JIRA Service Management Reviews

We are using JIRA for accessing our help desk when other companies have problems with programs and to let them login when somebody needs to create a new ticket.  

I think that one of the most valuable features is when I am typing in my question for a ticket JIRA does a search for the answer at the same time. If it finds my answer, then I do not have to raise the ticket because I already found the answer in the knowledge base. This is good in saving time for customer service workers.  

For us, one of the weaknesses of Service Desk is that we can not check every issue in the queue raised for one product. If we have more than one customer using a product that has raised a ticket, we can not see the complete list of issues for the one product from all sources. It is not as easy or efficient to handle tickets without that capability.  

For this reason, we have an add-on administrative tool that we had to purchase separately for use with JIRA to help make the workflow more efficient. This could be added to the base product for all users.  

We have not been using the JIRA Service Desk for too long. We started doing our testing which lasted for just a few weeks and then we sent out a notification to our clients to use it. It has been in use at the company for maybe less than one month.  

We have not had the product in use long enough to scale the usage upward from the volume of our current client base. I do not think it would be a problem.  

I think the initial setup for the product is easy. It is not too complex or time-consuming to set up.  

We are very satisfied with the pricing of the product. Because we are an associate partner it is free for us.  

On a scale from one to ten where one is the worst and ten is the best, I would rate JIRA Service Deskaybe as maybe and eight or nine-out-of-ten. For our use case, and putting aside the need for the plugin, it is a nine.  

One of the primary things we use JIRA for is the Kanban Board feature. We use it for managing our projects and issues as well as accountabilities within the company. We have a homegrown — I suppose you could call it a Six Sigma type — approach. We identify the six main projects and the six areas where you can make the biggest difference within the company. Then we identify six projects that we're going to work on within those areas.

We use the Kanban Board extensively. We use the Confluence facility on the backend. Really,  we use Confluence and JIRA both together: Confluence for global planning and JIRA for issue and project management.

It simply helps us shape our project management workflow.

The implementation that we have is highly customized, so I can't talk to the capabilities of JIRA product independently because I'm not familiar with all of the different things that can be done with it. It's very useful in terms of the dashboard for the office, and the overview of all the different issues and props, what's on backlog, what's in progress, what's been resolved. That kind of thing, is very helpful.

One of the best additions to this product would be a single centralized point in which to store all the documents that are involved in progressing with tasks. For instance, if you're working on a JIRA task and you attach a document to it, not everybody will share a centralized storage facility where all the documents are. The idea would be to make it so everybody can see (or view) the same current document. They would get specific privileges (e.g., view or edit). But if a document is shared now, as it is in potentially an older version, it may not be accurate. Better to share the current document so that everyone has the same information.

Centralized document storage would allow all documents to be linked to any issue where it was pertinent rather than having to be attached to specific issues and limiting the viewers.

The product itself seems stable. We don't run into issues where we blame JIRA directly for failing.

JIRA can really scale perfectly for our needs. We have both end users and admins using this product. Really, everybody in our company uses it. No one has a problem with getting access and we scale as needed.

I haven't had any access to JIRA's technical support at all directly, I've never had any need to call them in. Generally, that would be someone else's responsibility. I'm not aware of having anyone in the company having issues with support on call or other contact.

We have looked for solutions in terms of the enterprise applications that are used by my company. We already have Confluence, we have JIRA Service desk, and we have Quest KACE Endpoint Management. We also use VMware AirWatch, virtualization productivity, and Dell hardware. A solution that works with these existing tools means that there is lest to change and train.

I wasn't involved in the setup of JIRA, so I can't really comment that much on that aspect of the product. It was set up by one of my other team members. However, I've been told it was a relatively straightforward process. The customization, which is substantial, has been difficult. That is obviously not the fault of the product itself.

We had specific goals in using a suite of products and we are doing our own deployments based on goals that we define. Essentially we didn't need outside help.

When considering a solution it is best to stay as standard as possible when adopting it. The further you get off the standard path the more difficult it is to adopt or adapt to other solutions if that becomes necessary or desirable in the future.

I can't actually give it a fair appreciation at this stage of the capabilities of JIRA as a stand-alone product because of the way we have implemented it in a cluster of other products. 

At this stage, I would give it a five out of ten. This is mostly because we rely on other products for certain services or features. If JIRA had more comprehensive coverage of what we require, or if it was easier to implement what it already does, the rating would be higher.

We use this product for our IT service desks. We are resellers and I'm head of corporate projects.

I think it's easy to use and user-friendly. 

The documentation needs improving because we have a lot of issues trying to find specific procedures. I'd also like to see an improvement with the inside discovery of assets.

I've been using this solution for four years. 

The solution is stable. 

The solution is scalable. 

Technical support is not the best and could definitely be improved. 

Neutral

The initial setup is straightforward. Each project is different in terms of the number of people required to deploy. Some only require one person but others might need two or three consultants to assist the client with implementation and configuration. 

This solution is good but it's not the best. Sometimes if you pay a bit more there's less pain. 

I rate this solution seven out of 10. 

Our product lifecycle management is done in JIRA Service Management. All the daily BAU tasks are tracked in JIRA Service Management on the Sprint device.

Our scrum team may be able to give more details, but the visibility features are great. It is user-friendly and fast, and we can relate the tasks.

There could be more optimization, and the pricing could be better too.

I joined the company three years ago, and we've been using it since then. It is a cloud-based solution.

The stability is good.

It is a SaaS service, so it is scalable. We have 5000 users using JIRA Service Management, and we plan to increase the number of users. However, we require some basic staff, mainly managers, for maintenance.

We have not required technical support.

We previously used ITAM, BMC Remedy and some other tools, and JIRA Service Management is comparatively better. Integration is also easy.

I am unaware of the initial setup, but it requires a signup and a purchase plan.

I am not aware of the licensing costs.

I rate this solution a nine out of ten and recommend it to others.

We are using Jira Service Desk for supporting both internal and external clients. 

One of the best features is that I can share tickets with team members, at which point any team member is able to pick one up and work on it. 

I began using Jira Service Desk when I joined the company about two and a half years ago, although the rest of the company has been using it for longer than that.

We have had a problem with stability in the past, although it has been resolved.

I have contacted technical support about different features and I find that they don't address issues as fast as they should.

The pricing is very competitive and I think that it is okay.

I would rate this solution an eight out of ten.

We primarily use this product to log issues that require investigation or solutions.

It allows tracking and communications to be sure issues are resolved. This helps us remain on task and keeps clients happy.

The product is valuable for logging and tracking issues. We can use it on multiple platforms and make it accessible to other people in other streams.

The product could be improved by integrating better with mobile numbers. For example, creating a WhatsApp platform would extend the solution and make it more useful. For now, when the issues are logged here, requests and responses go through the email server. The additional opportunities for connectivity would make it possible for quicker responses and more immediacy. With Micro Focus, one of the tools we used, we were able to build in a script that would send a response through WhatsApp instead of sending emails to the project group. JIRA would be better if that type of thing were possible, or even better if the solution was actually built into the product instead of having to use another service.

I think if JIRA can get that one right, it will be more desirable in the marketplace in general.

More interactive reporting would also be helpful.

We find that this is an excellent tool and it is very stable.

JIRA is an excellent tool. We still have room to improve how we use it. It can cater to multiple needs and purposes which enhances its demand. The fact that we can use it for multiple tasks alone makes it scalable. It's very good at what it does.

We have more than ten people currently using it. Most of them are testing consultants and developers. We also have project managers using it.

For deployment and maintenance, it may take only one to three guys. It depends on the complexity of what you are planning to do with it, so it will vary from case to case. There's no absolute answer to how many people will need to be involved.

Our deployment of the project is changing and growing on an on-going basis. It is used extensively and consistently and seems to be more useful as we explore what it can do.

I won't lie and say they are good because I am not the one who is in contact with support when something goes wrong. The development server had a problem that they solved, but the technical guys on the projects are the ones who would know about that. I haven't heard any complaints about support.

We previously used the defect module for Micro Focus ALM.

In most cases, we don't have to set it up from scratch. The stakeholders usually already have it installed. The amount of time it takes for deployment depends on the complexity of what a client needs.

We used an in-house guy for the implementation.

We have seen a return on investment in that it makes us more efficient and that in turn will make our clients happier.

I do not have a good idea of the costs as that is not my department, but it is a valuable solution for handling and tracking multiple projects.

We did not really evaluate other products when making the switch to JIRA. It seemed to be an intuitive choice.

On a scale of one to ten, I would rate this solution as an eight. It is a good solution and it helps to boost productivity.

We use this solution as a help desk. It's a place where the users upload tickets related to a new project, new ideas, new incidents, and things like that.

The solution has provided us with a tool for ticket management.

The most valuable feature of this solution is that it is user-friendly. It is web-based and can be accessed from everywhere.

This solution lacks features for project management. I would like to see more reports.

This is a stable and reliable solution.

We have a contract with a local partner for technical support and they are fine.

This solution was in place before I joined the company, so I don't know about the initial setup.

Our local partner handled the implementation for us.

I would rate this solution a seven out of ten.

The basic configuration and the basic abilities provided are the most valuable aspects of the solution.

Usability needs improvement. To configure it, you need to be well versed in JIRA administration. It's not very intuitive.

The stability of the solution is okay.

The potential to scale the solution depends on what the organization aims to do but it's good.

The solution offers lots of information on the website to assist with technical queries. There are also many community sites to help you troubleshoot any problems.

The usual setup is fine but to configure anything that is out of the box, you really need to understand the abilities of the solution.

Deployment takes about two hours.

I would rate the solution eight out of ten. I'd rate it higher, but it is expensive and very hard to customize.