Share your experience using JungleWorks Bulbul

My previous company used Zendesk for ITSM (IT Service Management) products and Jira for internal development, such as HR, finance, and other departments.

It was mostly used for internal purposes and integrations because it was mobile apps related to ride-dealing, like Uber. So, it was mainly for receiving requests from the customers and scanning the stuff.

It's a very stable tool, very powerful.  

It has a huge problem regarding the price. The price increases every year. Every year, they raise the price of the licenses, which makes a lot of limitations, and you have to pay more. So that's some conditions. 

Actually, most of the companies that use Zendesk need a customer experience or customer care department. However, Zendesk only works with chatbox or emailing services, but it can also use Genesys, VoIP, or voice sensors.

Additionally, Zendesk needs the administration panels to be easier because it's a very complex panel. You need to search for a lot of things to do, like a small job. So you have to do a lot of setup regarding the integration, and it's a little bit challenging to integrate any software in the vendor.

I have experience with this solution. I worked with it for five years. 

It is a stable product. I worked on it for five or five students. It's very stable.

Scalability is normal. Not very high. At that time, there were around 1100 end users using this solution. 

The support team is time-consuming, and they don't find the answer to our problem.

Because if you are doing your job by yourself, it will be a lot of aim to seek their support. But if you have, like, a support contract with them or something like that, there's the support when you go for a good position or if they can push it. You have to pay extra for better support.

Neutral

We decided to switch from Zendesk because of limitations for integrations. We were a tech company, and we needed more features, more add-ons, more conditions with a lot of tools that weren't accessible with Zendesk, so that's why we had to change it.

The initial setup is very difficult, and we had to use support help for the account setup.

You have to pay extra for better support. So it's not only the license that you pay for, but you have to pay extra for the support as well. The pricing is expensive.

Back then, we were paying $51 per license for agents and $89-90 per license for tech users.

We were paying around $2.25 million per year.

I would suggest using a trial version first and reading the logs before using it.

Overall, I would the solution a six out of ten because of the complexity of the tool and the high license price.

My main use case for IFS Cloud Platform is for production planning, where I typically use it for production scheduling and for inventory management.

When I open IFS Cloud Platform, the first thing I do is for production, where I use it for planning the release, scheduling the deployments, doing capacity planning, tracking the changes, and also managing maintenance activities.

The best features of IFS Cloud Platform, which my team uses the most, include production planning, production scheduling, and asset management.

IFS Cloud Platform has impacted my organization by allowing our team to spend less time reconciling data and more time executing business operations, as resources are utilized more effectively, reducing waste and improving productivity, while also resulting in reduced downtime and lowered maintenance costs, allowing management to make informed decisions based on actual data rather than historical reports.

There are features that came up during implementation that we are not actually using today, such as field service management (FSM), because we do not have any field technicians visiting customer sites.

One feature I wish IFS Cloud Platform had is to be more AI driven, with proactive recommendations, as it currently provides analytics and planning capabilities, but it would be useful if the platform could identify bottlenecks, predict capacity management issues, and recommend specific actions to users before operations are impacted.

I have been familiar with IFS Cloud Platform for three years.

Before I landed on IFS Cloud Platform, we used to use legacy on-prem ERP systems.

When we first implemented IFS Cloud Platform, it took two days to get up and running.

My team did not need any formal training on IFS Cloud Platform, as they were already aware of how to do it.

Adoption has gone well overall, as we have a pilot group that is experimenting with the setup of IFS Cloud Platform.

I can quantify that impact by saying our team has started working 30 to 50 percent faster, along with a cost saving of around 30 percent and a reduction in downtime by 30 percent.

When evaluating options, I considered other tools such as SAP HANA and Oracle Fusion Cloud besides IFS Cloud Platform.

I decided on IFS Cloud Platform specifically over SAP HANA and Oracle Fusion Cloud because it has a single platform instead of multiple products, allowing everything to be found in a single pane of glass, along with strong asset management capabilities.

The biggest friction point I have run into with IFS Cloud Platform is user adoption, which has been the biggest challenge, as different users in the organization need to get accustomed to the new processes after years of using spreadsheets and legacy systems, requiring training and a mindset shift, along with challenging data migration and process standardization.

My advice to someone considering IFS Cloud Platform with a similar workflow is to spend sufficient time understanding and standardizing their business processes before implementing it, as the technology is very powerful, but the real value comes when processes, data, and teams are all aligned. I would rate my overall experience with IFS Cloud Platform as a 9 out of 10.