We performed a comparison between Jama Connect and Jira based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Application Lifecycle Management (ALM) Suites solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."The most valuable feature is the user-friendly interface."
"Technical support answers fairly quickly compared to others like IBM or Atlassian. They also offer quite a good knowledge base for advanced cases and how to plan it, etc. via videos that they provide. They are quite useful."
"You can get full traceability with any other system. It also includes a test module, and you build the traceability matrix incrementally throughout the development process."
"Provides suitable tools for managing regulatory requirements."
"I like Jama Connect because it's easy to use and understand. The widgets are great, and linking is straightforward. The solution is not complex compared to its competitors."
"Jama Connect is a good tool for the entire software development cycle."
"It is good at requirements management and test management."
"I feel the strongest feature of Jira is its workflow engine. It helps us automate our workflows within our organization. It's the one characteristic of Jira which I think can help any organization, be it in any domain."
"One of the most valuable features is querying because the jQuery function is very good. Additionally, we can create good designs very easily."
"The most valuable feature is its flexibility."
"The user story map is excellent. The features can be composed into stories and they can be allocated to each of the sprints in a program increment. It allows you to see all that in the user story map, and you have various dashboards to see the stories in various views. You can see them as a backlog view, for example, or you can see as an actual sprint view."
"The most valuable feature is the full integration between Work management, Source code management, and Test Automation."
"The product's initial setup phase is easy."
"There are a lot of plugins in Jira and we purchase the ones we need."
"The burndown chart is also helpful when it comes to reporting and allows us to know where we are going, especially during development."
"The initial setup could be better, it's complicated."
"Test management can be improved. It's not so scalable. The user interface needs to split things into small projects."
"t is rather slow, so the speed of the process and consuming information should be improved. It doesn't have a nice way of viewing information. We would like to see better interfaces for consuming information."
"I think there's room for improvement, especially with the review process. Reviews should be integrated with requirement evaluation instead of being separate from it. The review should not run parallel to the requirement."
"I have inquired about pricing for this solution but have not yet heard anything, so their response time in this regard is something that should be improved."
"There are some security concerns with Jama Connect, including two-factor enablement."
"I believe one of the weak points is the reporting side. You must export inter-readable reports from Jama if you do not use the system as a repository for your design history file. Jama is great if you keep it in Jama, but reporting out requires some customization to get it right."
"The user interface could be modernized and the product lacks project management functionalities."
"Jira lacks easy capacity calculation compared to TFS, making it harder to know how much work to allocate to each specialist."
"The release of a MailServer feature within Jira would be beneficial."
"It is a bit harder for management or the business partners. I used to search the Atlassian Community online for some troubleshooting issues and I think there were some issues that seemed to not be a big problem for other similar applications, like Microsoft Teams, that were not considered by Jira."
"I would like to have a future-proof idea of the cost and the roadmap for my class."
"Although it covers the overall requirements and measurements, it'll help if they had their own test execution feature."
"From a very software-centric or a lead developer standpoint, there should be the ability to work at multiple levels. You have epic stories and use cases or epic stories and tasks. It would be nice to be able to have multiple levels of stories and multiple levels of epics work with it. It's lacking a little bit there, and this is the big thing for me because it makes it difficult to do a real sprint when you're limited to one story per epic. It's really hard to isolate tasks at multiple levels to match the type of use cases you normally do. That's the biggest difficulty. Other than that, they've been improving year to year, and every version seems to have a level of improvement."
"If I'm comparing it to ALM Octane, the documentation is not as robust as ALM Octane's documentation. So, they can improve on the documentation side."
"Once the solution is deployed, it's not easy to configure."
Jama Connect is ranked 13th in Application Lifecycle Management (ALM) Suites with 9 reviews while Jira is ranked 1st in Application Lifecycle Management (ALM) Suites with 266 reviews. Jama Connect is rated 7.4, while Jira is rated 8.2. The top reviewer of Jama Connect writes "Agile, well structured, and has a great review module, which makes the design reviews smooth". 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". Jama Connect is most compared with IBM Rational DOORS, Polarion Requirements, IBM Rational DOORS Next Generation, Microsoft Azure DevOps and Polarion ALM, whereas Jira is most compared with Microsoft Azure DevOps, IBM Rational DOORS, OpenText ALM Octane, Rally Software and Microsoft Project. See our Jama Connect vs. Jira report.
See our list of best Application Lifecycle Management (ALM) Suites vendors and best Application Requirements Management vendors.
We monitor all Application Lifecycle Management (ALM) Suites 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.