BQE CORE is a business management solution built specifically for professional service firms. BQE CORE is a combination of a billing assistant, project management, and accounting solution. CORE is designed to do the hard work of delivering actionable insights directly to the user's dashboards or inbox. BQE CORE replaces the products Engineeroffice, Archioffice, and BillQuick; the functionality of these applications is now found in BQE CORE.
N/A
Miro
Score 9.2 out of 10
N/A
Miro empowers cross-functional teams to flow from early discovery through final delivery on a shared, AI-first canvas. With the canvas as the prompt, Miro’s AI capabilities keep teams in the flow of work, and scale shifts in ways of working.
$0
Pricing
BQE CORE
Miro
Editions & Modules
No answers on this topic
1. Free - To discover what Miro can do. Always free
$0
2. Starter - Unlimited and private boards with essential features
$8
per month (billed annually) per user
3. Business - Scales collaboration with advanced features and security
$16
per month (billed annually) per user
4. Enterprise - For work across the entire organization, with support, security and control, to scale
contact sales
annual billing per user
Offerings
Pricing Offerings
BQE CORE
Miro
Free Trial
Yes
Yes
Free/Freemium Version
No
Yes
Premium Consulting/Integration Services
No
No
Entry-level Setup Fee
No setup fee
Optional
Additional Details
—
Monthly billing also available at $10 per month for the Starter plan, or $20 for the Business plan.
I previously used Gusto for both benefits / employee details and also time tracking. It was really nice to have everything in one place, and Gusto felt very simple. However, it did not have as many broken down categories for time allotment. Harvest felt similar to Gusto, and it …
It helps and have a great impact on It employees like me to track and submit my timesheet to my managers and higher officials and make a note that I have spend my working house valuable and resourceful and the managers can take a look at what have I done in my working hours
our team uses both the platforms and does not tie very well. bamboo does have a more pleasant to the eye interface comparatively. it is also a bit easier to navigate and not have to click too many times to reach any particular information on bamboo. BQE CORE does do visuals of …
It was an admin desiring to switch. However CORE is easy to manage and calculate timesheet automatic with timer future. In addition I believe the admin stag like the billing aimless function and multiple additional future that monograph does not have. Without mentioning that …
BQE has more visual tools for determining billable hours and for tracking hours against a project. BQE has a better system for involving employee and simpler methods of tracking expenses.
Again, since I'm only an employee, I had no part in choosing BQE for my organization. But it is the best timesheet tracking system that I've used, and I've used 3 other ones in the past. BQE is the simplest to use, yet equally as powerful as the others. When editing my …
I didn't take part in selecting BQE CORE; however, our CEO chose it because of its ability to help with invoicing and incorporating other software into the program such as Gantt charts. I like BQE CORE better than BillQuick because it is more user friendly and also displays the …
BQE CORE has a much more streamlined process for entering expense entries than Concur. You are able to select which project you would like to charge to and where expense entries are sent for approval, whether that be your manager or the project manager. BQE CORE also is very …
BQE CORE is much more in-depth at time tracking than Harvest. Harvest is easier to use out of the gate but BQE CORE is worth the learning curve. I haven't had a chance to use BQE CORE on a mobile device so I can't speak to how it stacks up there against Harvest.
I don't recall the previous program we used as this was years ago, but we had to put in time manually each week and this was very time consuming. BQE CORE keeps your projects in the timesheet from week to week to you don't have to reinput the project number.
Miro is the more collaborative option, offering the ability for many individuals to work on the same item real-time. Though it does create some duplicate entry, we've found this added cost is minimal compared to the opportunity cost of lost collaboration.
Earlier we were using different products for different requirements, such as Microsoft whiteboard, lucidcharts for diagrams. But as Miro has all these features and other additional features which makes it "all in one place" and enable us to save out time which earlier was …
Miro is great for collaborating. I think it definitely is better than Mural and Jamboard because it has more features and it's easier to use. Compared to FigJam, as a designer I would probably choose Figjam to have everything in the same product. However, in my opinion, Miro …
We ran a business case analysis for these, and they didn't come close. Visual omnipresent collaboration is a must; list of different features is way longer in Miro; Kanban and its views is less clunky and requires less fiddling out of the box — Trello needed to be set up …
Miro was a big hit with all the teams involved, it was easy to stand up and start using, easy to license, and easy to manage. Other tools offered stronger connections to tools in their product suite without the freedom and ease of use that Miro did.
I was a while ago that I use Mural. At that stage the features where similar. However, Miro has developed at a very quick pace and is always adding features to improve the product, so I have had no reason to look elsewhere.
I think they all have very good features and are similar to a certain extent, however, Miro includes all the interactive features and allows you to create without limitations on format or page sizes, or oversaturation of users within the same session, which is why I appreciate …
Miro basically cover the needs of all the other tools. I started using Miro extensively during the pandemic and at that point only Jamboard provided similar options and was free when collaborating in a bigger group and when not everyone had a license. This is still the main …
As I've mentioned, I've used Figjam before. Figjam is better for more detailed and design based ideation workshops. But Miro is better for people without much tech ability.
We assessed these tools to gain a better understanding because they are excellent and have certain unique features. But in the end, we chose Miro since it offers all the features that ClickUp, Stormboard, and Conceptboard do. Additionally, it has a special feature that lets you …
We tested every product, but the biggest problem we encountered was that most of them required plugins in order to centralize all of our work. Other problems included the products' excessive price, which was higher than Miro's. Last but not least, Miro offered us an all-in-one …
In my opinion, Microsoft White Board does not compare. So much lag, much more limited functionality (ability to customize visuals and text), no ability to lock content, etc. Mural I haven't used as much. Probably closer in competition to Miro - felt pretty similar. Miro I …
FigJam is particularly tailored for design led product teams so lack the versatility which Miro provides Better for workshop facilitation but clucky UI
Jira is actively used in conjunction with Miro to track activities, and it offers functionalities that differ from Miro. However, it is much easier to create tables and diagrams in Miro. The advantage of Jira is that it enables the management of digital projects more …
I find Miro to be more user-friendly than Figma, where we had a very steep learning curve trying to achieve real-time collaboration with both tech and non-tech users. I haven't personally spent a lot of time using that tool or others, however. At this point, I have a strong …
I would recommend this for our industry: architecture, engineering, or construction. I would recommend this for any larger firm with many employees or high number of projects. I would particularly recommend this for a company with projects that have budget constraints and where time tracking and expense tracking is very important. I would not recommend this complicated software for a small firm with a small amount of income or number of projects.
I remember a project where all our different teams were involved in it. I created a board with timelines, KPIs, and customer journey stages, and each team added their input live. We were all able to work together in real time, view the entire project, and leave comments without switching apps, which is why it worked fantastically for us. Everyone benefited from the hours of time it saved, and we made a good profit on that project, for which I was named employee of the month.
Invoice Collections within Billing is a great tool because of the ability to take notes and track contact.
Invoices are professional looking and easy for our clients to understand the overall progress within each phase of their project.
Dashboards are the best tool EVER!
The Contact List feature within Clients setup is the perfect way to track multiple project managers within a large company that also has multiple contracts with us.
Assigning contacts to particular roles - such as Invoicing, Contracts, etc.
Accounting Functionality - they are basically a project management accounting software, so in my opinion, they could learn some things from other accounting software such as QuickBooks etc.
When using the find functionality to locate an item in a Miro board, I do not like that it keeps my previous searched term. Other programs, like Excel, do this but they have it so that you can easily overwrite the previously-searched term.
It would be helpful if you could search by a particular frame, instead of the entire board. For our quarterly backlog review, we often have items that carry over, so there are duplicates on the board. Being able to search by a frame would make this easier.
Understanding who can access a board is not always clear to me.
We have been using Core for a few years now, and honestly started to look at other software systems to see what was out there. What we chose was a nightmare for migration so we never left Core. Now we have added invoicing and payments from Core instead of double entry with QBO. Still only a few cycles in but looks like it will be up to speed soon and working smoothly.
I have advocate for the renew of Miro quite few times, however, it is not under my control as the decision is made in another team with their own budget. I would buy for my own entrepreneur projects (1-2 members) as I do know the value and work there 100%. So, I would pay out of my own pocket to get the value. However, If I wouldn't know the value it provides, it would be hard to decide with the current freemium features
The foundation is awesome, like I have said before, however the house being built on it, the educational resources being provided to us (more of sales pitches that don't work), and flexible workflow opportunities, is making us look elsewhere for how much we will be spending on per user. It's crazy to think how flexible they are not when it comes to user settings. Lack of integration with other sources is awful.
The platform is flexible, easy to use, and simple because Miro is a great visualization tool that makes it easy to collaborate on creating charts. It helps in creating workflows and other designs easily and securely. It supports integrations with major cloud storage solutions and office suites. On top of that, it provides a decent free plan, which is sufficient for basic usage.
I only give a 9/10 because of the speed at which it loads. I have never experienced issues with Miro logging me out early, or some other technical issue causing the program to crash, or even it just loading in perpetuity without ever actually coming up (unlike other programs such as SFDC). It take a minute for all of my boards to come up after I click on it in my favorites, but besides that, it's all good.
This is one area that does need some improvement. It can be slow at time, so we had our IT look at it from our side and we had no issues, so it has to be some slowness on their side.
Sometimes it gets quite slow and there is a correlation between this and the size of the board. Hence we are trying to segment the boards based on product stages or projects so that the size doesn't go big. When you go from discovery to delivery on a simple board, it will get large and difficult to load, even crash or go white screen
As a new employee and CORE user, I talk to support on a weekly basis. I have never had to wait for more than 3 min to get connect with a support rep, and all my questions have been answered. The support representatives are polite and eager to help no matter how simple your question is.
We have never reached out to or contacted support because Miro's platform has been incredibly intuitive and user-friendly. The comprehensive resources available, such as tutorials, documentation, and community forums, have provided all the guidance we needed. The seamless integration with our existing tools and the reliability of the platform have ensured that we rarely encounter issues that require external assistance. This self-sufficiency has allowed us to focus more on our projects and collaboration without interruptions. Overall, our experience with Miro has been smooth and efficient, eliminating the need for additional support
There was a series of webinars which Miro hosted with our organization that went over the basics, then progressively became more advanced with additional sections. The instructors were knowledgeable, and provided examples throughout the sessions, as well as answered peoples' questions. There was ample time and experience on the calls to cover a range of topics. The instructors were also very friendly and sociable, as well as honest. Of course Miro isn't a "God-tool" that does absolutely everything, but the instructors were aware and emphasized the strengths where Miro had them and sincerely accepted feedback.
Easy to learn, Miro has a series of videos on YouTube that effectively taught this program to my team members and me. The program is drag-and-drop and works excellently. People pick up on how to use it efficiently, and it's great for organizing ideas more freely. This product is more challenging for some older audiences who are not accustomed to using a touchpad, but for most, it was very easy to use.
Deltek Vision is far more advanced, more encompassing and offers more flexibility with what you want to do. However, it's also quite difficult to use, whereas BQE CORE is intuitive and user friendly. The trade off is worth it in some arenas but overall it's not suited for a larger fast paced company. Great for smaller companies.
Miro is the more collaborative option, offering the ability for many individuals to work on the same item real-time. Though it does create some duplicate entry, we've found this added cost is minimal compared to the opportunity cost of lost collaboration.
Miro is great for scaling. In every department and subdivision across my entire organization, there is someone using it. From Sales to marketing, to manufacturing and operations; and even in legal and finance, there isn't a process or a department that is not using Miro, and if they aren't, they're missing out! Even at the highest to the lowest levels of the organization, it is essential for virtual collaboration.
