We have two use cases for this solution. Some of them are out of the box, while the other is based on the clients' or our requirements. Those are the use cases, for example, DDoS attacks we build.

We use it for incident management mostly, though we also try to use it for problem management, but most of the time we use it for managing and resolving incidents.

We are using it for logging all the cases. We use it to track all the efforts, ensure that all requirements are met, tickets are recorded, and the work is being done by the respective teams.

We are a system integrator, and we have been dealing with all versions of this product. We have seen its development from the beginning when it was a plain ticketing solution. We have tried all the flavors of ManageEngine ServiceDesk Plus, and we have on-premises and cloud deployments of this solution.

I have only used its demo version for evaluation. We haven't yet implemented it. I have been playing with ServiceDesk Plus for incident management, service request management, and some change request workflows. There is also a CMDB, which seems to be quite good. 

In our company, we use this solution on a daily basis as an administration application for reporting, where you can assign incident tickets or trade tickets and the relevant department uses it for follow up on problems or changes that have occurred.

I use it to create reports that show our teams where the issues are, what's going well, and what can be improved. My colleagues use it from a workflow perspective.

We have different organizations with a centralized help desk that will lock calls into groups of 20 or 30 people. We have a team that builds and customizes it and then we have all kinds of managers that pull out reports.

Finally, we have numerous end-users working on their own products. We also have external parties that provide services that use this application to work on incident problems and changes.

We use it for asset management, system tickets, trouble tickets, project management, software deployment, and remote control.

My primary use of the solution is not hands-on. I'm the architect. I was involved with getting the architecture going, getting the systems up and running. I've also got insights into the configuration. I'm not working with it on a day-to-day basis.

We primarily use the solution for service request management.

As a reseller and integrator, I help clients implement this solution.

I use this solution as a support engineer in the IT department. I provide services for my colleagues inside the company.

It is used to improve communications between other departments and to build more ITL servers for business processes in our IT department.

We use ManageEngine ServiceDesk Plus for all helpdesk, MDM solutions, ITSM, and more.

This is a software-as-a-service platform and we're using it for IT incident and problem management, as well as for asset management and procurement requirements. I'm the global chief information officer of the company and we are customers of ManageEngine. 

Right now, we use ServiceDesk for help desk and ticketing, but we plan to implement asset management. 

Our primary use case is a ticket management tool for the end user in my company.

ManageEngine ServiceDesk Plus is primarily used for service desk ticketing and instant management.

We use it as a daily ticketing system for IT, in-house and on hardware.

We use ManageEngine ServiceDesk Plus for people in our domestic holding can open any ticket from anywhere.

This is a very elite and mature ManageEngine product. We are based in Pakistan and I'm the enterprise senior account manager.