More than adequate, but disappointing and getting more so over time.
Updated June 09, 2017
More than adequate, but disappointing and getting more so over time.
Score 4 out of 10
Vetted Review
Verified User
Overall Satisfaction with CA Agile Central (formerly Rally)
It's used in tech engineering to manage agile development on several teams developing integrated software, firmware and hardware products.
- Handle the complexities of multiple teams.
- Visual indicators for individual story states.
- Adaptable as your teams go through the learning curve in Agility.
- Portfolio management... poor graphical presentation of portfolio (as compared to Aha! for example).
- Release management... the model and implementation are not cohesive, require many manual steps to maintain release plan integrity, seems to support SAFe at the expense of other, more Agile, practices.
- Visualization, in general... minimal capability for user-defined charting (unless you want to do SDK programming), and most canned charts offered are with an old internal SDK that doesn't support new features
- My big gripe is that in the two years we've had the product, an unbelievably SMALL amount of work appears to have been done. Glaring gaps and inconsistencies (conceptual and practical) continue to go unaddressed, while apparently great effort is being spent on new features having marginal utility.
- Based on this experience I have concerns for the ability of CA to bring the product up to modern standards and to restore its conceptual integrity after years of piecemeal incremental improvement. For a large development team, they don't seem to be delivering much new value.
- Positive: fast ramp up didn't crash and burn
- Negative: obscures business value of features... the implementation of that kind of view is minimal
Selected because the others seemed worse two years ago when the decision was made. VersionOne seemed ugly and too restricted. Might look better now. Microsoft TFS, now VSO, looked limited but also might look better now. Microsoft is improving it at a remarkably rapid pace. Jira was considered and rejected because their solution is too piecemeal requiring too much administration.