JIRA Service Management Reviews

We use this solution for support for our projects.

I think one of the most valuable things is that it's all integrated. Between the Wiki and the product itself, whenever someone is typing in an error, it automatically pops up a solution.

Whenever we want to fix or improve something, Atlassian send us to the marketplace. We can vote for improvement, but it is really hard to get Atlassian to move forward with production because they have a huge marketplace. There are a lot of companies developing fixes or features, and you can pay for those features. I feel that Atlassian isn't really interested in fixing everything because if they did, the partners that are developing the fixes and features would not have a place in the market. 

An additional feature I would like to see is automation. JIRA offers the functionality of global automation in their highest plan, but it's at a higher price. Sometimes they release good new features, but they're always at a higher price so most of the features are only available for the highest plan. I would like to see new releases also being available to the lowest plan.

I have been working with this solution for four years. 

The solution is quite stable and we've had no problems with it. I would rate the stability as an eight out of ten. 

It is easy to scale, especially because we are working on SaaS, so it's not a problem for us. We have been putting a lot of new projects on JIRA Service Management and we've never had any issues. Approximately 200 employees use this solution at my company. 

I have opened tickets with the support team. Sometimes the answer is good, and sometimes you're commonplace behind a priority search, so it all depends on the technical representative that picks up the ticket. I would rate the technical support as a three out of five. 

Neutral

The initial setup was quite easy. 

On a scale of one to five, with one being really high and five being good, I would rate the price of this solution as a four. 

I would rate this solution as an eight out of ten. It's a good product. 

One of the valuable features is that an automatic response or action can be taken on tickets. We can have certain responses for tickets that contain keywords or are logged and tagged with certain labels.

The other thing is that the solution is starting to get out of just Service Management, and it's providing a Service Management project for other parts of our business. You've got the IT part and you've also got the business support, so people can use it for services like purchase orders, applications for shipping, and other things that are used across the business. That's the other useful part, that you're able to adapt it for other things.

Because it's a cloud platform, and because it's based on people subscribing to a platform, you end up with iterative improvements. I know a lot of users have said that they want a feature, for example, that was on the on-prem version of Jira or that the cloud version is missing, and the biggest issue, and this applies to a lot of cloud or SaaS platforms, is that the vendor can't deliver or do that. They're either unwilling or unable to give feature parity. The nature of a lot of SaaS solutions is that you can't always get the same thing.

The other thing is that you may have a time lag where, suddenly, you don't have a feature anymore, and you have to log an improvement request and then wait for various other factors. Eventually, it might get progressed or it might get stopped. Probably the biggest downside is that you are locked into that model and you have to accept what you signed up for. You have some capacity to extend it with add-ins and things, but for the base feature set, you will always be at the mercy of the vendor.

A lot of the integrations within the marketplace for Jira are all third parties, so a lot of the additional solutions that plug into other platforms are not written by Atlassian and that usually incurs an additional cost. It may not be the model they want and it would stifle competition and external people being able to contribute, but it would be good to see Atlassian provide more native integrations out of the box. I'm not against paying for integration if it's going to provide benefits, but it would be nice if Atlassian themselves were able to provide some things, at least at a basic level. I know third-party vendors can commit resources and probably have far more capability to deliver something that is feature-rich, but if you just want basic integration it would be nice to have it, rather than having to buy something when you may not need all of its functions.

I have been using the solution for probably between four to five years. Previously we used an on-premise installation of Jira, and then we moved to the hosted or Atlassian offering, where they host it in their own cloud. 

From where I sit, the cloud version is superior. Mainly this is due to not having to manage the upkeep of Jira, which was quite frankly a pain, but that's just the nature of Jira.

The solution is relatively stable. There was an incident not long ago where Jira was in the news because there was a small error made by somebody, and they ended up deleting a lot of customer environments and they didn't have any backups. I think that was a wake-up call for a lot of people. Otherwise, stability-wise, it's pretty good. They've got APIs and things for various other actions and we consume that and it seems to be pretty issue-free.

We have increased our license count and our consumption of services, not just with Service Management, but our entire Jira service consumption. We upgraded our subscription at least a couple of times over the last year and it's pretty simple, you literally say what you want to do. The other great thing is that you can trial it. You can say, "I want to initiate a trial of this particular level or subscription," and then you can trial it, piece it all out, and decide whether you're going to increase.

In terms of actual support staff, we have probably between 50 to 75 employees using this solution. The whole business includes between 600 to 650 people who could be using it to log requests.

I think the complexity of the setup depends on what you take with you. We migrated our existing Service Management project to this cloud version. If I was doing it, I wouldn't bother doing that. I would archive that data and start fresh, but it does have a lot of built-in onboarding features that were quite useful. We also have a partner who's a Jira-certified implementer, so they were very helpful with a lot of the issues that we had.

One other thing was getting the SCIM, or the provisioning of users, fixed. We use Azure ID, so it was important that that was done correctly, otherwise licensing would be a nightmare. We wanted to make sure that we weren't licensing people who were no longer active, and also that everyone who needed access, got it.

We didn't require an integrator, but we already had somebody who we were working with, not specifically for Service Management, but for a number of Jira initiatives. They were able to give us pointers. You don't have to have an integrator, but it was useful.

On a scale of one to five, where five is a good price and one is high, I would rate this solution as a three. It isn't cheap but it's not ridiculous.

I would rate this solution as a six out of ten. 

My clients use Service Management for general ITSM ticketing. They typically use Jira internally for providing help desk services to other departments, but one of my customers uses it for his customers, like external websites, etc.

Service Management is great if you're an Atlassian shop already using JIRA for the development team and you want another tool for help desk ticketing. When it's all under the same umbrella, I can easily take a ticket from the help desk and move it to the development team. You can't beat that integration between two products. 

Service Management is highly customizable, but I think it might be too customizable. If a company isn't aware of the best practices, it can easily mess something up. For example, you might try automating something that Jira doesn't support, and it could interfere with the product's out-of-the-box capabilities. 

Asset management should be built into Service Management. Typically, companies need both. You have to buy Atlassian's asset management solution separately. It could either be offered as a bundle or some lighter version of asset management could be included with Service Management. 

I have been using Jira Service Management for a year or so.

I have confidence in Service Management. 

Service Management is scalable. 

I rate Atlassian support two out of 10. It takes a lot of time to reach them and get ahold of someone who understands my problem enough to provide a solution. Also, I live in Israel, so my work week is Sunday through Thursday, but I can only contact them from Monday to Wednesday.

Negative

I've worked with ServiceNow. Comparatively, Jira provides a good solution at a reasonable price, and it's quicker to implement inside a company. ServiceNow's implementation is complex. I'm more comfortable with Jira. 

I rate Service Management six out of 10 for ease of setup. At first, setting up Service Management seems incredibly easy. You log into the website and access the site, but nothing comes from the backend because you don't have anything set up for the company. You need to set up the fields, workflows, etc. Companies expect to be able to do it fast after buying the license, but it's not that quick. It typically takes five days to set it up. It isn't a plug-and-play solution.

I rate Service Management four out of 10 for affordability. The price could be better, especially for companies using more than one Atlassian product. It's suitable for SMBs that can afford it. I don't think there's another tool that's both better and cheaper. All help desk tools are relatively expensive.

You also need to consider the overall work we need to do on the tool. The five days of work needed for deployment isn't much, but it requires ongoing maintenance over time.

I rate Jira Service Management seven out of 10. If you plan to implement Service Management, you need to be aware that you can do whatever you want with it, but you might not know the long-term effects. If you do too much automation, it could have unforeseen consequences in the long run. You need to be highly specific about your needs from the start, so you can correctly build the tool's architecture.

Our primary use case is for customer service and customer requests. We also use it to set SLAs and as a general help desk. We are customers of Jira.

The solution has improved company functioning by providing more transparency, in my opinion. Our business is already working out of JIRA, so it connected directly with the platform rather than requiring us to move between several different platforms.

The reporting is a great feature. I also like being able to create customized forms which is extremely helpful.

If you raise a ticket with Jira, the portal doesn't enable any capability to see your other JIRA tickets, only the parts that are in the plugin for the service management. That's not a great experience because we have project teams that work out of their own Jira backlogs, so unless it's a link to a ticket in the JSM, there's no visibility for the customer in one single location.

I've been using this solution for two years. 

We haven't had any issues with performance, other than issues related to being on-prem. It's a stable solution.

The biggest issue is not being able to display linked issues and that makes scalability painful as far as the customer experience goes, and weighs down the system with more tickets. In terms of expanding, it's fairly straightforward. We have over 5,000 users in various roles including managers, developers, HR - it's across the board. In terms of maintenance, we have the main administrator and then a couple of guys that help out.

We transitioned from Salesforce to Jira Service Management mainly because a lot of our teams were already working out of Jira for their own project tracking. It just allowed us to bring everything together rather than working in different systems.

The initial setup was fairly straightforward and was carried out by an in-house team.

I would suggest looking into your current layout and requirements, evaluating them and then figuring out the best option in terms of how you want things categorized and broken down from both a customer perspective and a backend perspective before you try to build it out.

Despite the few downfalls, its cost is still very good compared to other holistic systems. A big reason for getting the switch approved was that the cost was substantially lower than other solutions. I can't speak for the cloud experience, I'm sure it's a little easier than running on-prem, which is very administrator heavy when you want to do a lot of automation or post functions. It's important to be prepared for that. Depending on how your organization is set up, you're likely to need your admin to do those things.

I rate the solution seven out of 10. 

We use it to track software development projects.

We get software developed faster.

I like that it's easy to set up Sprint and put tasks and stories into Sprint. It is really easy to lay out the work that needs to be done.

I think that either a Gantt chart or a calendar view is something my management is used to seeing, and while they like the Sprint burndown charts, they would still like to see what is on the plan, and what is up and coming. I would like to see improvement in the ability to filter completed tasks.

I have been using JIRA Service Management for three years.

The stability is ok for our needs. There are times when there have been some flaky things, that I don't think we expected, but it's not crashing all the time.

It seems to scale just fine.

I haven't figured out how to find Jira's technical support. There are times when I would have been happy to have had Jira technical support and I could not figure out how to get ahold of them.

There were some pieces that were more difficult than I expected. This is another place to think of some improvement. Not regarding the installation instructions, but more guidance on the different ways to set up your project and different ways this tool can be used. Again, if I'm paying for the licensing of the tools, going out, and sending lots of people to large training courses, this becomes more expensive. I'm looking for the developers to give more guidance on directions on relating to the tool and the ways that the tool is useful. 

I would rate JIRA Service Management an eight out of ten.

We are using it for IT service management and business process management. We are using it for the help desk to handle all internal requests. We have its latest version.

Customizations are most valuable. The customization of workflows is the main power of the Atlassian tools in general. 

Functionality-wise, it is a great tool, and I have no problems with it. In terms of ease of use, ease of setup, and support, you can't go wrong with Atlassian tools.

Its UI is a bit overwhelming for new users. That has been the problem with Jira for a long time. If they could put some fields that we could use to simplify the UI, it would be good.

Transitioning from the server to the cloud has a learning curve. The pain point is again related to UI and not knowing where to look.

There should be an easier way to connect to an external database with special custom fields. It has been a pain point for me for such a long time. There are processes to do it, but I find them cumbersome.

I've been using Jira for over a decade.

In general, it is pretty stable, but sometimes, it has been sluggish. In a month, I have probably encountered this issue four times. It doesn't impede my work. It is just sluggish. 

Sometimes, I get kicked out of the system. That typically happens when we're starting with some configuration.

Scalability-wise, you can definitely scale your systems or integrate with other third parties. There are also plug-ins that you could use and evaluate. So, you do get the flexibility to install plugins. 

Before moving to the cloud, I could use plugins for more than 30 days, and I just had to give a request for additional months, but it is not working anymore in the cloud. It is probably because of the company that creates the plugins. 

We have 50 users. It doesn't require maintenance. We only maintain workflow changes, and the system runs on its own. Even upgrades are done by them. It is pretty easy as compared to the server version.

For the cloud, I would rate their support a nine out of 10. I don't have to worry about the system. I haven't experienced anything like that before transitioning to the cloud.

If I have to troubleshoot a problem, there is a lot of online documentation. I can also connect with the community. Sometimes, it is faster to Google than contacting their support.

It was straightforward. It happens at the click of a button. It is very easy as compared to setting up the server, which took a lot of skills. 

Setting it up just takes a few minutes. It is fast. If a workflow is complex, it would take a day. It depends on the complexity of the workflows, but generally, it is really fast.

I am using the free version, but my clients are paying for it. When they start, they evaluate it for 30 days, and after seeing the value, they move to its paid version.

I didn't evaluate other options. It is my favorite tool, but I am aware of ServiceNow and other ones. If you have Jira, you might as well get their whole ecosystem. If you're in development, you will get Bitbucket and Confluence as well for documentation. For Service Management, there is Jira Service Desk. I usually use their whole package. If there are integration problems, only then we would evaluate other solutions, but we could definitely connect with Jira by API. Atlassian products are very good. We always had Atlassian tools.

I am an evangelist of Atlassian tools, so I usually engage with my clients in using them. Everybody is into digital transformation, and we have been engaging with clients, and we're promoting Atlassian for their digital transformation. One thing that I always tell my clients is that they should have a single source of tools. Atlassian is always at the top of my list with Jira, Service Desk, and Confluence. These are my top three products of Atlassian that I usually give them. 

Based on my experience, you should go for the full Atlassian ecosystem if you are looking for IT service management and workflow management for your businesses. If you are into development, Jira is definitely one of the best tools out there. You can pretty much use the whole suite. Scalability-wise, you can easily scale your systems or integrate with other third parties. The only caveat is that you need to have someone who is actually an expert in Atlassian tools for you to be able to maximize it. It is very powerful if you know how to maximize it.

In the context of business process and workflow management, it would be impossible to implement good process management or workflow management in Jira if you haven't defined one. It is important to define the processes and then train people. If you don't train your staff using Atlassian Suite, you're not maximizing your investment.

I would rate Jira Service Management a nine out of 10.

In our bank, we use a partner company who develops software for us. They use Jira for the developer portion to track issues, or bugs, that need to be fixed on the software development life cycle. 

We have two teams, one is the development department which includes developers and business analysts who use Jira to track and develop issues within their own team and a third-party consultant. The other is the audit team who is using Jira to track their audit findings and follow-up.

Jira's issue tracking for different projects for the development side is quite useful.

With respect to our help desk, we have been considering switching from ManageEngine to Jira so that we can have a single consolidated system for all the development life cycles. Jira has different modules that can develop workflow for demand management and project management, but the solution is no out of the box and would require lots of customization. The cost of switching has prohibited us from moving ahead with Jira as a service desk solution.

I have been using Jira Service Management for almost 5 years.

Jira is quite stable.

We haven't used Jira on a large scale. Our work groups are a maximum of 20 people.

We currently are using ManageEngine for the service desk solution. This solution has been good but they do not have a consolidated system for the development life cycle. We would like to switch to Jira for this service solution as well but cost prohibits us from moving forward.

The initial setup is not complex. The deployment itself does not take much time, however the custom workflow does take longer. 

We completed the installation with the help of external consultants who are familiar with Jira.

Jira is becoming quite popular and is well supported. We find that when working with other companies on other projects, they are using Jira to track issues so it is beneficial for us to use the same solution.

Jira has lots of modules and integrations, however too many makes licensing difficult to understand upfront and becomes quite expensive to have a full solution.

I would rate Jira Service Management a 9 out of 10.

We use JIRA Service for our help desk, our procurement processes, and for our financial approvals. We also use it for our technical team collaboration with lines. I'm a program architect.

I think it's very easy to develop any process inside Jira Service Management, you can build any software with it. It's simple to use and user-friendly. It's based on a technical system, but you can move any process into JIRA Service Manager very easily. Its workflow design is very simple and that's why people prefer this product. I think it's currently the best solution on the market.

Service Management currently lacks an asset management module that can make deployment more difficult. We recently had to purchase SolarWinds Asset Management to cover that aspect.

I've been using this solution for 10 years. 

The solution is stable. 

We have around 700 users so the solution is scalable.

The customer support could be improved. 

We used two or three of our developers for the initial setup and they also manage the server. It's not a large team.

Licensing costs are on the expensive side. 

The solution is suitable for mid-sized or enterprise companies and I rate it 10 out of 10.