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."All of the features work together to provide a powerful holistic solution - from the dashboard all the way through to security."
"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."
"Work distribution among team members and accountability for completion with a clearer picture."
"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."
"Traceability reporting is inbuilt and includes all your requirements."
"It provides very good visibility and traceability. You can clearly see each and every part of a process. It is also user-friendly and robust. It is working well, and there are a lot of add-ons or plug-ins out there that you can use."
"The roadmap feature and the ability to integrate with Power BI are probably the most valuable features in it. It is a great solution. I absolutely love it. It is a tool that was designed for project management, and it has been awesome to work with it so far. I also love Confluence."
"The integration between Confluence and Jira, along with Jira's ticketing system, is a valuable feature the product offers its users."
"I can use Jira Query Language (JQL) to write queries to see the stories that are there for the current sprint. I can also sort them by assignment. I also use Jira is for burndown charts, which give an indication of how efficiently the squad is performing. I also use the Active Sprints function and a feature called Planning Poker."
"All departments can work with the same platform."
"It is a very convenient tool. We can organize our sprints through scrum or kanban. There are scrum boards, and there are kanban boards. If you prefer scrum, you can use Jira. If you prefer kanban, you can still use Jira. You can create your kanban boards in a similar way as you create your scrum boards. It is very useful. It also seems to be very popular these days."
"It's flexible and it can provide a lot of different options, such as dashboards, that you can create and manage."
"It was very easy to learn Jira. As a scrum master, I run daily stand-ups, and they are run directly from Jira. The feature that I really love in Jira is called Issue Navigator. It allows me to customize how I want to show the user stories within Jira to my squad."
"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."
"The solution is very heavily vendor dependent."
"Lacks ability to customize and reporting can be slow."
"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."
"Its UI can be improved a little bit. I know this a business tool and not a commercial tool, but it could be a little bit more interactive like the HP ALM/Quality Center, which provides you the results of graphs and gives you a lot of visual representations. I feel Jira lacks a little bit in this aspect."
"As the solution is highly configurable, it has very poor governance."
"It would be good if we can grant access based on the roles. This is something that Jira can look into. Currently, anyone with Jira access can access everything. Being able to define access based on the roles will give us more flexibility in managing Jira. I would like to have more reports in Jira. Currently, eight or nine reports are there. You can use Screen Test to get more reports or data from Jira, but you will have to get more add-ons, plug-ins, and stuff like that. It would be good if they can increase the number of reports."
"The integration of Jira could improve. The solution should be able to integrate easily with other solutions, such as ERPs. There are times the solution can be slow and we have to reset it over and over again."
"The only thing that JIRA doesn't for us is release management in a way that I can create a list of versions easily."
"There needs to be a way to export a user story."
"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."
"What I don't like is that perhaps there are not so many different apps that can add value over the management side of the product."
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 254 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 Rally Software. 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.