FigJam vs. Miro: Which Tool is Better (2023)

In this comparison guide of FigJam and Miro, we’ll go through the key features, exploring how FigJam’s emphasis on collaborative sketching aligns with design-focused scenarios.

We’ll also cover Miro’s versatile toolset and extensive template library cater to broader collaborative needs, from project management to cross-functional workshops.

So what’s the difference?

The main difference is that FigJam excels in collaborative sketching and design-focused ideation, providing simplicity and integration with Figma. In contrast, Miro stands out with a versatile toolset, extensive templates, and broader collaborative capabilities, making it suitable for a wide range of collaborative activities beyond sketching.

FigJam vs Miro: A Comprehensive Comparison

The table below provides a summarized comparison of the key features of both tools.

User InterfaceCollaborative and IntuitiveVersatile and User-Friendly
Real-Time CollaborationYesYes
Templates and ToolsLimited Templates, Focus on SketchingAbundant Templates, Diverse Tools
Integration CapabilitiesFigma IntegrationExtensive Third-Party Integrations
Brainstorming and IdeationEmphasis on Sketching, Sticky NotesComprehensive Brainstorming Tools
Collaboration SecurityFigma Workspace PermissionsGranular Board Access Controls
Pricing ModelPart of Figma Pricing PlansSubscription and Free Plans

What is FigJam and How Does it Work?

FigJam is Figma’s collaborative whiteboard tool, offering an intuitive interface focused on sketching and ideation.

It emphasizes real-time collaboration, allowing team members to sketch together, add sticky notes, and work on a digital canvas simultaneously.

FigJam’s simplicity and integration with Figma make it a seamless extension of the Figma design platform.

Pros of FigJam:

  1. Collaborative sketching for real-time ideation.
  2. Integration with Figma design files.
  3. User-friendly interface for quick adoption.

Cons of FigJam:

  1. Limited template variety compared to Miro.

What is Miro and How Does it Work?

Miro is a versatile online whiteboard platform designed for collaborative work. It offers a user-friendly interface with a wide array of templates and tools for different use cases.

Miro supports extensive third-party integrations, enabling users to connect their boards with various apps. It excels in providing diverse tools for brainstorming, planning, and visualization.

Pros of Miro:

  1. Abundant templates catering to diverse needs.
  2. Extensive third-party integrations for enhanced workflow.
  3. Granular board access controls for collaboration security.

Cons of Miro:

  1. May have a steeper learning curve compared to FigJam.

FigJam vs Miro: Side-by-Side Comparison

Now, let’s explorer in detail the key features of both tools:

1. User Interface:

FigJam’s user interface is designed with collaboration and simplicity in mind. The emphasis is on intuitive sketching and ideation.

The interface aligns seamlessly with Figma’s design language, making it familiar to users already accustomed to the Figma ecosystem.

Its clean layout and user-friendly tools promote a collaborative environment where team members can sketch and brainstorm effortlessly.

Miro’s user interface is versatile and user-friendly, offering a broad range of tools for different collaborative activities.

The interface is designed to cater to diverse use cases, providing a comprehensive platform for team collaboration.

While it may have a slightly steeper learning curve compared to FigJam, Miro’s interface is visually engaging, making it suitable for various industries and collaborative scenarios.

Both FigJam and Miro prioritize user-friendly interfaces, but FigJam’s simplicity and alignment with Figma’s design principles may offer a quicker learning curve for users already familiar with Figma.

In contrast, Miro’s interface caters to a wider range of collaborative activities, providing a visually engaging platform for diverse users.

2. Real-Time Collaboration:

FigJam excels in real-time collaboration, allowing multiple team members to work simultaneously on the digital canvas. This feature enhances dynamic collaboration during sketching and ideation sessions.

Team members can see each other’s contributions in real-time, fostering an interactive and collaborative environment.

Miro also supports real-time collaboration, enabling users to collaborate on boards simultaneously.

This feature ensures that changes made by one team member are instantly visible to others, promoting seamless teamwork across different collaborative activities.

Both FigJam and Miro provide robust real-time collaboration features, allowing team members to work together seamlessly.

This shared functionality ensures that team members can contribute in real time, making collaborative activities more dynamic and interactive.

3. Templates and Tools:

FigJam’s focus is on sketching, and while it may have limited templates compared to Miro, it provides essential tools for collaborative ideation.

The emphasis is on offering a streamlined set of tools for quick sketching sessions and brainstorming.

Miro stands out with an extensive library of templates catering to various industries and use cases.

It provides a diverse set of tools beyond sketching, including mind mapping, diagramming, and planning features. Miro’s template variety caters to the needs of teams engaged in different collaborative activities.

FigJam’s strength lies in its simplicity and streamlined approach, providing essential tools for collaborative sketching.

On the other hand, Miro’s diverse template library and extensive toolset make it a versatile platform suitable for a wide range of collaborative tasks.

4. Integration Capabilities:

FigJam seamlessly integrates with Figma, allowing users to incorporate their FigJam boards into Figma design files.

This integration facilitates a smooth transition from the ideation phase to the design phase within the Figma ecosystem.

Miro boasts extensive third-party integrations, allowing users to connect boards with various apps and services. This flexibility enhances workflow efficiency, supporting collaboration with a diverse set of tools.

FigJam’s integration strength lies in its seamless connection with Figma, ensuring a cohesive experience for users transitioning from ideation to design.

Miro, with its extensive third-party integrations, provides flexibility for users who prefer a diverse set of collaborative tools.

5. Brainstorming and Ideation:

FigJam places a strong emphasis on collaborative sketching and quick ideation sessions.

Its tools, including sticky notes, enhance the brainstorming process, making it a suitable platform for teams focused on rapid ideation.

Miro excels in providing a comprehensive set of tools for brainstorming, going beyond sketching.

Features like mind mapping, diagramming, and planning tools support diverse ideation activities, making it a versatile platform for collaborative brainstorming.

FigJam’s strength in collaborative sketching aligns well with teams looking for a straightforward and efficient platform for rapid ideation.

Miro’s diverse tools make it a more comprehensive solution for teams engaged in various brainstorming and ideation activities.

6. Collaboration Security:

FigJam leverages Figma’s workspace permissions to manage collaboration security. Users can control access to FigJam boards based on their Figma workspace settings, ensuring that only authorized team members can collaborate.

Miro offers granular board access controls, allowing users to manage permissions for collaborators. This feature ensures that boards are accessible only to team members with the necessary authorization.

Both FigJam and Miro prioritize collaboration security. FigJam’s approach leverages Figma’s workspace permissions, while Miro provides granular controls at the board level.

Users can choose the platform that aligns with their preferred method of managing collaboration security.

7. Pricing Model:

FigJam is part of Figma’s pricing plans, offering access to users subscribed to Figma’s professional or organization plans. Users can access FigJam features based on their existing Figma subscription.

Miro offers both subscription-based plans and free plans with limitations.

Users can choose a plan based on their collaboration needs and budget constraints, providing flexibility for teams with varying requirements.

FigJam’s pricing model is closely tied to Figma’s subscription plans, ensuring that users already using Figma have access to FigJam features.

Miro’s standalone pricing plans offer flexibility, catering to users with specific collaboration needs and budget considerations.

What to Consider When Choosing Between FigJam and Miro

Consider the following factors when deciding between FigJam and Miro:

Integration Preferences:

  • Choose FigJam if seamless integration with Figma design files is crucial for your workflow. This ensures a smooth transition from ideation to the design phase within the Figma ecosystem.
  • Opt for Miro if you prioritize extensive third-party integrations. Miro’s compatibility with various apps enhances workflow flexibility and supports collaboration with diverse tools.

Collaboration Needs:

  • If your team primarily focuses on collaborative sketching and quick ideation sessions, FigJam’s simplicity may align well with your needs.
  • For teams engaged in diverse collaborative activities beyond sketching, Miro’s rich set of tools for brainstorming, diagramming, and planning provides a more comprehensive solution.

Learning Curve:

  • FigJam, with its streamlined approach and integration with Figma, may have a quicker learning curve for users familiar with Figma’s design environment.
  • Miro, offering a broader range of features, might have a slightly steeper learning curve, especially for users new to online whiteboard platforms.

Budget Considerations:

  • FigJam is part of Figma’s pricing plans, making it accessible to users subscribed to Figma’s professional or organization plans.
  • Miro provides both subscription-based plans and free plans with limitations. Consider your budget constraints when choosing the platform that best aligns with your financial considerations.

Real-World Use Cases: FigJam vs Miro

FigJam Use Cases:

Design Sprint Collaboration:

  • Scenario: A design agency embarks on a week-long design sprint to conceptualize a new mobile app interface. The team leverages FigJam to facilitate collaborative sketching sessions. Each team member contributes ideas on the digital canvas using FigJam’s intuitive tools, including sticky notes and sketching features. Real-time collaboration ensures that everyone’s input is considered, fostering a dynamic ideation process.
  • Impact: FigJam streamlines the design sprint process, allowing the team to collectively brainstorm and iterate on design concepts. The platform’s focus on collaborative sketching enhances creativity and accelerates the ideation phase.

UX/UI Wireframing Workshop:

  • Scenario: A UX/UI design team organizes a workshop to create wireframes for a website redesign project. FigJam’s user-friendly interface and emphasis on sketching make it an ideal platform for collaborative wireframing. Team members collaborate in real time to sketch out user flows, layouts, and interface elements. FigJam’s integrations with Figma enable a seamless transition of wireframes to the Figma design environment.
  • Impact: FigJam’s suitability for collaborative sketching simplifies the wireframing process. The workshop becomes a dynamic and interactive session where design ideas are visualized collectively, leading to more effective wireframes.

Miro Use Cases:

Project Management and Planning:

  • Scenario: A project management team adopts Miro to plan and coordinate a complex software development project. Miro’s extensive template library, including Gantt charts and Kanban boards, supports project planning. Team members collaboratively map out project timelines, allocate tasks, and visualize dependencies. The platform’s real-time collaboration ensures that project updates are instantly reflected, promoting transparency and coordination.
  • Impact: Miro’s project management capabilities enhance team collaboration, allowing for a centralized hub where project details are organized visually. The dynamic nature of Miro supports agile project planning and adaptation to changing requirements.

Cross-Functional Remote Workshop:

  • Scenario: A cross-functional team spanning multiple departments conducts a remote workshop to ideate and strategize for a company-wide initiative. Miro’s diverse set of tools, including mind mapping, diagramming, and planning features, accommodates the varied needs of different teams. Team members collaboratively create mind maps, analyze data, and outline action plans in real time.
  • Impact: Miro provides a virtual collaborative space where cross-functional teams can contribute their expertise. The platform’s versatility ensures that teams from different disciplines can engage in a structured and interactive workshop, fostering innovation and alignment.

FAQs: FigJam vs Miro

  1. Can I use FigJam or Miro on mobile devices?
    • Both FigJam and Miro offer mobile applications, allowing users to access boards and collaborate on the go.
  2. Are there limitations in the free plans of FigJam and Miro?
    • Yes, both platforms have limitations in their free plans, including restricted board access, limited storage, and fewer available features compared to their paid counterparts.
  3. Do FigJam and Miro support offline collaboration?
    • Miro offers limited offline functionality, allowing users to access boards offline with certain features. FigJam’s offline capabilities may be influenced by Figma’s offline capabilities.
  4. Which platform is more suitable for remote teams?
    • Both FigJam and Miro are suitable for remote collaboration, providing real-time collaboration features and accessible online boards.

FigJam Pricing:

  • Part of Figma’s subscription plans.
  • Accessible to users subscribed to Figma’s professional or organization plans.

Miro Pricing:

  • Offers both subscription-based plans and free plans with limitations.
  • Users can choose a plan based on collaboration needs and budget constraints.

FigJam vs Miro: Takeaway

Choosing between FigJam and Miro depends on your specific collaboration needs, integration preferences, and the nature of your collaborative activities.

FigJam excels in simplicity and collaborative sketching, making it an excellent choice for Figma users.

Miro stands out with its versatility, offering a comprehensive set of tools for diverse collaborative tasks.

Assess your team’s requirements and preferences to make an informed decision that aligns with your collaboration goals.