Clarity SM Reviews

Users found the ROI from Clarity SM to be satisfactory, yet some suggested reassessing the scope due to high costs for simple needs, such as opting for CA Infrastructure Management instead of Nagios. Others noted it has good cost-benefit analysis for large businesses. One entity couldn't compare numbers, while another described their ROI as the best possible. A financial institution withheld specific information, while others simply expressed satisfaction.

Enterprise buyers find Clarity SM's pricing expensive, especially for smaller organizations, with high licensing and setup costs. However, users appreciate the flexible licensing model based on concurrent analysts rather than per user or ticket, which suits organizations with many end users. While some find alternatives like ServiceNow cheaper, Clarity SM maintains competitiveness through its comprehensive support and robust features, ultimately providing value for the investment despite the potential for long-term cost increases.

• "The solution is quite reasonable compared to other solutions in the market."
• "The pricing is based on a subscription model."
• "There is a subscripted needed to use Clarity SM. The price of the solution could be less expensive. ServiceNow is less expensive and BMC Helix is priced similar to Clarity SM."

Clarity SM is primarily utilized for managing incidents, problem requests, and change management, serving as a central ITSM tool for ticketing systems, CMDB, and customer support. It supports various functions like configuration, knowledge, service requests, and portfolio management. Users appreciate its customization capabilities and effectiveness in handling IT processes across multiple industries and large organizations. Integrations with third-party applications and service catalog features are also noted as beneficial.

Clarity SM customer service ratings vary from horrific to excellent, with faster, responsive support now than in the past. Some users found support satisfactory and others acknowledged improvements over time. Technical support experiences also range from slow and inconsistent to knowledgeable and helpful, with high responsiveness noted by many. Escalation processes occasionally face delays, but assistance is generally effective, and support quality depends on the assigned technician and issue complexity.

Many find Clarity SM's initial setup complex, with several components and necessary configurations, especially when integrating with existing systems. Although some describe it as straightforward with clear documentation, others express challenges due to its customizable nature and dependencies on architecture size. For some, issues arose with resource allocation and legacy system integration. Newer versions have simplified the process with automation, but extensive infrastructure still requires multiple consultants.

Clarity SM is considered scalable, with users reporting no major scalability issues. It supports significant user bases in varied environments. Some experienced overloads due to certain limitations but adjusted with upgrades. Its multi-tenancy feature enhances scalability in multi-organizational contexts. While older versions had challenges, enhancements have improved its capacity. Scalability varies depending on organizational needs, but Clarity SM efficiently handles diverse workloads, adapting to different enterprise sizes with proper resource allocation and architecture.

Many users find Clarity SM stable, especially when properly implemented. Some experience issues with older versions or when heavily customized, but recent updates have improved performance. High availability setups and adequate server resources contribute to reliability. Occasional downtime or instability is often attributed to external factors or infrastructure. Overall, it maintains strong performance with rare disruptions, especially in simpler setups or when comprehensive resources and configurations are in place.