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; } } }

Teams not working

Geoff Goodhew_iniikk

I cannot get teams to work in advance roadmaps. I have set-up a test project - added a few issues (Initiative, Epic, story, task) - all belonging to a single board on the project. I've made sure the team field is available on the issues and screen

I've then created a plan with advanced roadmaps and associated the board to the team - following the documentation provided (https://confluence.atlassian.com/advancedroadmapscloud/creating-your-plans-998650933.html). But when I try and filter issues based on this team, I get nothing. The team field is not populated.

I tried pre-configuring a shared team and adding that directly to the issue - this seems to work for that issue. But I can't get the plan to populate the team field at all - and having to populate it for each team in this operation is not a workable solution. Ideally, I want to be in a position where the users can either put the issue on a board or directly populate the Team field with a shared team and this will work for the plans.

I've read through the issues/questions and tried the advice there (e.g. https://community.atlassian.com/t5/Advanced-Roadmaps-questions/Shared-Teams-not-showing-part-of-my-Advanced-Roadmaps-Plan/qaq-p/1392064) - still no joy.

In terms of access, I'm a JIra and project admin - so I should be able to see everything I need to.

I'm at a loss here - any help to diagnose/fix this would be appreciated.

Accepted answers

Ste Wright

Hi @Geoff Goodhew

Teams should be applied to the issues themselves, to show what issues a team is working on.

To be clear upfront in this example:

All the teams are shared teams
The data is pulled from 6 boards - Teams 1-6
The team field is available on all relevant issue screens

All issues which a team works on are marked for that team - down to story-level (sub-tasks are assigned to the same team as the story). This means we could:

Change the "Group By" to Teams, it shows all the story-level issues and parents / grandparents above it. This is because we're choosing to see the full hierarchy and it's working bottom upwards
Change the filter to "Team 1" we just see what that team is working on - but also what is above the stories in the hierarchy, as these are needed to provide the full view (it's an option in the filter)

^ We could also apply Team to Epic-level - so we can see where a story below the Epic is not assigned to the Epic's Team, eg. a dependent task a centralised security teams needs to work on.

Is this how you've set up your teams / application of them?

In relation to manually setting the team field - you can add manually or:

Create in Plan: You can add the "Team" field into your scope view. Click options (3-dots icon) in the fields pane and add the field Teams. Then, when you create issues you can modify the team at creation. If the parent of the issue created is also in a team, it should auto-populate with the team name (eg. if Epic is in Team 1, a created story will default to Team 1).
Bulk Apply: Use bulk edit via issue search to apply teams
CSV Import: Use the Admin CSV import (Jira Settings > System > External System Import) to bulk modify teams
Automation: Utilise automation - eg. set a rule that if the Epic is in "Team 1", all its children also are in "Team 1" when the Epic Link is added

Ste

All comments

Ste Wright

Hi @Geoff Goodhew

Teams should be applied to the issues themselves, to show what issues a team is working on.

To be clear upfront in this example:

All the teams are shared teams
The data is pulled from 6 boards - Teams 1-6
The team field is available on all relevant issue screens

All issues which a team works on are marked for that team - down to story-level (sub-tasks are assigned to the same team as the story). This means we could:

Change the "Group By" to Teams, it shows all the story-level issues and parents / grandparents above it. This is because we're choosing to see the full hierarchy and it's working bottom upwards
Change the filter to "Team 1" we just see what that team is working on - but also what is above the stories in the hierarchy, as these are needed to provide the full view (it's an option in the filter)

^ We could also apply Team to Epic-level - so we can see where a story below the Epic is not assigned to the Epic's Team, eg. a dependent task a centralised security teams needs to work on.

Is this how you've set up your teams / application of them?

In relation to manually setting the team field - you can add manually or:

Create in Plan: You can add the "Team" field into your scope view. Click options (3-dots icon) in the fields pane and add the field Teams. Then, when you create issues you can modify the team at creation. If the parent of the issue created is also in a team, it should auto-populate with the team name (eg. if Epic is in Team 1, a created story will default to Team 1).
Bulk Apply: Use bulk edit via issue search to apply teams
CSV Import: Use the Admin CSV import (Jira Settings > System > External System Import) to bulk modify teams
Automation: Utilise automation - eg. set a rule that if the Epic is in "Team 1", all its children also are in "Team 1" when the Epic Link is added

Ste

Geoff Goodhew_iniikk

Hi @Ste Wright

To summarise (and make sure I understand): team is an explicit field that has to be populated. It's not automatically populated from the plan view unless you are creating the issue within the plan. However, once populated it becomes visible in the plan.

I didn't find this very clear in Jira's documentation - so your explanation is a huge help. Thank you.

I'll think about how best to do it (it's a big, complex operation: some teams have their own project; others share a project. In the latter case, it now makes sense to build boards off the Team field). Most issues will be created by the teams - not in the plans, so I think a mix of manual population and automation will be the answer. At least now I understand how it works!

Ste Wright

Hi @Geoff Goodhew

Yes - at least, this is how we do it

For more information - see here: https://confluence.atlassian.com/advancedroadmapscloud/managing-teams-998651279.html

Ste

Welcome!

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

Quick Links

Find more posts tagged with

cloud

atl-gruland

advanced-roadmaps