Jira Reviews

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:

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

Technical Support:

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 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.

Getting our Service Desk out of a system of stored emails and into a ticket system where we can queue, assign, track, report, and store knowledge has been great for us.

JIRA was our first experience with ITSM implementation. It allowed us to reduce the amount of tools we were using, standardize our procedures, and measure our work. This allowed us to show the need for additional staff resources, additional training, track our busiest times and prepare for them.

Administration: JIRA administration is not as efficient as it should be. JIRA is aware of many relationships but doesn't bother to show them to you on the admin side. Example. JIRA knows what roles I'm using for a project because they are listed in the permission scheme. Rather than just showing me the roles listed in the scheme it will show you every role in the database. This makes the page load slowly and is frustrating to scroll through. There are many other examples of this same function for administrators.

31 months

No, deploying JIRA in our VM environment was not a problem.

We did have some issues with stability in the beginning. We were pushing the ticket limit is 4.1 and it caused some issues. We later tested the High Availability Clustering and the archival tools for this which were very nice and did work, but were to expensive at the time.

We did have some limitations but that was not an issue after 4.4 when the ticket limit was doubled.

Customer Service: Customer service has not been helpful but I have not minded since the wiki documentation and Atlassian Answers forum have been great. The developers I have done beta testing for have also been great. They are good about using your feedback as they design.Technical Support: The wiki and forums are wonderful. I get all my answers from those two sources. Talking to a customer representative has not led to anything useful.

We had a system called EPIC that we had created in house and did not have the functions and capabilities JIRA had. JIRA was also a more cost effective solution.

I did have complexities in the beginning and again as I was scaling but they were not the tool as much as establishing efficient shared processes and procedures.

In-house. Two of use spent time learning the tool and implementing it in our area first and then across the University.

In dollars, nothing. We are not charging to use our implementation. In employee resources, project planning, training, staffing, process efficiency, a lot. It would be hard to say the actual cost.

Our original cost was about $2000 for our licenses and hosting costs to get started. We are currently paying about $6000 dollars per year for our current installation.

We tested three or four other options including, BaseCamp, Footprints, Drupal, and a lite version of BMC. We were a small area at the time and JIRA's combination of cost model and function won.

This is a very cost effective application if you are looking to do application development, incident management, request fulfillment, problem management, knowledge management, or project tracking at a low maturity.

Jira is used by my clients across their organizations. They use it for everything related to IT solutions.

Jira has been a good, powerful tool for collaborating across large groups of people.

I use structures as well as the reporting features, personally. The JQL feature is powerful and easy to use. 

The Jira dashboards could be more useful. The dashboards have good widgets but the comparison of data over time or extraction of trends from the data is not easy. This is important for us from a governance perspective. Currently, we do this outside of Jira in Excel manually or using other reporting tools. 

Secondly, it would be useful if the graphs in Jira could be more customizable. If you draw a graph on Excel sheet, you are able to do a lot of customizations. Those kinds of customizations are not possible with the current implementation of Jira. 

When you create structures such as hierarchy, including epics and stories, if you change something, the fields are not correlated. This makes the tracking of changes a manual process.

I have been using Jira for more than a year, but I'm working on a project which has been using it for five years.

This is a stable solution but it can be quite slow. The speed at which Jira operates depends on how it is implemented. 

I would rate this solution a seven out of ten. 

Public Cloud

We primarily use the solution as an ALM, an application lifecycle management tool. 

I like the entire workflow customization, which we could set up for our usage.

There are some really great in-built reports.

The solution is stable and reliable.

The scalability is great.

In terms of the initial setup, the solution is easy to implement. 

We've had zero issues with the product. It's been great.

Even though I like the reporting part, we have some issues. I don't know whether there is a Jira problem or a test risk problem, however, sometimes, we face issues on fetching the reports. This is when in-between integration comes into the picture. There could be easier integration. It used to be easier in 2016.

We've been using the solution for more than three years now. It's been a while. 

The product is reliable in terms of performance. It's stable. There are no bugs or glitches. It doesn't crash or freeze.

The solution can scale well. If a company needs to expand it can do so. It's not a problem.

We have 250 or more users using the solution. We might go up to 300. It's not likely we would pass 400 users. We might increase the usage a little bit.

We've never had issues with Jira and therefore have never reached out to technical support. I can't speak to how helpful or responsive they would be.

We used to use TFS.

The product is quite straightforward, especially since it is on the cloud. It makes it very easy to set everything up.

We have three people able to deploy and maintain the solution.

We did not use an integrator or consultant for the deployment of Jira. We handled the process ourselves. 

We pay for a yearly license. 

We primarily use the solution ourselves, as customers. 

I'd rate the solution at a nine out of ten. 

I would recommend the solution to others. It would be ideal if it offered better tool integration, however, other than that, we've never had issues. 

Public Cloud

I use the solution for software project management and software lifecycles. Jira covers the entire process from requirement analysis to deployment. 

I prefer Azure DevOps and Microsoft Ecosystem to Jira. 

I consider Azure DevOps to be more user-friendly and to provide a better user experience. I feel Jira to be a bit difficult to work with. I specifically recall that i encountered difficulties with Jira when I wished to receive or generate a report. Azure DevOps offers a simpler and more user-friendly panel than Jira. Jira's reporting panel is not user-friendly and a bit on the difficult side. Azure DevOps also offers more options for generating queries and reports, especially when it comes to great dashboard visualization capabilities for the monitoring of one's project. This poses a big problem with Jira, as Azure DevOps does a better job of providing this feature. 

I find the dashboard to be Jira's most problematic feature. I do not like it and feel Jira is troublesome when it comes to visualizing the reports. These should be improved. 

Azure DevOps offers more simplified processes, maintenance and development than Jira. 

I used Jira for around one year, at which point I left my previous company and made use of it in the new one I joined, where I continued to do so. 

I find the solution to be stable, though a bit hard to use. 

We have not encountered difficulties with the scalability. 

We have had no issues with support. As with Azure DevOps, we take advantage of the open community and forums for resolving any issues which may arise. 

I prefer Azure DevOps and Microsoft Ecosystem to Jira.

I consider Azure DevOps to be more user friendly and to provide a better user experience. I feel Jira to be a bit difficult to work with. I specifically recall that i encountered difficulties with Jira when I wished to receive or generate a report. Azure DevOps offers a simpler and more user-friendly panel than Jira. Jira's reporting panel is not user-friendly and a bit on the difficult side. It also offers more options for generating queries and reports, especially when it comes to great dashboard visualization capabilities for the monitoring of one's project. This posed a big problem with Jira, as Azure DevOps does a better job of providing this feature.

I find the dashboard to be Jira's most problematic feature. I do not like it and feel Jira is problematic when it comes to visualizing the reports. These should be improved.

Azure DevOps offers a more simplified processes, maintenance and development than Jira.

As with Azure DevOps, we take advantage of the open community and forums for resolving any issues which may arise.

We make use of the solution free of charge. 

My recommendation, for sure, is that a person go with Azure DevOps. 

I rate Jira as a six out of ten. 

It is helpful for bug tracking in software development. If developers are doing some work and testers notice some defects, they can flag it in JIRA. For example, I track my day-to-day work in JIRA so that others know what I'm working on. They can look at JIRA and don't need to contact me. From JIRA, they can find out that I am working on this project and spent two days on it, etc. It's used for so many things, like task management, bug tracking, and release management. 

JIRA is not for deployment. For deployment, you are going to use some tools like Jenkins. It's meant for all the features that are going into that deployment. 

Different teams within the company use JIRA. For example, everybody in the engineering section uses it, so altogether, that's around 200 people.

JIRA gives us a lot of visibility. For example, if you're planning to release a given feature, you can track the status of that feature. Is it working correctly, or does it have some bugs? So you have a high level of visibility on the work. 

The JIRA user interface looks great. It's an overall good experience. It's very intuitive in the sense that you understand how it's going to work. It's very self-explanatory, and it's beneficial overall. Each release has different steps and phases, and the whole thing can mostly be captured on JIRA. The workflows are really helpful. 

So at one point in time, they did a huge UI upgrade. At that time, I felt like they had changed something, so it was hard to figure out. Now that we are habituated, it's not an issue now. We had gotten used to the old interface, so things changed, we felt an initial discomfort. That's the only thing. Otherwise, there is nothing I dislike about JIRA.

I've used JIRA since the beginning of my career and nothing else.

I haven't had any issues with JIRA's stability so far.

The scalability of JIRA has always been good. The response time is always fast. I've never had any issues with scalability. I think no matter how much our usage increases, we'll continue to use JIRA.  But, I think our usage is at an optimal level. 

From our end, setup is basically book-keeping. I can't say much about the overall setup because there is an administrator for JIRA who adds users and sets everything up. I haven't been an administrator. I'm just consuming the JIRA. 

Initially, I think administrators are going to set some things like configuring the workflow should and then how you want to say things. But other than that, if you set it up once, it's going to work. You don't have to do much maintenance.

I rate JIRA nine out of 10. I would recommend it.

Public Cloud

We use Jira to manage all our software development projects and our engineering projects. Our main use of the solution is for the workflows on our different types of projects. It's mainly used by our engineering groups, they have the proper workflows and all of the stats. As a director, I work more at the business level, tracking tasks similar to the new planner that's in Microsoft which some people are switching to. We also use it in the backend of the projects. For project managers and directors, it's more about a to-do list thing that's shared. I'm a company director and we are customers of Jira. 

The online collaborative nature of the solution has been helpful. Previously, coordination was done in Microsoft Project and Excel spreadsheets. The level of collaboration and the accessibility of the information which Jira offers has greatly improved things and we've also been able to build out and fine tune the workflows and the integration into the different tool sets. We're definitely going to keep using Jira.

I think the customization and tailoring of the workflows have proven to be very useful. And then there's the collaboration of the tool itself which has a lot of nice features. 

One of the issues is tracking the hours that people spend on each task. I know the solution has some built-in features but it doesn't quite meet our needs. We tried a couple of expansions unsuccessfully. Being able to track the effort on each of the tasks is important for us and we'd also like to be able to compare that with what's been budgeted. It would be useful. We've recently moved to Teams and some of the integration with Teams doesn't seem to work, whether it's not supported or not there, the ability to integrate that would be something we'd like to see. 

We've been using this solution for over five years. 

We haven't had any issues with stability. 

We're a fairly small organization. We've scaled up to around 500 users and we haven't had any issues with that. It's mainly used by our engineering group, and our active users use it all the time, on a daily basis. We'll increase as we organically grow. 

I can't recall the initial setup but it took us a while to figure out exactly how to use it. We deployed using our own staff. 

I don't know what the licensing costs are but we find them affordable. It's never been a major issue.

This is a powerful tool and allows a lot of collaboration, it's worth spending some time figuring out how your workflows will be, that's where the real value is.

I rate this solution an eight out of 10. 

Public Cloud