[closeparen]

JIRA makes it dangerously easy to implement overly bureaucratic processes. A certain kind of organization is drawn to it for that reason. Even a healthy organization switching to JIRA can get carried away with the tools now at its disposal.

JIRA is a software product but also a social institution, an organizational philosophy. Sure, you can have the software without the attitude or vice versa, but use of JIRA is still a (weak) negative signal about the quality of an employer.

Turns out that the main thing protecting employee autonomy is the logistical difficulty of micromanagement. JIRA "solves" that problem.

[wonderwonder]

So your argument is that JIRA is too good and gives the user too much freedom to do what they want? Software is a tool, it is there to do what the user wants, a good tool does not limit the user. Organizational processes are just that, those selected by the org.

JIRA is successful because it is a good tool that gives power to the users. Anyone is free to build a competitor to JIRA, but I would argue that if the developer limits it and forces the client to use their preferred process methodology that they will likely fail.

Just my opinion. I have only been using JIRA for a few weeks now, have had no issues. Nothing amazing about it and nothing terrible. It does the job. Its just a tool. How its used is up to the user.

[closeparen]

“The user” is not a monolithic entity. JIRA transfers power from labor to management. Obviously a certain kind of management loves that, but as a worker, it’s in your interest to stay away.

Of course you can use JIRA as just a tool, but it tends to take on a life of its own, becoming central to his work is allocated and performance is assessed.