Shortcut Erfahrungen

This software is a curated experience that intentionally limits setup and flows compared with other products like JIRA which are less "bounded." I think this is better for most teams which do not care to install extra plugins and fight with non-intuitive workflow items.

There are some quirks in group selection and application, filtering, and sorting that do not always let me cross-cut the data the ways I want.

The software is intuitive and easy to use if you've used other product management software. Has lots of additional features.

The reason we stopped using it was we didn't actually need all the features that it had. In the end we felt like we had too many tools and downsized into Notion.

The software is incredible, it's easy to use, and the features just feats your team needs.

For Brazil it is a really expensive product, I wouldn't be able to pay the complete version, although I know that the free plan locks features that would be really helpful. Some international companies vary the price based on the exchange rate. That would allow to sell your product here easily. For example, for a team of 7 the price would be $84,00, that makes almost R$500,00 here that is almost the same as all the shopping (food, grocery..) for a family of two for a month. See?Other than that, it would be awesome to be able to change the team shortcut url. When I've created my team account I didn't know that the company name would be used for the URL, now it is very long and very ugly to share.

Whether you’re part of a small software team or you’re integrated into a collection of agile teams at an enterprise software shop - Shortcut makes it easy and intuitive to manage the many integrated software projects of todays micro services oriented development style. We’ve found that Shortcut grew with us from 2 devs to 10 and we expect it to grow with us as we grow to 50.

Story management sometimes feels like a full time job, but at least Shortcut makes it a joy. For our open source projects we have a hard time integrating with issues on GitHub where public issues are generated, but for our private projects, the GitHub integration is lightweight and effective.

Seems silly, but for me, it's the ability to create tasks under a ticket, and be able to convert those into tickets on their own. Jira did not have this, and still doesn't as far as I know, but wouldn't matter - Shortcut is simple to use, and ready to go out of the box.

Doesn't have the brand recognition, so hard to convince others that its the correct solution to use.

Shortcut is amazing for non-profits who need a flexible and no- to low-cost task/project management platform.

Unless you work in Agile methodology day in and day out, it can be difficult to understand how to effectively organize tasks/stories into epics and projects.

- Able to assign projects per sprint
- Able to forecast
- Milestones and epics are helpful

- Priorities are not obvious
- Hard to view the order of stories
- Not clean or easy to navigate

1) Easy to learn - Even our junior members got on-boarded quickly despite their absolute lack of familiarity to such tools.
2) Tons of tagging options - Tickets can get multiple labels and the long list of standard metadata for cross-posting and maximum searchability.
3) Powerful search box - We get lots of tickets using the same set of keywords yet the search function seems to algorithmically know exactly which one we are looking for!

1) Comment formatting is not WYSIWYG
2) A bit pricey for smaller teams
3) Continuous development is great, but there's always a new key feature deployed quickly that will make you rethink your currently-established conventions. We found ourselves testing these, and even migrating to fully commit to using the new feature instead (e.g. milestone-centric vs iteration-centric). There's this unshakeable worry that there's a new feature yet again right around the corner and we may have to switch once more.

As a product manager, I love the usability of Clubhouse (CH). Having come from competitive products such as JIRA, Rally, Pivotal Tracker, etc., CH feels far more intuitive and the user workflows well thought through. I greatly appreciate the ongoing development by the CH team. It's always a pleasure seeing regular alerts come in with rather material improvements.

Greater attention to how cross-team and cross-account collaborate using the software is a gap for me. Our business has a 2 or 3 different CH accounts mainly due to security needs (limiting certain access for groups of individuals). Which leads me to an additional thought which is, the ability to configure more granular security levels within CH is limited. Especially for an organization working predominantly with enterprise customers, we tend to have highly regulated standards related to third-party approved solutions.

From usability and technical perspective this is really an amazing piece of software. The easiness to never having to save something is extremely impressive

Moving stories between different Workflows is sometimes a bit annoying. Also it would be really awesome if you could apply your own prioritsation scheme and rank for it.

It's relatively easy to use, and the Slack integration makes tickets relatively easy to create.

It's not super opinionated on the workflow as opposed to Asana. I can understand why, though, given it's meant to model enterprise workflows.

I love it's exclusivity! Having to be invited by a member makes it just that much more desirable to get on. It's fun being able to directly interact with celebrities, movers and shakers, and influencers. The rooms are set up according to interest which is great as well.

The thing I least like about it is the fact that it's invite only. It's kind of a love hate with that aspect. So many of my friends want to join and I know they would find the content useful but cant join due to limited inviting options.

Fast. Easy to onboard. Easy to use.Clear

I like everything, even that one day their team called us to hear us out

It's amazing to just have everything work logically out of the box. The API access allowed me to integrate Shortcut with my tooling to make tagging commits and code far simpler than ever before.

There's definitely a lot of room for improvement with auxiliary features like the built-in WYSIWYG document editor, and sometimes the rigidity of the project layout does get somewhat cumbersome if you ever need to deviate slightly from the main feature set.

Board management and ease of use.Tasks can be easily created and managed.

Prioritization needs to be improved with more levels.