We performed a comparison between JIRA Service Management and Micro Focus Service Manager based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Help Desk Software solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."It scales well."
"The visibility features are great."
"The dashboards in Jira have been the most useful feature."
"Auditing team uses this solution to track audit findings and follow-up."
"JSM's best feature is the integration with other Jira products."
"This service management solution has a good user interface. It helps improve your IT request requirements and makes tracking requests easier."
"It is much more controlled and allows for different kinds of customization that we can plan and implement based on the project requirements."
"The initial setup is straightforward."
"Micro Focus Service Manager is fine. It's a good solution for small accounts with minimal reporting. Micro Focus is a good option because you don't have to worry about the budget."
"The solution is simple to set up."
"Service Manager does what it should, but it's quite outdated."
"Sometimes, customization is simple. The version we are using now has a nice interface."
"It's easy to scale."
"The solution will streamline productivity and also improve automation. That would bring efficiency as well the ability to handle a big number of enterprise-wide service needs. Productivity and collaborative capabilities are some of the key benefits."
"It would be useful to be ale to link tickets across different gantt charts in Jira and Confluence."
"The customizations in Jira could be improved by being simplified. They are currently very complex."
"JIRA Service Management should make reporting easier. I would like something integrated with DevOps tools."
"When you raise a ticket with Jira, there's no ability to see your other JIRA tickets."
"As a consultant, I have used the support. Some of the support I have received has been good and other times it could improve."
"A lot of users have said that they want a feature that was on the on-prem version of Jira and the vendor can't deliver. They're either unwilling or unable to give feature parity."
"It is pretty complex to move between the test environment and the production environment. There is potential for improvement."
"The product could improve its asset management."
"Customization can be difficult at times because scripting is often required."
"The interface could be better."
"Micro Focus Service Manager is not very great. It would be better if it had more features. When it comes to features, BMC tops the chart. When it comes to usage, people use BMC more."
"I don't see anything lacking."
"I think the best recommendation to Micro Focus would be to increase awareness and the marketing for this product."
"Service Manager is at the end of its life. The architecture, performance, and look are all way behind."
JIRA Service Management is ranked 2nd in Help Desk Software with 42 reviews while Micro Focus Service Manager is ranked 14th in Help Desk Software with 6 reviews. JIRA Service Management is rated 8.2, while Micro Focus Service Manager is rated 7.2. The top reviewer of JIRA Service Management writes "Customizable, stable, and integrates well". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Micro Focus Service Manager writes "Streamlines productivity and is able to handle a big number of enterprise-wide service needs". JIRA Service Management is most compared with ServiceNow, ManageEngine ServiceDesk Plus, Freshdesk, Zendesk Guide and SysAid, whereas Micro Focus Service Manager is most compared with ServiceNow, BMC Helix ITSM, IBM Maximo, ManageEngine ServiceDesk Plus and Ivanti Service Desk . See our JIRA Service Management vs. Micro Focus Service Manager report.
See our list of best Help Desk Software vendors and best IT Service Management (ITSM) vendors.
We monitor all Help Desk Software reviews to prevent fraudulent reviews and keep review quality high. We do not post reviews by company employees or direct competitors. We validate each review for authenticity via cross-reference with LinkedIn, and personal follow-up with the reviewer when necessary.
