Rally Software Reviews

I liked the overall user interface of Agile Central. It’s so much more user friendly. The Kanban view really helps daily tracking of user stories. The reporting tools available are easy to configure and use.

Previously, to upload test cases we usually used the Agile Central add-in for MS Excel. But as per recent changes, they have made Single Sign On to access Agile Central due to which, the add-ins seems not to be working.

I have used Agile Central for two years.

I remember that there were two incidents Agile Central was down or I was unable to login.

We have not faced any issues.

I haven't had a chance to use technical support.

I have not used a previous solution.

I’m not aware about price and licensing because of my role.

CA should keep doing what they're doing to make it better.

The Plan/Plan and Plan/Time boxes have proven to be the most useful for me to keep track of the development progress.

In the past, we used the JIRA system. It was very difficult to track progress. With the agile method, we can break things down to manageable pieces. Our deliverables to production have increased as a result, and I can clearly see if we are moving at the speed and in the direction to best serves the business.

It’s hard to say if it is a product improvement or business use improvement that is needed. But, managing the backlog has proven to be an issue. There are stories written for the same purpose, but in different words. If there was some way to question the writing when the subject is very similar; as to the need for the new story.

I don’t really think this is a product issue. The tools are there, but the business seems to not be utilizing them. The duplicate story issue is a business issue. I don’t see how the application can prevent this; especially since when developing, the same words can be used in multiple stories with minor differences in the tasks desired.

I know initially I thought Agile could put some sort of alert if the wording was similar; but that is a task too large and out of the scope of design.

As a business user, I just need to insure myself and my PM are taking better care in reviewing our backlog

We started using this system about 3-4 years ago. My only issue is that I work on 3-4 different projects and each team uses the application differently.

No stability issues for me. I’ve never been unable to access and/or update.

No issues with scalability for me either.

I’ve only needed technical support to allow a new user access; I would like a clearer process. Currently, I email the project manager and then they take up to a week or more to provide access. If this could be streamlined and expedited, this would be great.

We used the JIRA method and changed as our business leadership directed me to change to Agile Central.

The initial install was complex. But this was due to the lack of training. As with most changes, I was thrown into it first and then had classes. But this is a business practice, not that of Agile Central.

I was not part of the decision process.

Take a course or two before you start using it, so that you understand the process. Especially if it is different from your current business practices. The courses have been well run and informative. But, take care in choosing the class; some are for more experienced users.

I really value the customizable dashboards, taskboards and easy filters.

New features with Team Capacity Plan have helped our organization.

• Performance is very bad especially late evening and on Fridays.
• Enterprise backups could be improved.

I have used it for three years.

I did not encounter any stability issues.

There were some scalability issues after integration with internal tools like TFS.

Technical support has lots of room for improvement. We do not get the support that we need for problem resolutions.

Initial setup was straightforward.

This is expensive compared to other tools like JIRA.

We evaluated JIRA and VersionOne.

Compare other products before making a decision on features and pricing along with customer support reviews.

The most valuable feature is the ability to track projects; not so much the reporting, but what you enter and the use of the product, and that's for tracking purposes. That's why it's important to me.

It allows us to better scrum and Kanban. It allows us the opportunity to not need a board and physically co-locate it. We can do it online.

Building custom reports is difficult and cumbersome. Trying to find the correct field name to test is only part of the problem. The field name and qualification changes depending on what level I am trying to report.

When reporting at the task level, the story needs the story qualification whereas when reporting at the story level, the qualification is not needed. When reporting at the task level, I cannot qualify based on Feature Group. This limits my ability to programmatically limit my results. The syntax of the reporting is also cumbersome. The help is only limited help and is not written for non-programmers.

Solution: Provide a query help that actually lists all of the fields at each level. Even when selecting “To see a list of all fields available for each type of work item, check your Web Services API documentation

It is easy to put information into Rally but it is all overhead without an easier way to get the data back out. I have team members who continue to double entry the Rally data into a spreadsheet just so they can more easily produce the reports that are helpful to them.

I have used it for about three years.

Over the last couple of years, it's had moments of slowness, but it seems like they've resolved that, and every so often it goes down, but that just seems like it's a few minutes, so that's more like a support type of thing. So, it's not a big stability problem.

It is very hierarchical in structure, rather than relational. Maybe if it was built on a more relational database concept, it might be a little bit easier to manage.

I don't see any scalability problems.

I've talked with tech support but mostly about reporting and trying to get the information back out of it that we need. I use internal support teams, so it's Comcast employees that are supporting me.

It was a corporate direction to switch. The tool that we were using before was very poor at accomplishing what it needed to accomplish, so anything would have been better.

I wasn't involved in the setup; I was a consumer.

I was never part of the pricing and licensing. Training definitely; everybody that's using it should go through some training, but a lot of the training was very generic in terms of using CA Agile Central and it wasn't specific to the team's application.

The tool actually includes a lot of things that most teams don't do. That information was included in the training, but was never applied, and yet some of the things that we needed to do weren't covered in detail in the training like they should have been, so it was a lot of groundwork to come up to speed on that.

My advice would be to make sure that you're implementing it in conjunction with agile methodology. If you implement this tool with waterfall, you will see that it's very oriented towards agile, and it's set up and structured to support agile and not set up and structured to support waterfall methodology.

I think that it isn't that flexible for helping with teams to migrate to agile; it's not very flexible with customizing for my team. There are a lot of pieces of data that my team needs, and we're having to use non-ideal fields for those. I know that that's the way that it's installed in our application, but a lot of the customization that's available in CA Agile Central isn't available to me to do. So, I would say that it would need to trickle down to the group admins, the ability to be a little bit customized, to be able to customize it to the team.

• Sprint tracking + Kanban board (Iteration Status app): Informs me how well we are doing in our sprint, and what is the next part to work on.
• Burn-down graph.
• List of stories sorted in priority order.
• Kanban Board to visualize work in progress.
• Sprint planning (Iteration Planning app): Helps me draft plans based on my team’s velocity, and visualize my team’s roadmap for feedback on my team’s priorities for the upcoming sprints (user story level).
• Team sprint capacity management (Team Status app): Useful app to elicit the conversation of how much capacity does each team member have for the upcoming sprint, and calculate whether we are stretching our team members too thin. In addition, we can easily trade tasks from one user to another, as needed.
• Release planning (Release Planning app): Helps me draft plans based on my team’s velocity and visualize my team’s roadmap for feedback on my team’s priorities for the upcoming months or quarters (feature level).
• Portfolio hierarchy (Portfolio Items app): Allows me to define the epic, feature, story breakdown of my team’s work. Also, it allows me to visualize the dependencies between teams.

It provides teams the ability to define, prioritize, and monitor the progress of both their operational and project work. The big win is the fact that we are using the same tool outside of IT. It’s a huge win when your internal customers are also using the same platform for defining, tracking, monitoring progress on their objectives. The non-IT departments that have teams using the tool are marketing, operations, training, and human resources.

Provides portfolio, department, and program managers the ability to define, prioritize, and monitor progress on larger initiatives being delivered by multiple teams.

Make it easier to export information outside the tool for additional data visualizations and metrics. The tool does have a REST API, but that requires us to use a developer. The tool does have CSV exports for everything, but that’s a manual step.

Make it easier to share CA Agile Central information to non-CA Agile Central users. Not everyone in our organization is a licensed CA Agile Central user. Those users who are not licensed and provide work to the users on our platform, have a hard time tracking their work requests.

Provide the ability for team members to customize their custom fields/custom workflows without needing a tool administrator to set it up for them.

Mobile friendliness: It would be nice if we had the ability to view and change the state on assigned tasks from a phone.

CA Agile Central integration is great! Currently, everyone who has an CA Agile Central license has a Flowdock license. Unfortunately, it costs a lot of money to add non-CA Agile Central users to Flowdock. And a messaging platform is useless if you can’t message all your stakeholders within the organization.

There is no ability to easily create a work intake portal where a stakeholder can enter new work, have it routed to the appropriate team, and be able to track the work status. You can buy an integration engine that syncs your ticketing system with CA Agile Central, but again, that’s more money.

I’ve used CA Agile Central for four years.

Once in a while, it has performance problems. Nothing terrible and nothing we have not seen with other SaaS vendors.

We have not had any issues with scalability.

Technical support is fine. They assign a customer success coach that we use for tools training and tips. We are pretty self-sufficient now that we do not have to lean on them very often.

We did have other tools before CA Agile Central and we currently still use other vendors for managing other types of work. The best tool for the job really depends on the type of work you do, the work management methodology the team uses to get work done, and who the team’s stakeholders are.

Setup was easy for team-level usage. It gets more complex as you try to scale up your agile practice. Scaling up only happens when teams agree to portfolio standards such as your work hierarchy and planning cadence.

It is an expensive tool. Bring in a good negotiator. The money is worth it when you are trying to do agile at scale.

We evaluated:

• VersionOne
• JIRA
• Trello
• Smartsheet
• Taiga.io
• Tuleap

The nirvana for all organizations is to implement end-to-end enterprise business agility. It’s a lot easier to do that when you have a tool that allows you to capture all the data you need and systemically roll that up for your enterprise portfolio reporting. CA Agile Central is a tool that enables you to do that. BUT, in order for data to be entered consistently, you really do need an enterprise coach. If you are not implementing agile at scale, I would recommend a cheaper tool that is also mobile-friendly. CA Agile Central is a tool that solves the agile-at-scale challenge, and is still user friendly enough to handle non-IT work loads.

The most valuable features are in-line editing, easy custom view setup, intuitive and helpful visuals (e.g., contextual formatting) and the collaboration features.

The CA Agile Central tool’s UI is robust and user-focused enough that it allows me to collaborate, capture decisions, etc. right there in the tool in real time, versus having to add any steps outside the tool – e.g., hold a meeting, take notes, then translate notes into the tool. That is a huge efficiency and accuracy booster for us.

The platform comes with built-in and easily configurable reports that are optimized for audiences up and down the stack, from team level through leadership. That means no translation or manual re-representing of information stored in the tool into complicated spreadsheets, PowerPoints, etc. I can easily run a view, screen capture, and pop in a slide as needed. This is a much better use of a PM’s time. We can now stop spending half our time running things and half our time translating it into pretty pictures for leadership, and instead invest more time in facilitating and improving the high-quality interactions that form the backbone of successful agile delivery.

In setting up agile delivery operations, CA Agile Central’s training and platform have been instrumental to our progress and success. CA Agile Central was a key ingredient to that delivery transformation. Also, CA has updated the tool to support Scaled Agile Frameworks, which is a key competitive differentiator for them.

I miss the “Rally” brand – I do not find the CA Agile Central branding as compelling, but I get the reasons driving the re-brand.

More importantly, we are seeing internal challenges from Atlassian because of their highly integrated suite that enables further automation and centralization of activities that are also highly necessary – messaging notifications cued off builds, collaboration on Solution Architecture Documentation, etc.

It would be good for CA to develop a strategy to address the competitive threat coming in from Atlassian.

We have been using the product for about four years.

I didn't encounter any stability issues.

I didn't encounter any scalability issues.

I have not engaged their technical support, so I cannot offer a perspective there.

Our enterprise was historically a Rally shop, so I did not switch from anything else.

The setup was straightforward, as long as you have some grounding in agile processes and philosophies.

Frankly, pricing is expensive and needs to be carefully planned for when budgeting. Our licensing is handled by a centralized group at our company called the Application Lifecycle Management team.

CA Agile Central/Rally was already embedded at my company when I came on board. However, while I have been here, there was a move from some factions of IT leadership to make us move to the IBM Rational Suite. We were able to push back on that edict by demonstrating the clear superiority of the CA Agile Central solution over IBM’s. However, there are still pushes happening from that team, focused on the higher cost of CA over IBM.

Get training first on agile methodology. Then, consider engaging professional services to help you launch your first release, if you are completely new to agile. There is a very high benefit to bringing in experienced experts as they will greatly increase your chance of success.

I am a software tester, so the features I found that are valuable to me are importing of test cases, creating new test cases, editing test cases, executing test cases, and generating test reports.

Creating test cases is important to me because it allows to me write test cases in an MS Excel spreadsheet and quickly import them into CA Agile Central, saving me a lot of time having to manually rewrite the test cases.

Editing of test cases is also very important because I can quickly make changes to reflect changes in the user stories.

Generating reports is a great tool and is very important because I can create a test case and results, and share with other members who don’t have CA Agile Central access.

Using CA Agile Central, my organization was able to develop, test, and deploy software much quicker than we used to under the waterfall methodology.

The ability to customize reports needs improving by providing users with features for selecting what they want to see on the reports, how they want to lay out the reports, and create a schedule for a report to be generated automatically and sent by email.

When I create a custom report (see below screen), I want to be able to have my report run automatically once a day and email the scrum master.

We have used this solution for over five years.

We have not encountered any stability issues.

We have not encountered any scalability issues.

I have never had to use technical support.

I am not aware of any other previous solutions.

• Real-time status tracking
• Capacity planning
• Ease of configuration of reports and dashboards
• Iteration and release planning
• Ability to personalize views
• Ability to see vital information in one screen as opposed to having to navigate to multiple pages

Capacity and resource planning help us understand how much work an individual can accommodate per sprint and if any one person is over-allocated.

Release planning is made simpler by the Agile Central interface.

Honestly, I can’t think of any areas that need improvement.

I have been using Agile Central for four and a half years.

Once or twice in a couple years we experienced outages, but not frequently.

I have used Agile Central in small organizations, as well as large organizations working in a Scaled Agile Framework (SAFe) environment.

I have never had to use technical support.

I have not previously used another solution, but I have to use JIRA now and I would rate JIRA a 3/10 compared to Agile Central at a 10/10.

I was not an admin of the tool, so I’m not sure how complex the application setup was.

I don’t know about the pricing.

I was not in charge of making the decision to purchase the product.

There are so many high-value features it is hard to choose but I will say the most valuable feature is the fact that it provides traceability from the strategic objective to task level with rolled up and detailed reporting. This is valuable as activity is joined up from top to bottom; a developer in a feature team can trace their input at the task level all the way up the hierarchy to the strategic objective they are helping to deliver. On the flip side, the CTO can have a view of real-time progress against the delivery of strategic objectives, drill down to the portfolio epics and business outcomes with the potential to see the value being delivered.

It has enabled the transition from a project-based portfolio to a product-based portfolio.

It could do with a wider range of colours for cards and the Kanban features need some improvement (which I know is on the way this year). The colour swatch for cards in Kanban board views is quite limited; I think there are 9 possibilities. Using these to visually differentiate cards on a busy board becomes less valuable when multiple themes are sharing a card color.

Kanban features should be built around flow, which implies they should not be constrained by time boxes. This is of particular relevance when considering many of the views that, by design, require one to select a time box. This is also true of reporting. There are some things to consider, though, as when viewing a personal or team board, one doesn’t want to see the entire backlog, so it would be useful if that could be limited to a user-defined number of stories.

I have been using Agile Central for seven years.

We have never had stability issues in seven years of use.

It is the most scalable product of its kind out there.

Technical support is excellent.

I have used JIRA, Trello and IBM Rational, but none of them are close to Agile Central.

Initial setup was very straightforward and guided by CA consultants.

If you want the very best, expect to pay accordingly. But you will get ROI from it, especially if you are doing agile well and at scale.

In my current role, the firm evaluated JIRA, Agile Central, VersionOne and IBM Rational (I think).

You will only regret it if you have chosen the Rolls Royce when you could have got by with a Nissan Micra.

The UI/UX of the tool is good with friendly navigation.

We can track of our tasks and project estimations.

It’s a good tool to use. Charts and dashboards should be more interactive.

I have used Agile Central for over two years.

Stability is good.

Scalability is good.

I rate technical support 8/10.

I used to use JIRA.

Setup was easy.

They should go for it.

I evaluated JIRA.

They should definitely use it.