CA Technologies Love Rally! We coordinate backlog management, current sprint and release planning, and portfolio planning with a mix of co-located and remote team members. CA Agile Central streamlines tactical Story and Defect management as well as strategic Portfolio Feature and Initiative planning while also providing one source of the truth for the enterprise. Highly customizable visual feedback - CA Agile Central allows each user to create their own work space and also allows creation and sharing of custom visualizations for the product and engineering teams.
Artifact Edits are a straightforward mix of inline editing of common fields and detailed updates of entire artifact records. Integrations with customer-facing bug tracking systems is possible, but requires more direct intervention than expected.
Over many quarters - and ultimately years - of use, we were able to plan for seasonal spikes in support and new feature delivery based on known throughput from previous time periods. Using the inherent status visibility of CA Agile Central, we gained anywhere from hours of time per user by eliminating meetings, status check calls and user-generated weekly status updates. Visual indicators for individual story states. Adaptable as your teams go through the learning curve in Agility. 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. For example some simpler projects can be managed with simple user stories, a Kanban process and board. Large projects are managed with iterations, releases, tasks and burn down charts.
Create a home dashboard and customize it to show user stories and tasks assigned to you and a personal burn down chart. A portfolio management capability where you can link and view the entire hierarchy from theme to initiative to feature to user story s and finally to tasks.
For example more filters and reports and more ability to do mass updates. It has limited filters to generate reports. Often a Scrum master will need to export data to Excel or a tool like Crystal Reports to get enhanced reporting capability.
The adaptability and customization of CA Agile Central has aided in our success. Agile methodologies and CA Agile Central has made it easier to integrate business product owners into an agile team.
It was used by the whole company, in all departments. We had our user stories, tasks, and defects in there. We tracked our working hours in Rally also. We are an agile company with two-week sprints, and we used CA Agile Central formerly Rally to plan our development work. It was the main communication tool between teams members and their managers on the tasks level. You can add as much teams as you want, and guarantee each team's work would stay separate in browsing, graphs and analytics.
Rally is a very large powerful tool, and that also is the reason why it can't be a good fit for small teams who want simpler interfaces and way less features. Also if you attempt to sign in again on one tab, all the other tabs redirect to the same page of the first tab you signed in. Vendors can't alter or remove reviews. CA Agile Central Review: Use Cases and Deployment Scope.
Portfolio Planning features allows all team members to understand how individual stories and tasks roll up to larger milestones and releasable features. Drag and drop artifact arrangement has gotten better in the past few releases, but is still a bit difficult to use. For singular, small teams with concise product portfolios and few or no integration requirements, there are better, no-cost options in the market.
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. Standard Scrum from story grooming to delivery is good. Allocating features to releases is not good because in order to visualize you also have to assign stories to releases. Release management in general uses a narrow and often inscrutable conceptual model, so we have avoided it.
We use milestones instead but they have only limited support. It is used primarily in IT by developers and quality control engineers, by business analysts and scrum masters from the PMO and by business product owners. The ability to tailor the tool for each product. User management is pretty basic and could be better. The only scenario we have had some issues with is when we need to work with an organization outside of our domain that uses a Waterfall process.
In all other scenarios of large or small projects CA Agile Central has worked very well. We used CA Agile Central for our agile process. Not too user friendly interface Defect management is not the best I have seen Could add more fields for defects. We used it in our company for the last few years but decided to switch to JIRA.
Our management thinks that JIRA will work better for our wannabe true agile company. Also, I don't think Rally is the best tool for agile teams. We used Rally in our company through and beginning as the main tool to organize our user stories, defects and all other tasks. Rally is a great tool for large teams with very good experience in the agile world.
It's not well-suited for those little, get-things-done teams, since managing the whole platform becomes really a job by itself. Teams generally might have to consider having a dedicated member in the team to manage and administrate the tool and facilitate communicate with all team members regarding tasks flow and updates. If your team is active, that will generate a lot of noise in the landing page making it hard to focus on one aspect. I adjust permissions for those projects to ensure limited access to requirements in different phases.
When a phase is complete, I bulk move the stories into the next phase. Context Driven Testing Level 1 production support Vertical in healthcare. DevOps for agile environment is a better fit.
It is less about who does it, and more about the code meets the acceptance criteria. Companies often have specific lead times, hence release planning is helpful. Rally Software is very well suited to a deployment environment and in some scenarios which should consist of a QA person as well as BA, developer and operations working together. At my company, I am aware that the the project managers, the operations team, the QA team, and the engineering departments use Rally to work in an Agile environment.
I would not be surprised if it was used by the whole organization because having the company staying on one software allows project managers to track company progress more efficiently.
For a few years the company has strived to practice the agile methodologies and practiced scrum, daily standups and Kanban Board along with Rally to achieve this. Rally has many features to track progress as well as user friendly tools to optimize and track what other members of the team are doing.
Their easy to view Kanban board allows the viewers to understand what's in progress, what needs to be done, and what can be released and what is done all in one go.
Because our team also practices weekly optimization, the user stories on the backlog are ordered in terms of urgency allowing users to start stories that are on the top of the stack easily. This software has many features and it's great but I have heard that the project managers do not use the entire package of features making this software quite expensive for what they actually use it for. I believe this software is good for small-medium sized teams.
The team I am on operations is at most five people that is actively using it and the other teams also have about that many people on a team. It can be used for a larger enterprise as the company is on the larger side; but it is more suited for a smaller scenario. It is also great for companies that are looking for a web based software as everything is online and a company would not have to rely on their own IT department to run the features of this platform. If a company is looking for an extensive Agile software and can afford Rally's price tag, this just might be the software for them.
It has so much flexibility and power that it actually makes simpler tasks complex — particularly backlog management and scheduling things into releases and sprints. Typically we have 2 epics in a release. There are typically dozens of stories in an epic. Our core engineering team in our division pays for the application. If I were to evaluate new tools, I would look at Pivotal Tracker again, and also have a look at Altasian. They have a big product suite that some of the team has used before.
Rapid visibility of progress or problems across large number of teams. Portfolio view allows Product Management clear visibility across all their product features. Strong feedback metrics for the team and individuals as to status and meeting commitments.
Visual UI quickly gives teams visibility into their sprint progress. Helps enables Agile structure for widely dispersed teams. Supports traditional scrum and also Kanban. Completely open API give access to just about everything and enables integration to other systems you may be using. Team at Rally is very responsive to needs and feedback. They also have a strong SE team to help with best practices. Pretty easy to get one of their Product Managers on the phone to talk roadmap.
Strong community to help with questions and their forums are very active. Traditional Agile metrics like sprint velocity and burndown are built in, but still challenging to get metrics beyond these. Not an inexpensive solution. Their pricing structure is pretty flat - you get lower per seat prices with more seats obviously.
Buying at end of quarter will sometimes get you a little better price, but not huge savings. Sometime in the past, I was able to get a discount for being a reference, but now that they have grown and are gaining in market position, this is probably less the case. I have found them extremely easy to work with overall.More...