for opening up learning materials to a broader audience, enabling individuals to gain practical experience with the tool."
Jira is ranked 1st in Application Lifecycle Management (ALM) Suites with 266 reviews while Planisware is ranked 6th in Project Portfolio Management with 10 reviews. Jira is rated 8.2, while Planisware is rated 8.0. The top reviewer of Jira writes "A great centralized tool that has a good agile framework and is useful for day-to-day planning, task management, and work log efficacy". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Planisware writes "A comprehensive project and portfolio management with robust scalability and dedicated long-tenured support team". Jira is most compared with Microsoft Azure DevOps, IBM Rational DOORS, OpenText ALM Octane, Rally Software and Microsoft Project, whereas Planisware is most compared with Microsoft Project Server, Smartsheet, Planview PPM Pro, Asana and ServiceNow Strategic Portfolio Management. See our Jira vs. Planisware report.
See our list of best Project Portfolio Management vendors and best Project Management Software vendors.
We monitor all Project Portfolio Management reviews to prevent fraudulent reviews and keep review quality high. We do not post reviews by company employees or direct competitors. We validate each review for authenticity via cross-reference with LinkedIn, and personal follow-up with the reviewer when necessary.
