We performed a comparison between IBM Engineering Workflow Management and Jira based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Enterprise Agile Planning Tools solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."Traceability reporting is inbuilt and includes all your requirements."
"Good for managing stories, sprints, hydration and releases."
"We can track the status of test cases (passed or saved) in a single view. Based on releases and other attributes, we generate various reports and extract metrics from the data."
"All of the features work together to provide a powerful holistic solution - from the dashboard all the way through to security."
"Work distribution among team members and accountability for completion with a clearer picture."
"Agile templates give us a standard methodology for every Agile project. Also, the ability to create our own object types and linkages to features/epics allows us to enhance the verification of feature readiness."
"The product's initial setup phase was straightforward."
"It also works well with all the integrated tools that you buy."
"I have found Jira to be scalable."
"It is a complete solution. It has more features as compared to other tools, especially the open-source one that we use. It is also easy to administer."
"There are many good things about Atlassian."
"The pricing of the product is very good. It's not too expensive"
"The most valuable feature of this solution is the source linking on the commit level to git."
"It is very straightforward and easy to use."
"Lacks ability to customize and reporting can be slow."
"The solution is very heavily vendor dependent."
"Teams need clearer pictures of resource availability in charts and dashboards along with plans."
"Some administrative tasks are difficult to perform. These could be simplified."
"We have encountered issues with stability. We have seen where the entire system kind of goes for a toss when certain people use certain types of queries, which are very costly. Then the system kind of slows down a bit, and we have to monitor it."
"The reporting needs to be better."
"Jira is a project management tracking tool, and it would be great to see integration with the source front or Azure DevOps, etc."
"If you're not a technical person, it might not be very user-friendly."
"I want Jira to have more plug-ins, which will allow for more free plug-ins that help with the area of reporting."
"Backlog pruning and visualization are poor."
"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."
"I wish the whole workflow process was easier to set up. You put the requirements in and then you send it to the developer. They get a notification. Then they go into Jira."
"End-to-end management from product backlog to test completion could be improved."
More IBM Engineering Workflow Management Pricing and Cost Advice →
IBM Engineering Workflow Management is ranked 10th in Enterprise Agile Planning Tools with 14 reviews while Jira is ranked 2nd in Application Lifecycle Management (ALM) Suites with 243 reviews. IBM Engineering Workflow Management is rated 6.8, while Jira is rated 8.0. The top reviewer of IBM Engineering Workflow Management writes "Offers good traceability elements but UI needs improvement ". On the other hand, 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". IBM Engineering Workflow Management is most compared with Microsoft Azure DevOps, Codebeamer, GitLab, Polarion ALM and Endevor, whereas Jira is most compared with Microsoft Azure DevOps, IBM Rational DOORS, OpenText ALM Octane and Polarion ALM. See our IBM Engineering Workflow Management vs. Jira report.
We monitor all Enterprise Agile Planning Tools 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.