What are the plans from Atlassian with regard to the "team" functionality and "Jira groups?

[jeroen_wilmes]

Atlassian brought the team "functionality" to JIRA. But it is no news that this functionality, in the way it is implemented by Atlassian, has no added value at all! Atlassian should fix it or remove it, but Atlassian is doing nothing.

Especially because the other functionality "jira groups" is as bad!
To make effective use of "jira groups" you need site admin right which is not logical.

Bottom line: Atlassian speak up what are you going to do?  Keeping silent and leaving your customers with two completely useless features? Or fix one the the two quickly? (not "gathering interest for > 10 years, as most of the features on your backlog)

[Daria Spizheva_Reliex_ · Accepted solution]

Hi @jeroen_wilmes ! I can't speak for Atlassian's roadmap, but the frustration you're describing — Teams with limited practical use, and Jira groups requiring site-admin rights to manage — is something we hear from customers quite often, so you're definitely not alone here.

ActivityTimeline may cover the gap on the team-management side.

1. Flexible team creation — build teams manually (Classic), automatically by skills/positions (Functional), or import your existing Jira teams and Jira groups — so your current structures aren't lost.
2. No site-admin dependency — teams are managed inside ActivityTimeline by users with Manager/Admin roles in the app, so team leads can maintain their own teams without elevated Jira permissions.
3. Teams that actually do something — teams drive real planning features: team dashboards and timelines, workload/capacity view per team, a Team Panel for assigning work to a team before an individual (including a Team custom field on the Jira issue screen), team-based reports and timesheets. People can also belong to several teams, which helps with shared resources.

So rather than being a label on an issue, teams become the working unit for planning and reporting — all while Jira stays your source of truth.

Hope this helps.

[jeroen_wilmes]

Thanks for your information. but it feels like a rent a very expensive apartment (Jira Premium) from Atlassian, but if I want to shower, Atlassian tells me that the shower is not in the scope of what I pay for and refers me to paid third party apps.

I understand that you fill that gap and that is very good, but there is no way that I can and want to convince may management that on top of the premium price for Jira Premium I need dozens of add ons the make the basic functionality work.

[Germán Morales · Accepted solution]

Hi @jeroen_wilmes ,

Atlassian has not published a commitment or delivery date to merge Teams and groups. They remain different objects today: Teams are used for collaboration and planning through the Team field, team profiles, mentions, and capacity planning in Plans, while groups remain the admin-managed security objects used for Jira access, space roles, and permission schemes.

Some of the duplicated administration can now be avoided. In organizations with at least one Premium or Enterprise plan, an organization admin can connect an Atlassian Team to a local group. The group then becomes the source of truth for membership, while the Team remains available for planning and collaboration. Atlassian has also added delegated team-type permissions, allowing selected users, groups, or verified teams to manage specific types of teams.

The broader gap is acknowledged in JRACLOUD-80976: Consolidate Groups and Teams. It is currently Under Consideration and unresolved, so there is no confirmed plan to remove either model or make Teams usable in Jira permission schemes. For now, the practical setup is to use groups for access and permissions, Teams for assignment and planning, and connect them where available so their membership only needs to be maintained once.

[jeroen_wilmes]

Right, thanks for openness and it confirms that customers should not expect anything from Atlassian for  the future.

The ticket is "untouched" since it was created more than 3 years ago.  Like the comments in the ticket I'm also sick of all the work arounds or additional (not for free) add ons to solve Atlassian's problems.

The explanation of two different functionalities is not because it are different functionality, but because Atlassian did a bad job on integration.