We performed a comparison between Jira and Sciforma based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Project Management Software solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."It benefits us because we have globally located teams. Our team members work in different geographies, so the product is a better way to manage progress and see the status of different tasks"
"Kanban boards are most valuable"
"The ability to change and rewrite tasks is valuable. You can add a lot of columns, change the owners and the change the components."
"There are a lot of plugins in Jira and we purchase the ones we need."
"The workflows are very easy to handle as far as scalability goes."
"The product provides high flexibility to create new workflows quickly."
"It's flexible and it can provide a lot of different options, such as dashboards, that you can create and manage."
"The most valuable feature of Jira is the project package for development."
"I find Sciforma's customizability valuable."
"It makes it more fun to work with a modern designed and easy-to-use solution as a team and not add or analyze data alone. Internal, external, home office, remote work, desktop, mobile (available on iOS and Android), are always connected to One2Team."
"The integrated portfolio and project management approach is the most valuable feature of Sciforma."
"I am not sure if Jira can be integrated with our ERP. We have our ERP for the cost estimates or measurements. It would be nice if we can check or view a plan with the real cost. Currently, we have to do a double check of costs. It would be better to be able to integrate it with Jira."
"Workflows can be improved. We don't use workflows because we can't handle that much complexity. Its interface could be more intuitive for workflows."
"Scripts should be more readily available for implementing projects."
"They are not supporting in-house servers anymore and I think I've got until January to port this to something else."
"Something I would like to see improved is the traceability feature. When you have a user story, if you can see all the test cases, it would be an improvement if you could see any design documents or any change management."
"There needs to be more integration and connectivity."
"It should have its own repository for test case creation, so that one does not have to resort to third-party tools and plugins."
"The solution can improve by including test management functionality in a native bundle without plugins."
"For the future AI (Artificial intelligence) must be part of a modern solution. AI is with its unique ability to monitor patterns, is a capable assistant for project managers. Artificial intelligence is being used to help with project organization on a collection of different data from multi-data sources."
"The report developer needs a bit of streamlining."
"The solution's graphical user interface (GUI) is a bit old and could be improved."
Jira is ranked 5th in Project Management Software with 266 reviews while Sciforma is ranked 19th in Project Management Software with 3 reviews. Jira is rated 8.2, while Sciforma is rated 9.6. 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". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Sciforma writes "A project management solution that can be automated to suit your needs". Jira is most compared with Microsoft Azure DevOps, IBM Rational DOORS, OpenText ALM Octane, Rally Software and Polarion ALM, whereas Sciforma is most compared with Planisware and Broadcom Clarity . See our Jira vs. Sciforma report.
See our list of best Project Management Software vendors and best Project Portfolio Management vendors.
We monitor all Project Management Software 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.