We asked business professionals to review the solutions they use. Here are some excerpts of what they said:
"The most valuable features of this solution are the CI/CD pipeline, and the testing automation."
"The simplicity is very good and the customer experience is also great."
"There are great automation tools."
"Microsoft has good integration with its other products, such as Office, Teams, et cetera."
"We can eliminate some of the middleman processes."
"You get a complete solution with Azure DevOps. You can do everything in one place, starting from requirement gathering until you release the product. It is a reliable, scalable, and handy product."
"The installation is straightforward. We can create a whole new organization in less than a day."
"It is easy to use. The shared repository is useful. Everything is in one environment."
"We use the board and card hierarchies in terms of sprints so that we can see if we have cross-functional teams that are working on the same projects together, especially when projects have dependencies. The parent-child relationship within cards is really nice so that we can see what kind of dependencies there are when we're trying to get projects finished."
"Adoption across stakeholders and visibility have been the biggest success for us with LeanKit."
"The transparency that it brings is valuable. I like to look at things from all angles, and sometimes, flip chart paper on a wall and sticky notes are better than something on a screen, but the way they've made it accessible from all points for anyone within an organization is great. As a project management guy, sometimes, you have to force people into new environments where they have to see what you're talking about. Any screen is a barrier, and people got to get into the screen. How do you know they do? You don't necessarily know, but you are getting around that barrier with a countermeasure of making it accessible to as many as possible. So, everyone can jump in there and see everything. It is fully transparent, and I like that. This is one thing that helps."
"Using the tool seems to save time versus trying to do things in a regular manner. It is highly collaborative; everybody can see things in one place. It is a highly functional, but pretty simple tool. That is hard to find: A tool that has a lot of functions, but is also simple."
"The "Blocking" feature has helped our scrum masters track impediments and share them at the program level to stakeholders with accountability and detail so that they understand and the action items which can be noted easily."
"People found the ability to set up different lanes and the ability to see where they're within the progress most valuable. They can use different colored cards or sticky notes, and then they can separate out which cards belong to a department or the initiative they're working on. They can filter who's working on it, and I've got good feedback about that."
"My team specifically uses our board for all of our Remedy tickets that come in. We had a card for every ticket that we get, and we're able to add the link to that specific ticket there.If I'm out of office, for example, and someone else needs to work a ticket or someone is being contacted to work on a ticket, I don't have to sign on it. Someone else can easily access that ticket because I put the link in there. It's nice. It has a lot of great functionality in there."
"LeanKit is amazing when it comes to getting answers about a given card's status. That's one of the biggest takeaways that we've had. The status is right there on the board. Everybody can see it. You just click on it and it gives you everything that you need to know, especially the comments feature because it gives us a timeline of updates. We use that a lot where we write a comment on the card and then we can see and track progress as we move it across the board."
"Requirements management is an area that can be improved."
"The tool was developed for Agile project methodology, but I've noticed that there has also been a try to incorporate what is typically done in MS Project, which is for more sequential Waterfall projects. The problem with that is that it is half-baked for Waterfall projects. If you're going to do it, then either go all the way and allow us to use the tool for both or don't do it at all."
"I think that they have some menus there that are not very well placed."
"With Microsoft, I would prefer to have more test plans. It's very difficult to find individual test plan module training."
"The solution can improve by adding integration with on-premise tools. The only built-in repository options are GitHub and DevOps."
"The tool has a logical link between epic feature, user story, and task, but when you try to generate a report to show the delivery progress against a feature, it is not easy. To see the percentage completion for a feature or progress of any delivery, it is not easy to draw a report."
"The test management section needs to be improved."
"The user interface could be improved."
"They have a feature called Instant Coffee. It was in the beta phase. They released it from beta, and now, it is a legit thing. We were in the pilot here. I liked the idea of Instant Coffee, and I like how it is integrated, to some degree, with LeanKit, but I have two big rocks to throw at them on this. The first one is that Instant Coffee does not save your work very well in terms of saving it in formats that you can then go back and edit as Visio would. It leads to the next point, which is, we're not really clear on what they're trying to do with Instant Coffee. I feel that they're trying not to reinvent Visio, Miro, and other software programs out there that do mapping, visual diagrams, etc. Miro is fantastic in that regard. I gather they're not trying to reinvent Miro, but it sure would be nice if it had more aspects of Miro in it, such as being able to draw arrows and write on them on the top."
"Being able to track actual time on cards or sprints, instead of using just the planned start and stop date, would also be useful. I would like to see something like JIRA has with actual sprint starts and stops."
"It is a pretty good product. It is really hard to think of things that I'd want to be improved. Sometimes, we use it for project management lessons learned. So, we have three columns, such as Could be Improved, Keep Doing, and Works Really Well. It would be helpful if there was a template set up for something like that because we code different cards based on the category. For example, if something belongs to the Could be Improved category, we may have those cards as yellow, but then I have to change the color of them and put a header. It is not as smooth, but it still works fine. To be honest, I don't have a lot of complaints about it."
"Our overall impression of Leankit has been very positive, however, our experience with the JIRA integration into our Leankit boards was much harder than we anticipated and that could be improved by simplifying it somehow."
"We are a 750-employee company, so we got lucky that our board approved the kind of funding we needed for the solution. But, LeanKit probably needs to reduce its pricing."
"There's room for improvement with the Instant Coffee feature. There are other businesses that have been interested in leveraging a virtual whiteboard or sticky note capability and how Instant Coffee was developed has not met the mark."
"Within the current features, if they can give some ability to show more icons on the card, it would be helpful. It would help us in showing more data on the cards."
"I love the concept of Instant Coffee, however, it is very cumbersome to try to use."
"The price is reasonable for the solution."
"I am not aware of any licensing subscriptions for the solution."
"I don't know the pricing of DevOps. It would be much cheaper than ALM because ALM came out as a software product initially. Now they are moving into a cloud and subscription model. In that case, Microsoft is coming from Azure and the cloud and DevOps and software as a service, so it would be much cheaper, but the catch would be that they are trying to get money on all the sides, like an operating system, Microsoft Office, or Microsoft Azure DevOps."
"We pay a monthly license for Microsoft Azure DevOps."
"There are other solutions available that are open source and free, such as GitLab."
"This product could maybe be cheaper. My organization handled licensing, so I'm not aware of which subscription they have."
"It is a subscription model and I only pay for what I use."
"It has an annual subscription. It can be cheaper for partners. Many open-source products are available in the market, and it would be great if they can be a little bit more competitive in terms of pricing. A lot of startups are looking for an open-source, free, or cheap solution. If they can accommodate such requirements, it will be good for the product in the long run."
"As far as I understand, it is not an expensive application."
"I don't know what it would be on its own. It was basically included with what we were already paying or using. So, it was a no-brainer. It wasn't like we had to sell the company on making a purchase or anything like that. There weren't any costs that came in after implementing it."
"In general, Planview's cost structure is reasonable. You get quite a lot of functionality for the license cost that you get."
"I don't believe there are any costs in addition to the standard licensing fees."
Azure DevOps Services is a cloud service for collaborating on code development. It provides an integrated set of features that you access through your web browser or IDE client, including the following:
Planview LeanKit enables engineering teams across all levels of the organization with a visual work delivery tool to apply Lean management principles to their work, helping them work smarter and deliver faster.
Microsoft Azure DevOps is ranked 2nd in Application Lifecycle Management (ALM) Suites with 69 reviews while Planview LeanKit is ranked 3rd in Application Lifecycle Management (ALM) Suites with 11 reviews. Microsoft Azure DevOps is rated 8.0, while Planview LeanKit is rated 9.0. The top reviewer of Microsoft Azure DevOps writes "Robust functionality, good integration, continually enhanced, and easy to scale". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Planview LeanKit writes "Scalable, flexible, and easy to use". Microsoft Azure DevOps is most compared with Jira, GitLab, TFS, ServiceNow IT Business Management and Red Hat Ansible Automation Platform, whereas Planview LeanKit is most compared with Jira Align, Rally Software, AgileCraft, Targetprocess and Micro Focus ALM Octane. See our Microsoft Azure DevOps vs. Planview LeanKit report.
We monitor all Application Lifecycle Management (ALM) Suites reviews to prevent fraudulent reviews and keep review quality high. We do not post reviews by company employees or direct competitors. We validate each review for authenticity via cross-reference with LinkedIn, and personal follow-up with the reviewer when necessary.