Digital.ai Agility vs. Digital.ai TeamForge

Scenarios where it works well: 1) Retros can be very well facilitated & notes/action items
can be captured against the sprint. 2) Product Owner can effectively track the story
progress with all the test-cases, design etc. 3) Being good scaling support, it provides good visibility
across multiple teams, programs and agile portfolios, providing a centralized
environment where all our stakeholders can easily work together regardless of location. 4) It provides easy tracking all of your epics,
stories, themes, defects, tasks, tests and issues 5) I like its intuitive UI as for moving stories
around, burning hours. 6) It allows top leadership to visualize
and report their strategic plans, giving all stakeholders the relevant data
that they need to stay dedicated to the project priorities. 7) It can be easily integrated with slack
so for few teams we used slack for collaboration Scenarios where it did not work well: 1) Test Management need improvement in
terms of tracking tests, team had hard time tracking regression test cases. 2) Version one comes with lot of features like
Rally but here we don’t get customizations which is there in Jira where from workflow
to issue everything can be customized based on your team/program/portfolio
requirements. 3) Lot of navigation to access basic
stuff. Example I want to go to bug attachment , there are lt of clicks &
navigation need to do which should be pretty straightforward I feel.

Incentivized

CollabNet TeamForge is more well-suited for technically knowledgeable users such as developers, systems analysts, QA but not for non-technical users due to the technical data used throughout the tool. CollabNet TeamForge is appropriate for most applications development. In any industry especially suited for high demand software delivery environments.

Incentivized

• Automated saving of changes, no records can be lost because all items are saved in real-time.
• The watch function, optional but beneficial when managing multiple teams or projects.

Incentivized

• Code security.
• Code migration.
• Agile tie-in.

Incentivized

• Saving of changes is inconsistent. Sometimes the changes appear to save automatically and other times the user needs to click the "Apply" button. Until the user is familiar with when this needs to happen, work can easily be lost.
• This may be a setup configuration issue, but it would be good to be able to set the default team when creating stories. Too often stories are created and the user forgets to enter the team and they need to search the entire database for the story that was just created.

Incentivized

• I would like to see personalization for managing artifacts, that is, allowing the user to customize pages and save personalized settings and then save them as bookmarks.
• I would like an improved subversion browser such as a graphical user interface rather than a basic file explorer.
• I would like built in features for CollabNet TeamForge integrated with subversion so that i can associate my private code branches and code changes.

Incentivized

VersionOne provides outstanding training. They have Product Owner training that I recommend every Product Owner attend. They have scrum master training and other agile training that was well worth the money paid because it made the teams more productive. And the support for the tool is incredible. These people live and breathe Agile and are evangelists and enthusiasts.

Incentivized

They always answer the phone when we put a call in, any time. They have consistently sent out contractors when needed and were there every step of the way when we switched over from ClearCase to TeamForge years ago. The support is what you really pay for when you buy into TeamForge.

Incentivized

Basecamp functions much differently from Version One and serves a different purpose, so it's kind of like comparing apples and oranges. However, both V1 and Basecamp have their pros and cons. V1 makes it easier to manage Agile processes, but Basecamp is more user-friendly and can be used for broader purposes. At our organization, we utilize both products. V1 is what we use to manage processes internally, and Basecamp is what we use to manage client-facing processes. If our organization wasn't Agile, I would prefer to use Basecamp for all project management (internal and client-facing), and have done so at previous organizations for which I've worked

Incentivized

CollabNet TeamForge is superior to Mercury mainly because it has a subversion change management tool integrated with the product. CollabNet TeamForge offers more complexity but with more flexibility for managing and tracking projects. I think
CollabNet TeamForge is more comprehensive than either Mercury and JIRA. They're all user friendly tools with short learning curves but CollabNet TeamForge is most efficient in my experience.
JIRA was recently adopted for particular applications and is currently being evaluated by various technology teams.

Incentivized

• I came in near the end of our use of VersionOne (we are migrating to Jira), and I don't operate or think at the business return (ROI) level. I'm not the one to comment on this!
• I suspect that V1 added much clarity to the prioritization of work, and added visibility across entire teams. So I assume that it had a positive impact on returns.

Incentivized

• Unfortunately, I do not have access to ROI information.

Incentivized