Shortcut Reviews

Once you understand the structure of the application, like the epics, stories, and iterations, it becomes very easy to navigate. The collaboration with team members and tracking of features or bugs makes it very valuable for our dev and product teams!

You do get a lot of email notifications when you are mentioned or anything related to you is updated, it would be nice to combine these notifications into one email every couple of hours or so.

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.

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.

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.

The ability to plan and curate our product backlog and create customized filtered views of our stories.

The product does not have a great way to document individual requirements or acceptance cases.

I feel like the software is very easy to use, and has a sleek design, which is a huge plus

I personally didn't get much use out of the epics, but I can definitely see the appeal

- 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

Shortcut is "just right" for our needs, and thinking back about previous companies, would have been perfect in their needs, too. It is much more than a to-do tracker but doesn't overwhelm you with flexibility. My favorite part of this software is that it's story-centric. Epics are available, but they can play a supporting role if needed. Tasks are left to the developer to fill out themselves end up being merely a checklist. This paradigm shifts the focus to deliverables and prevents gamification by closing out menial tasks just to pump up ticket closures.

As a bonus, this standardizes the language of Epics/Stories/Tasks. There is no more endless debate on what should be what. The one thing I've always seen with Jira, especially in young teams, is that the flexibility of the product creates unproductive debate and confusion about terminology.

This product focuses on product delivery. For more general applications, like issue tracking or process management, it may not be the best for that.

Flexibility and ease of the software - Clubhouse is extremely easy to learn and provides the ability to mold the software and functionality to your team's workflows.
Additionally, the Clubhouse team is continuously adding new integration and features that are best practice for most modern and agile product & tech teams.

Not necessarily a specific con to Clubhouse but in general for all project management tools. Given the need for detailed requirements, it is necessary to write a lot of content on tickets. As such, the mobile experience is not on part with the browser desktop experience. That being said, I tend to create shell tickets on the mobile app or mobile view, then complete the tickets on a desktop when I have full functionality and familiarity.

- Ease of use
- The UI is easy to navigate
- Perfect for our team structure

Have only ever run into a few minor issues:

1. Setting up the backlog of our stories to prioritize
- Solution: If you have a ticket that you would like to appear in the backlog. Set the owner as yourself(Product Manager) and set the state to Unscheduled. And we also set up the filters for the backlog to display tickets that have a PM as the owner and are unscheduled.

2. Estimate section of ticket creation - would attribute one point to one day of work, but not having the ability to set half a day of work because there is no 0.5 option

3. When copying plain text from a word file and pasting it into a ticket, I would like it to also appear as plain text

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.

Can branch out the epic easily from origin when too much topic / stories relate to one single task, easy to manage.

Report : difficult to view milestone and every team member epic / stories completion, declared start and end date vs actual end date.Charging fee : I have team member join and leave, empty seat is a waste of money.

I have found that the ability for me to create story templates for my team has improved the quality of the requirements for features, increased the number of test cases we identify before implementation, and has decreased the amount of time it takes my engineers to push fixes for bugs.

I would say one thing I feel is missing is the ability to see status of team members across multiple workflows. I can click through each one and jot down notes, but when there’s a critical bug it would be nice to just see a birds eye view of who’s working on what so I know who to give it to.

We use Clubhouse to manage priorities in our design team and it is really easy to use in this respect. It's easy to create stories, boards and tasks and to steer our team to be more productive.

I'd love to be able to format text without the need for markdown. That would be great!

Epics, millestones, projects, tags, workflow and reports are awesome!! The plataform is very intuitive and make understanding easy. The atualizantions aways come with great news and features

My team is not from the technology business so some features doesnt make sense to us. My team speak portuguese, so the language sometime is an difficult point for some. Losing the story's interactions history makes my team use the tags to identify the sprints.

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.

We love the team collaboration and flexible storyboard features. It works well across disciplines such as scrum and kanban.

It's difficult to rank and order the importance of UserStories relative to other systems I've used.

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.

Manage projects in hierarchy using EPICS, STORIES and TASKS, and be able to label them based on your firm's development process (example: sprint_5, design_discussion, etc.) and define different phases anyway you like, such as Backlog, Development, Review, Deployment and Completion. Then you have different views of the projects at any time, like Report, Status.

I wished there could be a way to attach an identifier to each of the tasks, in case that one would use it when checking in the code or communicating with others

This product is simple and easy to use! The features Shortcut offers are intuitive. It is very easy to filter tasks or bugs and all the data looks very organized. Each task/bug story is very easy to drag and drop to a new workflow state, and you can see every workflow state and their stories at once which makes it very easy to assess the status of a project and see what features and bugs still need to be completed. It is also easy to filter stories by project or user, tag other users in a story, and link stories together in the order they need to be completed.

We just us this software internally. It would be cool if we could use this externally with our clients as well, and be able to hide certain workflow states or story comments from them, and/or hide client comments from the devs and let the project manager interface between the devs and clients.

- I can create a different view for each of my standing weekly meetings, so I can quickly filter to just the items I need to view at the time.
- Labels are flexible and powerful enough to help organize and track varying needs.
- The structure meets differing needs across roles, R&D, Education, Development, QA, Product

- The software is so flexible that defining the "right" way to use it is very difficult starting off.
- I suppose this is a risk with any software in this space, but there is a danger of losing items if they are excluded from all your standard views. This means that you have to build a view just to look for those lost items. We call them our "Oops" queues.

- It is very simple and flexibile to the engineer and non-engineer (me) in terms of updating
- It enables quick updating to single or multiple stories
- It allows us to scale across different team structures and org designs
- They seem to iterate and introduce functionality steadily

Nothing really that I can identify. I would say that the reporting could use some more work in terms of surfacing insights on how a team can be work better together.

Cycle time analytics would be goood