Item: Miro
Rating: 7
Author: Aaron Down

Overall Satisfaction with Miro

Use Cases and Deployment Scope

It is used both internally for drawings and report reviews and comments as well as external progress meetings with consultants and clients. The flexibility of the platform is key as lots of our workflow is work in progress and the ability to record and track comments and updates live and between multiple staff is much better than static PDF documents.

Pros and Cons

Pros

Organising content
Aligning and distributing imported files and linking together
Providing comments and responses

Cons

Increasingly poor performance when multiple PDFs are imported to a board
Distributing importing documents/pages to a grid arrangement
Size/resolution of fonts/graphics in comparison to size/resolution of imported files

Return on Investment

Efficient review of both WIP and final documents and information
Reduced time required for progress meetings
Efficient internal presentations using variety of existing information

Collaboration

The ability to review packages of information, provide comments and track responses across multiple team members has been invaluable. By housing comments, responses and task progress on one platform we have reduced the need for multiple calls and/or messages via other platforms.

Alternatives Considered

Conceptboard and Microsoft Teams

Until recently Miro has handled multiple PDF imports much faster and more efficiently than other platforms. There are also much more opportunities for embedding links and organising content on the boards. Structuring Miro boards is somewhat easier than other platforms and the range of annotation tools is better.

Key Insights

Do you think Miro delivers good value for the price?

Yes

Are you happy with Miro's feature set?

Yes

Did Miro live up to sales and marketing promises?

I wasn't involved with the selection/purchase process

Did implementation of Miro go as expected?

I wasn't involved with the implementation phase

Would you buy Miro again?

Yes

Other Software Used

Revit, Adobe InDesign, Microsoft Teams, Microsoft 365, Google Chrome, Brave, Adobe Illustrator CC

Likelihood to Recommend

Best for smaller package reviews due to issues of slow performance when more than around 50 pages are imported to a board.
Good for WIP team reviews with consultants and clients where multiple formats of information are to be presented and a report has not yet been produced/formalised.
Not currently feasible to house multiple versions of documents/drawings in PDF format due to slow loading of board.

Comments

Please log in to join the conversation

Powerful platform for internal and external collaboration