Miro Review
December 08, 2023

Miro Review

Anonymous | TrustRadius Reviewer
Score 7 out of 10
Vetted Review
Verified User

Overall Satisfaction with Miro

Miro is pretty much my team's research and planning repository. I use Miro for all kinds of things: facilitating participatory activities with stakeholders and research participants in remote workshops (which are the bulk of our workshops), as a visual aid/"sketching" tool for personal and team research planning and strategizing, and as a repository for research findings (both for literature reviews and primary research with end users). The main use case here is conducting activities that one might conduct on paper or a whiteboard (e.g. the messy work of participatory design activities, ideation, and brainstorming) with remotely-located participants and/or (less often) in-person when wanting to keep the outputs immediately documented.

Pros

  • Workshop activities - many templates to help set up the "skeleton" for common workshop formats (e.g. brainstorming/ideation, journey mapping and blueprinting, sprint planning and other rituals) as well as tools like voting and presentation to carry through the other parts of a workshop
  • Supporting research synthesis - Miro handles data from Excel cells very well, allowing for easy turnover into affinity diagramming as part of research synthesis
  • Keeping a log of outputs by constant saving

Cons

  • STABILITY - In my experience, over the past 2 weeks, Miro has suffered hours to days-long outages (logged on their site) where boards were inaccessible, ineditable, or only partially accessible due to service degradation for large swathes of users. As it holds research and planning repositories, this had a huge impact on our work. I'm going to be keeping an eye on whether this continues, because in the past I hadn't had such issues with Miro.
  • Speed - Miro is a CPU/browser memory hog. Having large boards, or too many boards open at a time, will cause a notable performance drop/lags in Miro and the overall computer in my opinion. Based on experience with tools like Figma, I think Miro could be a bit lighter.
  • Exported files can be huge and, when put into PDFs, are often chopped up in weird ways without much that we can do. Getting products out of Miro should be easier - exporting just text or shapes/diagrams as SVGs, for example.
  • I haven't been involved in overall Miro implementation, but I do believe that it's helped improve productivity by facilitating collaborative activities remotely. I believe that without Miro, remote work would be quite ineffective.
  • At the same time, if the instability continues it could have the inverse effect as pockets of our org has become reliant on it as a workspace and research repository
I've integrated Miro with Microsoft Teams spaces and Jira. Rating it low because the integration itself is easy, but in my opinion, it doesn't provide much added value (basically just tiny crammed Miro boards in these other spaces that you need to click into and open in the web to engage with meaningfully!).
This is the core of its value-add for me...I work with (and have worked with) teams located in multiple cities or across the country. Without Miro, we'd be trying to diagram and do activities in Google Slides or Powerpoint presentations, or writing over one another in shared documents...using largely words. The whole spatial aspect and visual aspect to communication that is a crucial part of design would be compromised. Miro supports visual communication, and the nature of the workspaces actually lets us even work on things asynchronously (an advantage over in-person collaboration onsite) by contributing to a board in our own time.

Do you think Miro delivers good value for the price?

Not sure

Are you happy with Miro's feature set?

Yes

Did Miro live up to sales and marketing promises?

I wasn't involved with the selection/purchase process

Did implementation of Miro go as expected?

I wasn't involved with the implementation phase

Would you buy Miro again?

Yes

FigJam is a strong competitor, and the integration with Figma (which we use for prototyping) is a huge selling point. The template library is not great, so I find in our workplace there is a bit of a mix with a skew towards Miro for its applications in workshops, but a skew towards FigJam for UI/UX design because of the integration.

Google Jamboard has much less features than the other two and just seems more cumbersome, even with things like resizing and moving sticky notes. It's nowhere near the other two.
- Well-suited to context where you'd be using sticky notes or a whiteboard to brainstorm and diagram together - Well-suited to initial drafting, brainstorming, and ideation - In my opinion, it's poorly-suited to complex diagramming and any work that you might want to export into another program In my opinion, it's poorly-suited to polished products, demonstrating prototypes, anything high-fidelity. In my opinion, it's poorly suited to any diagramming where you might want to implement custom branding or a consistent design system across boards

Comments

More Reviews of Miro