JIRA Service Management Reviews

One use case is to communicate with customers. We have a lot of customers who are facing issues with products and they can raise the request from the customer portals. Internally, we'll also use it for the IT team and the Jira team. If any configuration changes or any new projects need to be created, or any configurations to be implemented, et cetera, we have a service management project and they will raise their tickets.

The SLAs are great. With SLAs, we can try them out. If you are providing solutions or responding to customers, it's great. 

The flow of the reports is good. I don't see any features or anything that is lacking. Everything is good on the JIRA Service Management, in terms of what they have provided.

It's easy to set up.

We have a lot of add-ons, however, instead of the add-ons, for example, cloning could be better. 

When we do a clone of a particular issue, it needs to ask certain things like system fields at least, to copy them or not. One thing which I did not like, is whenever we are moving a request from one project to another project, if, during that time, for example, a resolution has been fixed and now I am moving that issue to a particular work in progress status, during that time the resolution needs to be clear. JIRA applications are not providing the information. It is not clearing it in the backend.

If we are moving from one issue to another, we are waiting for support to resolve them. During that time window, a resolution is mandatory and it is not prompting us to resolve anything. Due to this, sometimes the reports might not get properly recorded.

I've been using the solution for the last four years. 

Recently, in the Jira cloud, we have had an issue. Users are not able to log in and some of the customer data has also been lost. Overall, it's stable, about 99% stable.

Currently, the number of users on Jira Service Management is around 300 plus users - maybe as many as 400. In terms of Jira software, we have 1400 using it.

It's a scalable product.

We do have plans to increase the licensing in the future.

Technical support has been helpful. We are satisfied with the level of service. 

The implementation is straightforward.

I wrote the automation. I used automation for the Jira app, and in the backend, in the workflows. I used a validator with the script. Based on that, I pulled some conditions. It was easy.

I'm not aware of the exact pricing. It's my understanding that, compared to Service Management, the price is a little higher, however, the Jira software price is okay. It's a good price.

I'm just an end-user.

We are on the cloud, and therefore using the latest version. They release new versions and fixes automatically and we can take advantage of them right away. 

Others need to be aware of how we need to use service management first. They need to know the queues and the SLAs. They need to understand the configurations also. 

I'd rate the solution nine out of ten.

The most valuable features are the flexibility of defining your own workflows and automation around the workflows, and the integration with the gate or any repository.

The main issue with this solution is there's no limited subscription available for plugins we only use for a few people. If we only have a team of twenty using a plugin, we still have to purchase a subscription for the whole 200 users.

I've been using this solution for a year and a half.

We're using the cloud version, which I think is more stable than the on-prem.

JIRA Service Management is scalable, but there are some issues that cloud instances can't be linked with server-based instances.

JIRA's technical support is good and responsive.

The initial setup for the cloud instance was very straightforward.

If you're not bound to the Microsoft platform, I would say you must go for JIRA as it's more flexible than the Microsoft equivalent. I'd give JIRA a rating of seven out of ten.

We are a software development company with 80 users. As part of development, we track the sprint to see if all the storyboards are complete and development completion. We notify the development team about change requests or incidents using JIRA Service Management.

In software development you need to handle case related software issues, JIRA has helped us with that.

I find the Kanban chart where we put each story in to be the most valuable feature. We use the Kanban chart to revise the project every morning in our five-minute meeting.

JIRA Service Management should make reporting easier. I would like something integrated with DevOps tools.

I have been using JIRA Service Management for two years.

JIRA is a very stable solution.

The solution is scalable.

Once the system is integrated we look at the tickets and find the solution in-house. Someone from JIRA will contact us and offer a solution, but rarely will we request support.

We moved from HP Service Manager to JIRA Service because it was more suited to a software development company. We needed something to support our agility model where other software is focused on operations.

We used an integrator to deploy JIRA. The initial setup of the solution was simple and transferring to JIRA Service took about 3 months.

Switching to JIRA provided a financial ROI. We did the ROI study when deciding to move from HP Service Manager and determined it was beneficial.

If you are a software development company you need to use JIRA because it aligns with project management.

I would rate a JIRA Service Management a 9 of 10.

We are primarily using it for service management, which includes incident management, change management, etc.

I'm not sure if we are using its latest version, but I would expect so.

Its integration is most valuable. It is pretty open for integration.

It is pretty complex to move between the test environment and the production environment. There is potential for improvement.

Security is always an issue with every tool. So, everything can be more secure.

We have been using this solution for approximately three months.

I haven't noticed any problems with stability.

It is, for sure, scalable. In our organization, we have approximately 200 users.

We are using a local partner, and we are very satisfied with them.

I didn't deploy it. We have only two admins for its deployment and maintenance.

We need a license because we have a higher number than the free part.

We were evaluating some time ago. We scanned the market, and Jira was selected.

I would definitely recommend this solution. It is definitely not peer-to-peer in comparison with solutions like ServiceNow, but it is a pretty big software, and its feature set caters to our needs.

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

The primary use case is for support. I open, support, and service a request. There is also some follow up with the activities.

Some of the most valuable features are simplicity, ease of configuration, and ease of customization. Overall, it's very easy to work with.

At times you will need add-ons or additional software, so built-in features would be helpful. For example, a built-in SIEM.

It would be interesting to add an Atlassian SIEM. I think it would be great!

I have been working with JIRA Service Desk for one year.

This solution is stable and we have not experienced any bugs.

This solution is scalable. They have a good architecture with good settings, especially the data center architecture. You can download scalable architecture.

I have not used the technical support.

The initial setup was simple.

It takes a maximum of one month to deploy this solution for a medium-sized company.

At times, customers request regular assistance for maintenance as they do not have anyone internally. It's an on-demand implementation or improvement.

We implement this solution for our customers. Most of our customers are medium-sized companies, but we do have some that are larger.

It's not really expensive, especially when you compare to ServiceNow or other solutions, and it's not expensive to maintain.

There are additional costs for add-ons that require additional software to support the specific add-on.

There are not only custom licenses, they have licenses for add-ons as well.

Globally, it's an interesting cost perspective.

Because it is simple, you can start small and develop. You can customize more and more depending on your requirements. It's quite simple to configure.

I would say start and improve. Often you have to think about everything because it will be painful later on if you need to add customization that comes with JIRA Service Desk. This is the reason that you can start in one month. It's a simpler approach.

It's a good product.

I would rate this solution a nine out of ten.

I'm primarily trying to use the solution as an IT Service Management solution.

The customization is the most valuable aspect of the solution. I can customize full workflows. It's very flexible. We can use mail if we want to open requests as well. 

The solution offers access to add-ons that are also very helpful. 

The solution should be more formalized. It could be more user-friendly.

If we are talking about IT service management, I think more features related to problem management need to be within the solution. If you want something for supplier management or complication management, you have to buy some add-ons from the market to help you with this. However, there needs more enhancements regarding that both on the solution and with available add-ons. 

Arabic support is very important. It should be included on the solution itself, not provided separately. The reporting features should include more how-to guidance.

The solution is stable.

In terms of handling data, the solution is very scalable. Right now, we have about 50 users on the system.

Technical support is okay. They help us if we have something initialized. They're helpful and professional. 

We previously used FS from Nexus, a Mac-specific manager, and a CS manager, among others, for various types of service management. We were trying to replace the IT Service management solutions with Jira mainly as a non-technical box for a non-technical cost and push management.

The initial setup has a medium level of difficulty. Deployment took about ten days.

We did the implementation ourselves with the help of some tutorials, which really helped to build the system.

When we bought the solution, I recall there was one license option limited to 50 users. There is an enterprise version as well.

We are using the on-premises deployment model.

It's a good, stable solution. It can help open the IT Solution management backing if you're just looking to do some enhancements.

I would rate the solution seven out of ten.

We use JIRA Service Management for internal product development. We use it as a ticketing tool, for issues and bugs, for user storage, etc.

I like the precise ticket management capabilities. JIRA Service Management is easy to use as well.

I think the performance can be better.

We've been using it for six months. It is deployed on the cloud.

It's pretty stable.

It's very scalable. We currently have four to five staff using this solution.

My experience with JIRA's technical support has been fine. I'd give them a nine out of ten.

Positive

The initial setup is straightforward.

I advise you to go for it. JIRA Service Management is user-friendly and can help you achieve what you want to achieve. 

We're a service provider. We implement the solution for our clients. 

Typically clients use Jira more around incident reporting management and resolution of queries, or SLA management. Then, sometimes, they need a range of compliance SLS's such as knowledge management.

It's easy to set up the solution.

JIRA Service Desk is really good when you have a primitive environment where most of the Atlassian applications are already present. However, if you are just using JIRA Service Desk for making leads for an IPS and solution, then it becomes really difficult to get all these IPS and capabilities up and running. This is due to the fact that in a native application, we don't get all these capabilities. 

JSD has some analytics, but it's pretty much basic and simple dashboards. There's no mobile application for JSD. It really would benefit from better implementation with other vendors. We're heavily reliant on some external marketplace applications.

We don't find there's support for CMDB.

The notifications are limited. That is good if a client environment is small enough and they do not require any advanced or mature use cases, but if they require it, then that's when we face a lot of issues because Jira Service Desk doesn't compliment such advanced decisions.

Jira should offer package solutions and be much more focused on giving advanced capabilities. If they are not developing advanced capabilities, at least, what they can do is focus on providing a packaged solution to give their customers the flexibility to choose what type of business package they want - whether its operations based or finance related. 

I've been using the latest version of the solution for the last couple of months. Before that, I used it last year as well. Overall, I've been using the solution close to a year now.

There are minor bugs and issues, however, I would describe the solution as quite stable.

With the number of applications on the marketplace continuing to grow, I would say the solution is quite scalable. The only challenges with scalability come with advanced use cases. There are some issues around their IPS and tools. Jira has the capabilities, however, they don't sell well for advanced cases. 

Still, if you are talking about the ability to scale using tools and plugins, I would say that usually, Jira can scale quite effectively for clients.

When deploying or implementing, or even sometimes in day to day maintenance, if we encounter some issues, we will connect with technical support initially. There were a few issues, for example, around a server's speed and Jira wasn't quite performing well. As time has passed, it's gotten better. 

The initial setup is very straightforward. It's fairly easy to get everything up and running.

In our experience, deployment takes about two to there months, depending on the complexity.

In terms of the process we follow, we usually come back to do some groundwork around what exactly the requirements are. We ask: what are we trying to solve? Then we do an assessment of the client environment. We try to identify which is the best fit in terms of applications for this deployment. Once decided, we run tests to see if the application fits the necessary criteria. We try to identify what the default configurations will be and make sure we clarify those before going ahead with our deployment strategy. 

The number of people involved in the deployment varies from client to client. If it's a small deployment, only five to ten people are needed. They may not be working all at the same time, but they'd have various roles in both deployment and maintenance. Afterwards, there will always be about three or four individuals that track support. These numbers can increase based on the number of tickets or the size of the organization. The highest amount of people we've worked with was about 30.

We implement the solution for our clients.

I'm not sure what the exact pricing is, but it's tiered based on the number of users. If a company has 10 users it might cost X but with 50 users it will cost Y. Outside solutions, such as plugins, may come at an extra cost. Apart from that, I don't think Jira has additional costs.

While we largely deal with cloud deployments, we did recently have a client that requested an on-premises deployment.

The types of clients we have are small or medium-sized enterprises typically.

On a cost-basis, the product offering is very good.

Jira is very customer-centric. They really try to help users make the most out of their solution as well as other products. The plugins are all designed to make Jira even easier to use, even more user friendly, and serve to bridge the gap of features Jira might lack.

I'd rate the solution seven out of ten. We hear a lot of feedback from clients, and they mention the solution has some limitations.