We performed a comparison between Jira and ServiceNow Strategic Portfolio Management based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Project Portfolio Management solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."The most valuable features of Jira are all the integrations with other systems. It's not the best in any specific area but it has lots of plug-ins and integrations."
"The product's initial setup phase is easy."
"The informatics is the most valuable feature. It captures what we need."
"The scalability is good."
"No other platform can compete on speed or search."
"The solution is extremely stable."
"Jira is flexible and accessible for the end-user. It lets users track their requests. The look and feel are good for our purposes."
"The board has been a very valuable feature because it can be very simple for teams that are not technical. It can also be highly technical and have lots of data for teams that are technical. So we use it for both instances."
"The feature I find the most valuable is the one that lets you see how much time has been used in processing a ticket. This allows us to better monitor performance."
"The interface is extremely user-friendly."
"Competitive in terms of research"
"The PPM module is an excellent service."
"The resource manager is useful."
"Everything is valuable. It is tough to choose a particular feature, but project portfolio management along with agile 2.0 are two key product features that I would suggest for services companies like us."
"The most valuable feature of ServiceNow Strategic Portfolio Management is incident management."
"We mainly use the solution to support operations and align our ITSM operations with our business goals. This involves coordinating between our application development, support teams, and network engineering teams. When there's an issue at the product or network level, we raise a ticket, and our team works together to resolve it."
"It can have a more high-level view of portfolios. It has quite detailed views, but I would like a high-level view of portfolios. We want to integrate Jira with Microsoft Active Directory, and I don't know how easy or hard it is going to be. I don't know if Jira supports this. We are starting that integration in the last quarter of this year. I hope to find all the required tools for this integration."
"It lacks features to cover all testing aspects, so we often integrate it with other plugins or tools like X-ray."
"Its ability to perform true executive-level status reporting could be improved. There are a lot of benefits there, but there are also a lot of things they can and should expand upon."
"The GUI should have much better features like more graphical illustrations. There are some cases or benchmarks that we are trying to capture into a dashboard GUI's graphical summary, but unfortunately JIRA is not able to do that."
"The filtration could be better."
"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."
"I would like to see test execution modules."
"ClickUp is a good alternative to Jira, so they have a better interface [GUI]. I don't like Jira's graphical interface - it could be more user-friendly. Jira looks old school."
"The interface isn't user-friendly."
"ServiceNow IT Business Management could improve by adding better artificial intelligence."
"The user interface could be more modern."
"The price keeps going up, and to remain competitive, it needs to have a competitive edge. I would like to see more of the latest innovations, in terms of AI, ML, and all of the latest cutting-edge technologies, included in the platform."
"The setup is a bit complex. It depends on the organizational needs, and sometimes, we make customizations based on those needs."
"A major improvement we would like to see is definitely around agile management."
"When we originally set it up, we had some kind of success manager free of charge, and now it's an additional charge over and above what we're paying."
"ServiceNow needs to invest more in integration. That's the only thing. It could always extend its portfolio a little bit."
More ServiceNow Strategic Portfolio Management Pricing and Cost Advice →
Jira is ranked 1st in Application Lifecycle Management (ALM) Suites with 266 reviews while ServiceNow Strategic Portfolio Management is ranked 3rd in Project Portfolio Management with 27 reviews. Jira is rated 8.2, while ServiceNow Strategic Portfolio Management is rated 8.0. 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 ServiceNow Strategic Portfolio Management writes "A very strategic demand management tool that visualizes risks and ratings in a bubble chart". Jira is most compared with Microsoft Azure DevOps, IBM Rational DOORS, OpenText ALM Octane, Rally Software and OpenText ALM / Quality Center, whereas ServiceNow Strategic Portfolio Management is most compared with Microsoft Azure DevOps, Jira Align, Microsoft Project Server, Smartsheet and Broadcom Clarity . See our Jira vs. ServiceNow Strategic Portfolio Management report.
See our list of best Project Portfolio Management vendors.
We monitor all Project Portfolio Management 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.