nav[aria-label="Primary Navigation"] { padding: 0; & ul { list-style: none; width: 100%; display: flex; flex-direction: row; justify-content: start; align-items: start; gap: 30px; padding: 0; & li { margin: 0; } & ul li { list-style: none; } } }

URGENTE! Workflow - Upsteram+ Downstream

Dionei Piazza

Hello people!

I'm new to Jira Software and I need help.

I recently created a workflow for the software development team. Kanban that has Upstream (discovery - product team) and Downstream (delivery - development team).

For guidance, I ended up creating a workflow for Upstream and another for Downstream. I left the issue type Epic in the Upstream workflow. The other issue types (story and task) were linked to the Downstream flow.

I have some problems in the assembly of Kanban boards. Thinking of an end-2-end flow, it is difficult to compile the Upstream and Dowstream items in the same frame.

Talking to some users of Jira, I saw that a large part creates Upstream and Downstream in the same workflow. In this way, all end-2-end flow statuses can be displayed in a single frame. Or, create a frame with only the status of Upstream, and a second frame with only the status of the downstream.

Anyway, thinking about what the Jira guide says "Don't create complex workflow", which would be the best solution for my end-2-end context.

Accepted answers

Jack Brickey

One thing I have done in a past life is to create a Product Management Kanban and a Development Scrum board for the same project. I overlapped one status “Approved for Dev” where it was the right-most column in the PM board and the Backlog for the Dev board. So maybe it looks like this for example...

PM: Idea - Vetted - Requirements - Ready for Dev - Approved for Dev

DEV: Approved for Dev - In Progress - Done

hope this helps

John Funk

Hi Dionei,

Here's my experience. Most work that is handled in the Upstream/Discovery process has a defined start and end to the process - you vet the issue and by the end of the Discovery process you decide to do it or not.

Now, at that point there are two trains of thought. One is that you complete the issue at the end of the Discovery process - in other words, you mark the issue Done, whether you are continuing or not. If not continuing, then it's Done. If you are continuing then new Story and/or Task issues (or other issue types) are created for the Downstream/Execution process. In this process you would have two separate boards.

Another thought is that you create an Epic and let it work through the upstream process (with it's own workflow for the Epic issue type). When you come to a conclusion on the Epic, if you are not going to do it, then you simply close it as Closed or Done or whatever status you like.

If it is going to continue on, you leave the Epic open - maybe even move it into an In Progress status. Then you create your Stories and/or Tasks under the Epic. Those will move across the board for the Downstream.

Either way, I would use two separate boards.

That's my two cents. :-)

All comments

Jack Brickey

PM: Idea - Vetted - Requirements - Ready for Dev - Approved for Dev

DEV: Approved for Dev - In Progress - Done

hope this helps

John Funk

Hi Dionei,

Either way, I would use two separate boards.

That's my two cents. :-)

Dionei Piazza

Hi @Jack Brickey !

Firstly, thanks for the answer. So what about the workflows behind these boards? The two boards have the same workflow or did each board have its own workflow?

Dionei Piazza

Hi @John Funk !

Thanks for the answer. So what about the workflows behind these two boards? Each board have its own workflow or sharing just one workflow end-2-end?

John Funk

You could do it either way. But I generally prefer to have two different workflows because the statuses tend to be very different.

Jack Brickey

Same workflow. This is how the one status is shared on the two boards.

Welcome!

It looks like you're new here. Sign in or register to get started.

Quick Links

Find more posts tagged with

jira

cloud

jira-software

workflow