JIRA Service Management Reviews

We are only using JIRA Service Management for a limited amount of use cases.

The most valuable feature of JIRA Service Management is a plugin we are using for the front end for simple user forms.

I have been using JIRA Service Management for approximately two years.

For the environment, we are using JIRA Service Management for it is stable.

JIRA Service Management is able to scale to a reasonable size. Since it is hosted in the cloud there are not any scalability issues.

We have approximately 500 to 1,000 users using this solution.

We are using the premier support from JIRA Service Management.

I rate the premier support from JIRA Service Management a five out of five.

I rate the standard support from JIRA Service Management a three out of five.

Neutral

The initial setup of JIRA Service Management can be complex for new users. There is a lot of configuration.

We have a two or three-member team that does the maintenance for JIRA Service Management.

The price of JIRA Service Management could be reduced.

We did not evaluate other solutions prior to using JIRA Service Management. The company preferred this solution.

I rate JIRA Service Management an eight out of ten.

Here in Korea, there's high demand for eCommerce solutions or platforms. You'll see fifty percent of products on eCommerce platforms or follow an eCommerce model. Some companies even own eCommerce platforms. For example, a clothing company wants to sell products online and uses online services. Usually, companies want to build platforms, so my company goes ahead and helps build the platforms, and Jira Service Management helps in the process.

Another use case relates to training solutions, especially with the COVID-19 pandemic. A company wants a training platform for its employees. For example, a rental company with thirty thousand service staff or installers must train employees frequently or regularly, so my company does the application development for online training solutions.

My company also uses Jira Service Management in platform-enhancing projects. For example, a company wants to enhance CRM or ERP, manage or improve hiring, do cost management, etc.

Jira Service Management is a generic solution that helps in project management and application development projects.

Jira Service Management has three features I found valuable. First, it has a workflow feature that you can configure for your specific requirements. For example, you can configure your workflows for service management, especially if you want to utilize it for a service desk. This is beneficial if your company provides services to customers where customers or users have questions, complaints, or troubleshooting requests. Through Jira Service Management, you can receive service requests and handle the requests within your organization or company as long as you configure and apply service management processes through the solution. This would still depend on your company's process. It's different from one company to another.

Another feature of Jira Service Management I like is that it lets you efficiently manage service requests with team members or employees. Team members can access and handle designated service requests, add answers, check the history, etc.

Jira Service Management also has a dashboard that helps you handle service requests well. Dashboards provide monitoring information, such as the number of service requests, which customers need information on, who's handling the service request, what's the status, and the priority levels of the requests. You can get service request statistics on the dashboard.

I also like that Jira Service Management has several feature sets you can configure. You can add columns and configure screens containing the information you want, such as customer name, environment, etc. The solution is flexible, which I also find valuable.

What's missing in Jira Service Management is the user screen. You'll find it very weird if you've never used the solution before. You won't instantly understand how to use it. It's not too difficult to grasp, but first-time users would think that Jira Service Management is a weird solution. The user-friendliness of its interface needs improvement.

There's a pro and a con to adding user screens because some people might lose product visibility if a user screen is added, but I want Jira to develop a way to add user screens to Jira Service Management.

I started using Jira Service Management in 2014. I've been using it for eight years now.

Stability-wise, Jira Service Management is a nine out of ten because it's been stable for eight years.

Jira Service Management is very scalable, so I'd rate its scalability as nine out of ten.

My rating for Jira Service Management technical support is eight out of ten.

Positive

I find the initial setup for Jira Service Management very convenient. Ten minutes is enough for me to set it up. In terms of users becoming familiar with the solution, it would take one week. The total time to deploy Jira Service Management is one to two weeks; setup-wise, it's eight out of ten.

How you set up and deploy Jira Service Management depends on your needs. Sometimes you need to set the solution up with a CI/CD pipeline to streamline it. You must gather your requirements and look into your project scope, particularly application feature sets and development list. Once you have the requirements, you can drill down into the development list, break down the sub-functional list, and then identify the software design.

From the software design perspective, you need to break it down into functionalities, and once you have your functionality list, you can assign that to developers and designers. The designers and developers can work via scrum or sprint. My company practices both. People will then develop the software based on the application functionality list and perform some tests.

The QA department will then do an API test and test the user interface and feature sets. Staging, verifying, and validating requirements will also occur before the software is deployed into a production environment.

As Jira Service Management lets you enjoy efficiency and more visibility compared to other solutions, you can consequently save money, so there's ROI from the solution. Still, at first, there were some deductions.

ROI-wise, it's a seven out of ten.

Jira Service Management has affordable license fees. It's $12 a month per person. If you need support, you need to email Atlassian. Atlassian doesn't provide premium-level support that requires additional payment. My company doesn't need it anyway.

I'm a heavy Jira and Confluence user and have a lot of information on system integration projects. My company used ALM solutions ten years back, but not now. I'm looking for other solutions that provide quick delivery for digital transformation projects, as that's what companies search for nowadays.

Confluence, like Jira Service Management, is from Atlassian. Atlassian provides several solutions, such as service management and application lifecycle management (ALM) solutions.

I use several solutions, such as Jira Service Management, Jira Work Management, Confluence, Bitbucket, and Trello.

My company uses Jira Service Management heavily for sixty projects.

My company is a service integration company, so for some customers, Jira Service Management is deployed on the cloud, while for some, it's deployed on-premises. My company builds CI/CD pipelines for customers with data centers. My company utilizes Jira Service Management heavily in both AWS and Azure. The solution is deployed on Azure or AWS, depending on the customer's requirement.

Three people train users on the software. It's not difficult to set up Jira Service Management. The difficulty occurs when users have no familiarity with managing the solution. A small software development team sometimes doesn't want to use Jira Service Management.

When the solution is up, it doesn't require maintenance. If it's just a feature upgrade, it doesn't need maintenance. However, sometimes, my company needs maintenance and support because the project is continuously evolving, so there's a need to make some changes. For example, you need to change your workflow or the dashboard. Atlassian maintains the software. It's Atlassian's responsibility. My company has three engineers for ALM maintenance, rather than Jira Service Management maintenance. The three engineers support customers.

My rating for Jira Service Management is nine out of ten.

My company is a Jira customer.

The SLA, speed, the comments from the agents' side, and the dashboard for agents are the most valuable features. 

From the customer side, it's not friendly used compared to other competitors, like ServiceNow or BMC. It's also not fully ITSM management if you compare it with ServiceNow or BMC. They have a full model of ITSM. In BMC they have TrueSight, they have Discovery, which helps IT to discover IT equipment with a serial number, with the specs, capacity of the server. It will give them a view of what's happening if you want to manage requests for change or incidents or planned maintenance. That is available in BMC. They can put a timeframe for maintenance, whenever you want to raise issues, it will tell you that there is client maintenance. And it prevents you from creating issues. This kind of automation is missing from Jira.

Maybe I could find it if I added add-ons or patch in add-ons. Jira cannot compete with what is developed now in ServiceNow and BMC. They are focusing on having a full set of ITSM and a full set of ITOM, which is needed to enhance a lot in Jira. 

There are improvements in every release. They don't look at competitors. They focus more on enhancing bugs or enhancing the features that they have, to fix the bugs that they have, to listen to the users' recommendations. The other competitors are looking to enhance, to change entire the platform to make it reliable, or to make it also near for the growth of the company expectation. The IT team is looking for more automation, more link with systems. How they can, for example, prevent issues from happening. 

We want people to not slow down with the tickets. We want people to have the issue solved automatically. I know that there are add-ons, but always does not fit or is not always in the proper way that we are looking for. 

I have been using this solution for seven years. 

People are looking for more stability and reliability in the system, which is improved in every release, which is good. It's always improving. I feel the difference from the day I moved to version seven and today. It's become faster and they don't have issues with the slowness anymore.

Their response is good. I don't open a lot of tickets with Atlassian. I have a contract with my vendor, who is a partner of Atlassian. My contract with him is not to solve issues, it's more to have more help in scripting or in developing a small script to help me do something which cannot be done directly from Jira. Within the full year, maybe one ticket or two tickets are raised with Atlassian. 

I did the migration from version five to seven. I have a good idea about the flows and the workflow, the customization inside the scheme, and things. Within three or four months, we migrated everything to the new platform. The beauty of Jira, because it's simple, even the workflow is easy to understand. 

It's easy to use.

Compared with other vendors, pricing is okay. But they increase the price every year which gets me in trouble with finance. I have to convince them why I have to pay these extra amounts which are supposed to stay the same. 

I know it's not linked to Atlassian always, because also the other partner was giving us the price directly. 

I would rate Jira an eight out of ten. 

I would like for them to have automation to change the portal, it's still limited. It's not user-friendly compared with other vendors. 

I recommend would, of course, recommend Jira. It depends on the users. When we started, it was good for us but now that the company is growing and we have a lot of applications, a lot of servers, a lot of complexity, and a lot of links between application services, it's not perfect for us. Our infrastructure has also become huge. We have cloud, hybrid, and on-prem. Sometimes we face an issue, but we spend hours understanding where exactly. It can be small things, but no only can understand where exactly. So that's why we are looking for something that can help with this, to prevent us from raising issues, and to find a solution.

We use Jira to track support incidents, which take a different route than incidents that occur within the project. The workflow has been configured so that tickets raised in Service Management are prioritized based on severity and the SLAs. After that, it gets assigned to the owners. We use it mainly for production issues.

We have around 40 users. Some are business IT, but members of the operations and BAU teams also use it. A few of the higher-level management use it, too. 

Jira lets us customize the workflow to meet our requirements. The email and alert features are also handy.

We have tried exporting some of the test cases into Jira from Excel. The interface for that isn't very user-friendly. 

We're a new company, so we have been using Jira for three-and-a-half years.

Jira is highly stable.

We have a relatively small organization, so Jira scales up enough for our purposes.

I rate Atlassian support eight out of 10. If we get stuck, we can usually find solutions from the Jira user community. 

Positive

I wasn't involved in purchasing Jira, but I believe it is affordable for small organizations.

I rate Jira Service Management eight out of 10. It's easy for new users to learn. A lot of the staff members are new to Jira, but it's simple to pick up and learn how all the processes work.

Jira has many features, and I haven't had the opportunity to work with some of them. There are workarounds to accomplish most things you want to do with the product.

We use this solution to track the work of different team members and to ensure that project tasks get completed. They get assigned tickets relating to those project tasks and and a deadline by which they have to complete the tasks. As they make progress, they update each task in the Jira ticket and this keeps everyone in the loop about their progress.

We have an Agile environment and using Jira makes it easy to adhere to Agile best practices. 

It would be useful to be ale to link tickets across different gantt charts in Jira and Confluence.

I have been using this solution for two and a half years.

This is a stable solution. 

This solution is very scalable. We have tons of people across different companies using it. 

I would rate this solution a nine out of ten. 

Our primary use case for this solution is project management. We use it to record some of our tasks and follow up with our developers to ensure they complete assigned tasks. It is cool and user-friendly. It is easy to navigate and understands most of its functionalities. Additionally, we use it to review developers' tasks and tasks assigned to the QA team from JIRA Service Management to run checks. When we're done with the checks, we do our reports on it, and the project manager can view what has been done. It is a very cool tool, but I didn't work with it for long before I moved to Microsoft Azure Dev Tools.

I can't specify which of the functions are my favourite, because I think everything about it is great. The only challenge is that it is difficult to navigate if you don't have any prior knowledge of the software. However, if you have knowledge, you can navigate around it and know what each tool within the software is used for. I preferred JIRA Service Management before we adopted Azure because I had already started getting familiar with it.

I think it's well organized. If the project manager knows how to set it up, it can be set it up in a way to suit what we want. The only issues we observed are network related, for example, when we try to log into the system or open up the software. Other than that, I don't think there is any other thing I can say that is wrong with the software. The developers did a very good job of knowing what the users wanted. The product is not lacking anything that a QA will want to use because it's not a major testing tool for QA. However, if they can develop their own JIRA development tool, that will be cool, similar to how we have Chrome development tool and Azure. I think it will be good if that can be incorporated into JIRA Service Management.

We have been using this solution for about five months. First, we used the latest cloud-based version where we navigate to the website and key in our community, company name, projects and group. We can then go directly to our workspace, where we see everything we do.

Most software work with the internet. Some of them, especially those that are cloud-based, are also linked with work servers, but there is no guarantee that they are 100% stable. If the network is not stable, then it affects the software. For example, if you open the web browser and type the URL and get a server error, it's usually a network issue. If the network is stable, the platform will work fine, but if it's not stable, you're going to expect some hiccups in the work site.

The scalability depends on the organizations using JIRA Service Management. If it's fitting for what they are using it for, then it's okay. If it's not, they have every right to change it and use something else. We decided to move away from JIRA Service Management to Azure because we felt it wasn't properly organized. I found working with JIRA Service Management interesting because I could look at the extractor and see which task is in development, or emerging, the status of every task and to who it was assigned.

Our company has currently switched from using JIRA Service Management to Azure.

I don't have any details of the initial setup process. 

I don't know anything about the licensing costs. I wasn't with the company when it was installed, and I only used it as a tool for my work. Hence, I cannot comment on pricing.

I rate this solution a ten out of ten, as it does not lack anything. My advice to users is that JIRA Service Management is a good project management tool to handle projects respectively and efficiently. The product is second to none if they know how to use it. Additionally, JIRA Service Management has a learning section where you can go and learn how to use the software. New users to the platform can also capitalize on a cursor feature that describes how to use a particular tool once you hover over it. For those who developed the software, I want to give them a thumbs up as they did a very good job. If there is anything they feel they can add to make it more user-friendly, they should ensure that the users can have access to whatever they want to upgrade on the software and let it be that the users can use that tool effectively. However, the tool could be improved by including more explanations to assist users who are new to the platform. I would describe JIRA Service Management as being 75% user-friendly, but it would be great if it could be 90% user-friendly.

We are a services-based organization providing software services to our customers.

This product is great at providing end-to-end project management for creating dashboards, for test case management, bug defect management, and the like. The management aspect is a key valuable feature. 

I think test case management could be more efficient. It currently requires two plugins which makes it less effective. At the moment with Jira, there are various products not included in the license such as CI CD pipeline or Atlassian Bamboo. Even if you take a bundle, these products are considered separate. On the other hand, if you buy an enterprise version of Microsoft Azure DevOps, a competitor of Jira, it's a one-stop solution on a single platform. 

I've been using this solution for over 10 years.

The solution is stable. 

The scalability is good. 

We don't use the technical support very much. Jira provides good documentation. 

Jira's advantage is in the straightforward set up. It's very easy in comparison to other tools. Deployment generally takes two to three weeks before we can go live. We use a third party for our deployments. The infrastructure environments vary from client to client. The deployment requires testers, developers, a technical architect, as well as project and service managers. 

The cost of the product is not very expensive but if you need to buy other plugins such as Confluence, it costs extra. I would recommend choosing a bundle option, if Atlassian gives you that option with Jira Confluence.

We also deploy Microsoft Azure DevOps. The client generally decides which solution they want to go with. The added advantage with Microsoft is that it's a one-stop solution whereas Jira's benefit is that it offers a less expensive product. 

I rate this solution eight out of 10. 

We use this solution for ITSM solutions including for our help and service desk for user support ticketing and incidents. There are several use cases for this solution and its usage depends on the kind of the company.

The customer portal with connection with our knowledge base has been most valuable. The queues to classify requests and SLIs to measure the quality of the service response and resolution time have also been great. It offers flexibility to configure workflows.

The product could improve its asset management.

I have been using this solution for seven years. 

It is a stable solution. You can deploy it with high availability in a cluster.

This is a scalable solution. You can add clusters or servers if you need on-premise solution or for a cloud solution.

I would rate the technical support for this solution a four out of five. 

The installation is simple but you need to set up a PDF to initiate the configuration and adapt to the customer or user needs. It's very flexible, but you need to complete the configuration work.

The cloud version or AS version takes minutes or hours to deploy. For on-premise version, you need between five to 20 days. It depends on the initial needs of the customer. Compared with other solutions like ServiceNow or EasyVista, this is a solution that can be deployed in less time.

It depends on the number of users but it starts at $20 per month per user. I would rate them a three out of five for pricing. Asset management has an extra cost. The relation between price, functionality and usability is good.

I would rate this solution a nine out of ten.