People with no proper experience in online collaboration may think team software development doesn’t have many concerns other than effective messaging and uploads, but the truth is that these systems are designed to do far more complex tasks than those two. What is challenging the collaboration industry today is mostly the issue of how to organize collaboration in a result-oriented manner, and make the final product functional in all industries, and for all types of projects. Not every collaboration system out there is what it claims to be, and inefficient project/task management is often a deal breaking factor for many companies.
One of the leading collaboration solutions available on the market is dapulse. It’s one of several systems that have mastered the managerial craft, ensuring at the same time that users can connect with each other in real time and via multiple popular channels. Such systems provide instant messaging & chart, empower comments and notes, trigger notifications and alerts, but most importantly clarify who is in charge of what. In order to save you some time on research and to provide you with a comprehensive overview of the available options we prepared a comparison of dapulse functionalities and five other popular systems. We hope this analysis will help you select the ideal software for your type of business and budget needs.
dapulse is the starting point of today’s comparison, mostly because we admire the rapid development and innovative operation mechanisms it provides. In our tests we found out that dapulse combines ideally the crafts of streamlined collaboration and result-oriented project management. Likewise, it offers competitive pricing and should be affordable for companies of all sizes. There is also a free trial plan available that you can use to try out all key features first. You can easily sign up for dapulse free trial here.
Easily able to compete shoulder to shoulder with some of the biggest names in the industry, dapulse helps many companies excel in performance, relying on the concept that all operations should be simple, and all issues should be gathered in a single dashboard. The system is not programmed to distinguish between private and shared boards, items, or tasks – all types of data are categorized using its unique Pulses, with each user given the full freedom to customize them according to his needs. For each Pulse, there is a separate collaboration page where users can discuss improvements, leave notes, comments, or simply follow progress. By default, each user can become a participant of a Pulse discussion, unless the manager has arranged permissions to prevent him from doing so. Overall, dapulse requires some manual work, but provides a better and more comprehensive total business insight than many expensive, enterprise-grade systems do.
Dapulse is also a secure and easily searchable system, integrated with all relevant third-party services, and what is even more important – reasonably priced.
Wrike is one of the leading dapulse competitors that ranks high in our collaboration software category. A closer look on its functionalities and the ones of dapulse will reveal many similarities between these systems. This clearly shows both developers are keenly aware of what the users need and assembled more or less the same features.
In many ways, dapulse offers a system similar to Wrike’s creative collaboration suite, where users can separately contribute to projects and tasks instead of using a single internal channel that would pull on more administrative burden. Both apps use agent profiles and govern access in a similar way. The choice here will mostly depend on how much customization you want involved, as in Wrike you can trigger your own conversations, while in dapulse you are given access to premade conversation panels. You can easily use both systems to leave notes, comment, and share files, and benefit inclusively from their live newsfeed updates. Dapulse has the slight advantage with triggering alerts & notifications whenever an important change is taking place, but the neat and social network-reminiscent interface Wrike provides won’t stop its users from tracking those changes as well. Finally, both apps store important conversations in a historic database, from where you can proceed to reporting directly (in Wrike), or integrate the app with an analytic system and export the conversations (dapulse).
In terms of project management operations, Wrike and dapulse are almost indistinguishable: Wrike’s highlight is categorization, as it allows you to divide projects in many individual tasks and sections, while dapulse does practically the same thing providing room for unlimited and un-categorized Pulses. The question here is whether you prefer to stay in full control of how tasks will be managed and customize your own subtasks, or let the system govern connections and automatically categorize activities one under the other. If your biggest issue are unresolved and delayed tasks, you can benefit from Wrike’s task timeline that displays progress in comprehensive charts, or opt for dapulse’s color block indicators to prioritize what is really important.
Another important comparison is the one of how well both apps integrate with third-party systems. Compulsory connections to email & storage systems are present in both cases (Google Drive, Google Calendar, Gmail, Dropbox), while dapulse has the slight advantage of partnering with business systems (Zapier, Slack, Github, Pipedrive). Both systems are fully mobile optimized, and able to meet the needs of small, medium, and large teams.
Comparing pricing, you will see that there is no substantial difference between the two products (enterprise packages are available at $24 for dapulse and $32 for Wrike). Dapulse fans will benefit from attractive annual subscription deductions, while Wrike teams with less than 5 users can actually use the system completely free of charge.
Asana is another of the prominent dapulse competitors that is explicitly designed to facilitate corporate communication in small, mid-sized, or large business environment. It is also the product we gladly recommend to individuals and freelancers looking to improve project management. What can be considered as a powerful competitive edge of this system is that it basically eliminates all need to use third-party systems to streamline collaboration.
Which product should you choose? Being completely honest, it will be nuances that will help you decide. Dapulse and Asana have many things in common, including the outstanding customization that is rare in all other cases. Dapulse allows users to categorize activities in a completely business-specific way, while Asana, despite of its traditional task-subtask division, enables creative management and prioritization, and relates activities the way users want to see them. Both Asana and Wrike offer progress reporting, while in dapulse this option is only available with the relevant integration.
Both systems offer clean and accurate duty delegation – you can either proceed creating Pulses for your tasks and assigning specific users for each of them, or use Asana’s Focus Mode to see who is in charge of what, and track performance. In both cases, users will receive a notification whenever an important change has been made.
In terms of discussions and commenting, however, dapulse is an undisputed leader: instead of creating new Team Pages for each conversation and inviting members (as it is done by Asana), dapulse already has collaboration panels embedded in each Pulse the user has created. Asana also lacks the powerful update feed provided by both dapulse and Wrike.
What Asana handles better are integrations, as it covers all integrations offered by dapulse, and many more (JIRA, Usersnap, MailChimp, WordPress, Harvest, and so on). With modest coding knowledge, nevertheless, you can make dapulse become just as powerful. Asana also doesn’t offer separate Android/iOS apps such as the ones provided by dapulse, but it is still completely responsive on all mobile devices.
Asana is a bit less flexible in terms of pricing, because it is priced per user, and only offers a single plan for all customers ($8.33/user/month). What is more, they don’t offer a free trial, but it’s not a big problem because all teams with less than 15 members can use Asana for free.
Clarizen is another powerful collaboration and cross-project management system, predominantly designed to meet the needs of large teams and corporations. It does a considerably good job making business operations more flexible, and focuses on planning more than it does on execution. It is known for its end-to-end project management, which is why we commonly describe it as an administrative-powering rather then a communication-fueling system. At its core, however, this system has some similarities with dapulse.
In short, dapulse and Clarizen are based around the same social networking idea for intuitive navigation, and therefore make project management more transparent and efficient. In both cases, communication is result-oriented, which is why users get to discuss separate projects instead of bundling information in a one-size-fits-all panel. They offer the same file sharing and document management capacity, with dapulse’s change tracking being slightly more advanced due to its update feeds, alerts, and notifications.
However, there are other reasons why we believe dapulse to be a better collaboration system than Clarizen. Despite of how well it was designed, Clarizen’s collaborative suite is still just a project management facilitation, and can’t be applied to corporate discussions outside the planned projects and tasks. It is because Clarizen is predominately a project management system, packed with billable working items, Gantt charts, and executive dashboards and reports dapulse doesn’t possess. As a matter of fact, Clarizen can very efficiently cover portfolio management, budget and inventory tracking, employee scheduling and other professional services and be the ideal project administration hub, but it certainly is not the one-stop-shop for companies that looking to improve collaboration.
From the integrations point of view, the differences are almost insignificant: dapulse and Clarizen integrate with Dropbox, Google Drive, Zapier, Slack, and similar systems. At the same time, they both offer open API (SOAP and REST) for users to trigger when adding value to their software ecosystem. Clarizen has even developed its own App Marketplace, where the user can download auto assign managers, pre-built project request forms, and other handy segments and widgets.
As expected, Clarizen is not that very accessible to small and medium companies, as it is more expensive compared to dapulse (starting at $45), and offers only two plans (Enterprise and Unlimited).
Projectplace represents a powerful project management suite many companies use to improve productivity and boost ROI rates. Nevertheless, it is easy to see that Projectplace’s developers handle collaboration seriously, and approach it a way quite similar to what dapulse has to offer.
What does this mean exactly? If you’re a manager in charge of a company looking to improve team productivity, both trains move in the same direction. In order to choose wisely, however, you must take a second look at the two applications: while dapulse is designed for task-focused collaboration and offers an individual discussion panel for each activity, Projectplace delivers a single collaboration network where users can discuss all projects at once, and include partners and third parties if needed. This won’t stop you from organizing task-specific meetings and inviting selected participants in Projectplace, but it will still take a bit more time. Easy uploading and storage capabilities are offered in both cases, and the two systems are absolutely secure to use.
In terms of project management, however, Projectplace is dapulse’s decent competitor. It provides a clear view on current and upcoming engagements, and prioritizes tasks for smarter business decisions. The customizable fields resemble dapulse’s Pulse rows, but are packed with performance evaluation indicators and expense controls. Despite of the fact that adding items is not unlimited as in the case of dapulse, Projectplace drills into details to such an extent that expanding its functionality will rarely be necessary.
The system is integrated with the same systems as dapulse (excluding JIRA, Github, Pipedrive, and few others), and fully mobile optimized to eliminate barriers in decentralized teams. It also has API for users to help them blend it into their software infrastructures, but the process will be more complicated and will most likely require developers’ assistance.
JIRA and dapulse have many similarities, and are perfectly integrated to complement each other. Just as in the previous comparisons, you will get a tool where collaboration is completely customizable with conversations categorized per item and used for task prioritization, at least in cases where collaboration is a facilitating circumstance and key for effective delivery. Basically, dapulse can benefit from JIRA’s advanced project management features to import Pulse details without manual input, but stores and exports conversations at the same time to enhance the app’s communication capacity. Between the two, your best shot is to use both of them, but in case you’re looking for a collaboration-oriented app, the smarter choice is usually dapulse.
Observed from the technical aspect, both apps are easy to use and hosted in the cloud, and distribute collaboration in a business-specific fashion. You can also choose to host JIRA on your local server, but you would miss on the updates and automated back up dapulse’s SaaS engine has to offer.
When planning thier integrations, the JIRA team paid more attention to business and financial management apps. As a result the app integrates with Salesforce Cloud, Attlasian Confluence, and Tempo, but complements the lack of document management connections using its integration with dapulse. Note that this system doesn’t offer open API, and that it will be more challenging (if not impossible) to push it inside a diverse software environment.
Finally, purchasing JIRA makes more sense to enterprise-grade users than it does to small companies, because this system is quite expensive. Teams up to 15 users pay a monthly fee of $75, and free plans and trials are not available.
FinancesOnline is available for free for all business professionals interested in an efficient way to find top-notch SaaS solutions. We are able to keep our service free of charge thanks to cooperation with some of the vendors, who are willing to pay us for traffic and sales opportunities provided by our website. Please note, that FinancesOnline lists all vendors, we’re not limited only to the ones that pay us, and all software providers have an equal opportunity to get featured in our rankings and comparisons, win awards, gather user reviews, all in our effort to give you reliable advice that will enable you to make well-informed purchase decisions.