We performed a comparison between JIRA Portfolio and Planview Portfolios 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."The graphics and the resolution of the work are very good."
"I think the solution's most important and valuable feature is its ability to track the issues."
"The solution is stable and reliable."
"Having an option to view dependencies between projects and teams is great."
"The customized workflows we can define are very valuable. JIRA's private projects is very useful as well. There are also a lot of plugins that they provide."
"Its stability is very reliable."
"Has many functionalities including good supervision and workflows."
"Jira Portfolio is useful for tracking time and hours. It's easy to manage, create tickets, and change the status of delivery reports. It's not complicated."
"Our transparency is increasing a lot. It is helping us to get people together. There are no dark rooms anymore. In some areas or concepts, we want to add more light to every single concept. That's the big impact that the tool is having. It allows conversations between people."
"We have a fairly good picture of time tracking."
"We provided whatever feedback we had to the Planview team, and they went in and built those additional features that we requested. For example, they created a great way for our users to search for a specific resource, project, program, or role. We were not using some of the features, and we wanted them to not be visible, and they helped us with that. They also brought a feature to provide visibility into when a resource was never assigned to any task. There was no visibility to this before. This feature was really very good for visibility into the resource portfolio."
"The portfolio management gives you a view of all the projects as well as all the information about the total amount of effort, time, and cost being spent on the projects. It gives the organization how much money and effort should be spent towards projects so they can budget and do better capacity planning in the next fiscal year. It gives them visibility into their resources and if they have capacity."
"The solution view into resource capacity and availability helps us to manage work."
"Another good thing is that we can create custom reports, which is great. If I created a custom report, a tile that tells me how many people have logged in today. We currently have a little under 2000 users, and that's only users, we actually have integrations, that we created a custom form that sends hours directly to Planview. They're not using Planview directly, but they're sending their hours to Planview through an API."
"Planview has helped connect funding and strategic outcomes with work execution. That is the key use that we have for it. We use it to validate the work that we're doing and the funding that we need. The difference between the previous version and current version for us would be the ICPM and the way it gives us different scenarios. We can go in and build that out."
"The most valuable features are the control and visibility that you have for portfolio management in terms of projects and capacity planning for resources along with strategies and outcomes, etc. It's so easy to access information for sharing analytics and reporting."
"JIRA Portfolio could improve new implementation because if I want integration for the complete wide frame tools it cannot provide any wide frame tools."
"Portfolio is easy to scale, but we've had some difficulties with it regarding compliance and support."
"There should be an integration of efforts between the cloud service providers' side and JIRA Portfolio."
"The interface JIRA Portfolio could improve."
"Another thing could be to have an easy way to manage the Portfolio and have more ways to share and to show graphics and reports"
"Currently lacks AWS integration."
"Converting a task into an epic is very troublesome."
"Their interface is a little unique and I think that's partly because the core of the product has morphed into several sub-products, but the underlying architecture has stayed the same on all of them in that it was originally a help desk ticketing system. It's a very tech-focused product and that's fair given its origins, but if they really want to expand their community of users, then they're going to have to move beyond that a little bit and polish it up."
"There are some issues with how long it takes to load the data to Planview, It just depends on what your setup is. If there was a way Planview could maybe make the loading faster, in case you do have a lot of things going on with your setup."
"While Planview Management provides robust reporting and analytics capabilities, further enhancements could include more advanced data visualization options, predictive analytics features, and customizable dashboards to provide deeper insights into project performance and trends."
"It is not an end-user-friendly product, and that's really the biggest thing. The hardest or the biggest hurdle I've ever had to face was adoption. I did the installation of the HP product in 2011. The company used it from 2011 to 2015, and the adoption was very high. When I was given the Planview product, adoption was very low. It wasn't as extensively used. We actually had people who wanted to go back to HP PPM because the interface of Planview was so broken, and it still is to some degree. So, it is not user-friendly. It doesn't flow the way a project manager thinks. What we did with HP PPM was a lot more manual programming. It wasn't as nice in terms of the interface, and it wasn't as pretty, but you could design it and build it so that everything flows with the way you worked, but Planview doesn't quite do that. There are a lot of screens. You have to jump back and forth. There are so many different places you have to go to just to do some basic tasks. That's the biggest thing that has really hindered adoption."
"I think some of the administrative aspects of it could be a little easier, especially when it comes to designing reports. The reporting coming out of it could be a little bit better."
"Support is still a challenge. We find it challenging more due to the responsiveness and getting a case or ticket assigned to an analyst. That's what I was just doing. I was following up on an email that we opened last week. We haven't heard anything, so following up on that."
"The technical people are very competent, but there is so much turnover in the people that we talk to, and that's frustrating. They will say, "We can make this work." Suddenly, that guy has left, and we have no one. Then, we have to start all over."
"The number one thing that needs improvement is the UI. It should be easy for a casual project manager. It should provide customizable screens that can be a choice for project managers to choose as a professional level, medium level, and a very easy level."
"The out-of-the-box reports, as far as I can tell, are weak. We've had to build a lot of reports using Power BI, which we connected to it."
JIRA Portfolio is ranked 4th in Enterprise Agile Planning Tools with 31 reviews while Planview Portfolios is ranked 8th in Project Portfolio Management with 5 reviews. JIRA Portfolio is rated 8.0, while Planview Portfolios is rated 8.0. The top reviewer of JIRA Portfolio writes "Great roadmapping, reasonably priced, and good support services". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Planview Portfolios writes "Increases our on-time completion rate and helps in managing the demand and capacity, and we get excellent service in terms of feature requests and support". JIRA Portfolio is most compared with Jira Align, Oracle Primavera Portfolio Management, Adobe Workfront, Microsoft Project Server and Microsoft Project, whereas Planview Portfolios is most compared with Broadcom Clarity , Planview PPM Pro, SAP Portfolio and Project Management, LeanIX and Adobe Workfront. See our JIRA Portfolio vs. Planview Portfolios 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.