Jira Core is Atlassian's general purpose business and project management tool available to smaller companies or teams and designed to suit a variety of purposes (e.g. marketing planning, product roadmap, etc.). In Jira Core, Workflows define process and enable teams to track tasks. Jira Core Cloud instances also have boards that let users visualize workflows and drag and drop tasks from to-do to done. It is available on the cloud.
$7.53
per month per user
ProcessMaker
Score 8.9 out of 10
N/A
ProcessMaker is a process automation platform that helps organizations optimize and scale their business operations. By combining workflow automation, AI-driven decision-making, and advanced analytics, ProcessMaker empowers businesses to streamline complex processes, improve efficiency, and enhance customer experiences.
N/A
Pricing
Jira Work Management
ProcessMaker
Editions & Modules
Free
$0
Starter - Monthly
$7.53
per month per user
Premium - Monthly
$13.53
per month per user
Starter - Annually
$22,500
per year User tier: 201-300
Premium - Annually
$40,500
per year User tier: 201-300
Enterprise
Contact Sales
No answers on this topic
Offerings
Pricing Offerings
Jira Work Management
ProcessMaker
Free Trial
Yes
Yes
Free/Freemium Version
Yes
No
Premium Consulting/Integration Services
No
Yes
Entry-level Setup Fee
No setup fee
No setup fee
Additional Details
—
—
More Pricing Information
Community Pulse
Jira Work Management
ProcessMaker
Features
Jira Work Management
ProcessMaker
Project Management
Comparison of Project Management features of Product A and Product B
Jira Work Management
7.8
30 Ratings
1% above category average
ProcessMaker
-
Ratings
Task Management
8.530 Ratings
00 Ratings
Resource Management
8.529 Ratings
00 Ratings
Gantt Charts
7.223 Ratings
00 Ratings
Scheduling
8.125 Ratings
00 Ratings
Workflow Automation
7.427 Ratings
00 Ratings
Team Collaboration
8.629 Ratings
00 Ratings
Support for Agile Methodology
8.129 Ratings
00 Ratings
Support for Waterfall Methodology
8.120 Ratings
00 Ratings
Document Management
7.024 Ratings
00 Ratings
Email integration
7.424 Ratings
00 Ratings
Mobile Access
6.618 Ratings
00 Ratings
Timesheet Tracking
8.118 Ratings
00 Ratings
Change request and Case Management
8.522 Ratings
00 Ratings
Budget and Expense Management
7.217 Ratings
00 Ratings
Professional Services Automation
Comparison of Professional Services Automation features of Product A and Product B
Jira Work Management
8.7
19 Ratings
12% above category average
ProcessMaker
-
Ratings
Quotes/estimates
9.215 Ratings
00 Ratings
Invoicing
9.712 Ratings
00 Ratings
Project & financial reporting
8.517 Ratings
00 Ratings
Integration with accounting software
7.410 Ratings
00 Ratings
Customization
Comparison of Customization features of Product A and Product B
Jira Work Management
-
Ratings
ProcessMaker
7.8
3 Ratings
7% above category average
API for custom integration
00 Ratings
7.83 Ratings
Reporting & Analytics
Comparison of Reporting & Analytics features of Product A and Product B
Jira Work Management
-
Ratings
ProcessMaker
8.6
11 Ratings
10% above category average
Dashboards
00 Ratings
8.911 Ratings
Standard reports
00 Ratings
8.911 Ratings
Custom reports
00 Ratings
8.09 Ratings
Process Engine
Comparison of Process Engine features of Product A and Product B
Jira Work Management
-
Ratings
ProcessMaker
8.9
10 Ratings
22% above category average
Process designer
00 Ratings
9.99 Ratings
Process simulation
00 Ratings
8.38 Ratings
Business rules engine
00 Ratings
9.99 Ratings
SOA support
00 Ratings
9.910 Ratings
Process player
00 Ratings
8.08 Ratings
Form builder
00 Ratings
8.08 Ratings
Model execution
00 Ratings
8.38 Ratings
Business Process Automation
Comparison of Business Process Automation features of Product A and Product B
Jira Work Management suits projects involving multiple teams, such as product development. In our case, the design, development, and QA teams use Jira to track tasks from ideation to deployment. Custom workflows and real-time updates ensure that all teams are on the same page, and the ability to link related tasks helps manage dependencies effectively.
The task mining component is well suited for processes where there are a lot of steps performed in a variety of systems, particularly by a single individual on a team. It also requires a robust activity ID to be able to track an activity. It is not well suited when trying to track a process where the content is in an email.
User interface. It is clean and easy to understand. You won't get overwhelmed the second you log in.
The workflow maker. With a drag and drop interface, you can easily visualize and implement what you want on the screen. Out of all the programs we tested, this one had the easiest process maker and designer.
Ease of understanding. My biggest recommendation would be that this program is easy to access for anyone. There are complications (see negatives) but this program can be implemented quickly and efficiently, and nearly anyone can learn to use it. You will not feel like you are in the dark with it.
Complications when you get to the more advanced pieces. When trialing, I found that the more advanced a process got, the more complicated it got for me in coding. When you begin using the more advanced features, you will find that you need to have a basic knowledge of coding - otherwise you won't go any further. This was my sole issue. Unfortunately, it was one that would have brought the school to a grinding halt if they were to ever get more complicated than they were.
As we are Atlassian users overall, this entire ecosystem is truly built from a 360 perspective. It becomes the one source of truth, and we can easily see where we are in our projects and where to emphasize focus in the upcoming period. There are some areas for minor improvements, but they are more a matter of preference rather than business necessity
I gave this overall rating for ProcessMaker due to its overall flexibility, design and ease of use for most. Examples of this from us include it being an excellent and trustworthy tool for automating processes, the abilities and capabilities for real-time process tracking and the web-based accessibility and implementation which allows for easy access and management of the tool.
The evolution of Jira Service Desk to Jira work management is accompanied by lot of new features like the List View which allows inline editing, easy column management, the Calendar View bases on extensible modal and state categories, the Timeline View supports tasks and subtasks, the Boards which allow the categorization of status and allow the visibility of subtasks on the cards, Forms can be created very easily, Project templates can be used based on the business area.
Before making the decision to get ProcessMaker, we assessed different and best options in the market, which are also quite competitive. KiSSFLOW, Blueworks Live, and Bizagi, being the most relevant and ADONIS, to mention the ones we consider the most relevant and capable of meeting our needs. In the end, we went for ProcessMaker because of mainly three things as described before: 1. Real-time process status tracking. 2. Metrics and dashboards. 3. Ease of use for constructing diagrams.
The capability is robust and quite industry agnostic. It would benefit significantly with some out of the box models - e.g. procure to pay on SAP and similar. They could also develop industry specific examples which could kickstart the implementation for organizations.
For our marketing team, Jira Work Management caused us to lose valuable work time due to manual updates that could have been automated.
Due to lack of creative review tools within Jira Work Management, our team had to pursue other tools that do not integrate with Jira Work Management, thus creating additional OpEx.
I'm using Communication edition to introduce BPMN in my organization. I can build the first process in a short time, make my boss more confident with my job.
But, with ProcessMaker, we need more time to design code to handle the process, and without PHP/Javascript Programmer, it seems hard to work with more and more processes online.
However, IE Browser is not well supported, somewhat let the user confuse.