Initiative dates should be based on linked features, not releases

We have weekly releases, so adding Initiatives and Goals to releases is too much overhead.  As a result, I can't use the "Set Automatically" option for Start and End dates on Initiatives, since it's based on the individual linked releases for that Initiative. So, I don't have any usable timeline views for Initiatives, unless I manually adjust the dates, which is also not something I have time to manage.

But as a solution, I do consistently link Features to Initiatives (side note: we renamed Initiatives to "Epics" and use the Product Line Initiative as our "Initiative" level).  When building Epic/Initiative timelines, I want dates to be based on when the underlying *Features* are being developed (ie. their respective release time frames).  For long term planning, I'd rather drop a placeholder Feature in a future release than have to manipulate the Initiatives on every release and keep this updated over time, particularly since this value is not as visible to the user.  When release plans change it normally means I'm just moving features, not updating release details.  This is too much to maintain - Features are the center of our roadmap universe, and I'd rather timelines be driven by them.

  • Jonathon Leeke
  • Apr 29 2016
  • Unlikely to implement
Release time frame
  • Apr 29, 2016

    Admin Response

    Thank you for the request. As you mentioned, we currently provide the ability to set dates manually, or automatically based on release dates. We provide this automatic setting to be on the release level (rather than features) as this would generally require much less configuration (when considering the number of features vs. releases).

    While we understand your use case, based on current priorities and community feedback, we are unlikely to make updates in this area in the near term. To avoid manually setting dates, we would suggest linking them at the release level. We hope you can understand.

  • Attach files
  • Jonathon Leeke commented
    May 12, 2016 03:15

    This is unmanageable to have to keep release Initiatives up to date with the features in that release just to get a basic timeline view of how long an initiative will be in development.  I'm not sure what value the release Initiatives provide when you can link Initiatives to the underlying features - they should roll up to the release automatically to avoid duplicate data entry.

  • Mark Watts commented
    August 25, 2016 16:03

    This is also a key issue for my team. We have a large roadmap and set of initiatives. Initiatives are driven by delivery of key features and to be able to best represent initiative progress the Initiative roadmap is a key tool. Having to manually adjust the roadmap as we move features between releases means we need to maintain a manual mental connection. This is prone to error. This is a key feature to making the Initiative roadmap a powerful tool. 

  • Puneet Singhal commented
    August 28, 2018 21:31

    I agree with both comments above.  This is getting unmanageable.  I do not understand the value that Aha adds with initiatives if we are unable to roll-up features status, or start date or % complete (based on story points calculation).  I wanted to remove this manual tracking in the first place.  Jira Portfolio does this beautifully.