ManageEngine ServiceDesk Plus Reviews

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. 

The tool is easily configurable and we can make any changes ourselves whenever we want. ManageEngine has already provided additional modules that we can integrate in the future. 

We were unable to load tickets from the previous platform to the new platform, to transfer the database of tickets and that was a problem for us. I'd like to see more flexibility in the configuration of the workflows. We currently use layouts because we know that if we need something more complex, it will be difficult to map.

We completed implementation a few months ago and I've been using this solution every since.

The solution is stable. 

The solution is scalable, we have around 30 licensed users.

We're still receiving support from the implementer so haven't had to deal with technical support yet. 

I think the implementation was pretty simple and didn't take much time. 

The solution is reasonably priced. 

We looked at ServiceNow as an option but the cost would have been about 10 times more than we're paying for ServiceDesk Plus.

In the future, we're going to see some hybrid platforms in the cloud and also in the application. Because of that, I think the solution needs to be more integratable so customers can interact easily with other platforms. 

I rate this solution nine out of 10. 

We primarily use the solution for asset and incident management. We can use it for monitoring as well.

The mother-child features in the ticketing tool are great. You can upgrade up and down in terms of the level of importance of tickets, et cetera. 

The automation around report generation is great. It's easy to create reports and to automate who it is sent to. 

It makes the monitoring of tickets very simple. 

It is more flexible than ServiceNow in terms of cost. Its pricing is good. 

There are a lot of great templates that you can take advantage of. 

It is scalable. 

We'd like to have more integration into other platforms. 

We've had trouble transforming that data in ServiceDesk Plus, for example. 

I've used the solution for about seven years. 

The solution is stable. I've never had to worry about our subscription when I was using it. The solution is very reliable. 

The solution scales well. Even on-premises, it can scale; however, the cost would be a bit higher. It's easier to scale on the cloud. 

Support is better on the cloud than when you have an on-premises deployment. 

The local support is very accommodating. They are well-versed in the product. 

Positive

I'm also familiar with ServiceNow. 

The initial setup is easy. Migration is also very simple. You must have to create an XML file and move everything over. 

The solution doesn't really require any specific maintenance. As long as you are working on the latest version, you don't need to update to any additional features. Maintenance will only be needed if you upgrade. 

The pricing of the product is okay. We find it to be less expensive than ServiceNow. 

I was an end-user.

I am not using the latest version of the solution. I moved to another company recently. The last engagement I had with the solution was to upgrade the ServiceDesk to the latest version. 

I'd rate the solution nine out of ten. 

I particularly liked the dashboard features. It displays reports effectively and provides notifications for new tickets assigned to us. 

Additionally, the ticket automation is impressive. When a technician is assigned to a ticket, they automatically receive a notification. 

Overall, its ease of use is very good. 

We're comparing it to other ITSM systems. The main areas for improvement seem to be Active Directory integration and Single Sign-On (SSO) capabilities.

So, I would like to have SSO as well.

We have used it, or rather, I've used it on a trial version. It was the Standard Plus edition. We were in negotiations with ManageEngine and waiting for a demo before the company decided on implementation.

It is a stable solution. I would rate the stability a nine out of ten. 

There were around 30 users using this solution in total. I would rate the scalability an eight out of ten. It is a scalable product.

Support was good. Anytime we raised issues, we got instant feedback. We didn't have to wait too long.

Positive

I have experience with Jira.

I highly prefer ManageEngine. Faster and better interaction. Didn't need many integrations. With Jira, especially for support, raising issues sometimes takes a day. But in interface and user experience, ManageEngine is better than Jira.

It was easy to implement. I didn't have a hard time. It was very quick, around 10 to 20 minutes.

I would rate my experience with the initial setup an eight out of ten, with ten being easy. 

It was fully cloud-based. We didn't want an on-premises solution.

I would rate the pricing a six out of ten, with ten being expensive. It is above average. But it is neither cheap nor expensive.

Overall, I would rate the solution a seven out of ten. I would like to see a clearer distinction between ManageEngine Cloud, ServiceDesk Plus, and ManageEngine Enterprise. That way, choosing the best one is better informed. Initially, I struggled to understand the difference, but I figured it out later.

Our primary use case for the solution is for IT support across departments in our company. We provide templates for users that are not specialists so they can install them immediately. We deploy the solution both on cloud and on-premises.

The solution does not have an automated approach to integration with other ManageEngine products and third-party products. Additionally, brand promotion can be improved so that users know a good solution is available that is not very expensive.

We have been using the solution for approximately six years and are currently using the latest version. 

The solution is stable.

The solution is scalable, and you can start from five users and expand to any amount of your choosing. I rate the scalability of the solution ten out of ten.

There is good technical support from ManageEngine ServiceDesk Plus. I rate them a ten out of ten.

Positive

The initial setup process is straightforward. A person with basic Windows server skills or an engineer with basic Microsoft networking skills and Active Directory skills could assist in setting it up Basic. We usually get it up and running within a couple of hours, and one technical staff is required for maintenance.

We have seen a good return on investment.

The solution is free for up to five users, making it a good starting point for many organizations, especially now that people are cash-strapped. The licensing costs for over 500 users start from $500 upwards, depending on their choice and if assets are attached to it. So an average license would be up to 10,000 per year for subscription on average. Subscription licensing includes technical support and all the features at no additional cost, and Perpetual licensing requires annual maintenance of about 15% of the initial cost.

I rate the solution a ten out of ten. The solution is good, but the next release can include a more automated approach to integration with other ManageEngine products and third-party products.

We use the solution for asset management and for ticketing. We use it as a support solution.

The solution allows you to solve certain problems by categorizing the technicality of the problem and to prioritize critical issues. The solution can provide an overview to show which issues are cropping up the most in order to ensure the most important issues are dealt with expediently. It's saved us a lot of time and effort. 

The reporting feature of the solution is very good for asset management and also for the performance of our organization.

When somebody wants to follow up with a problem from the past, the solution makes it easy. It keeps everything in one system and updated. It even has a calendar, and a backup available on the application.

At first, the interface is not so easy to use and it's a bit complicated, but you do get used to it over time.

We should be able to monitor the performance of assets, not only documents. For example, printers. We should be able to monitor ink levels and get notifications when the ink is low. In another operation manager I use, they send me a notification when the device is off or has something to perform. This is a great feature. I'd like to see things like that added to the solution.

The solution is pretty stable.

The solution is scalable. So far, we've scaled up to 500 users, and we plan to scale up even more over time. 

Technical support is very responsive. During some updates, we had a few small issues and they fixed them for us.

We did not previously use a different solution. We used to use an excel spreadsheet to manually track issues.

The implementation was straightforward. However, they provide a manual that's very big and you have to go through everything by yourself to get used to it. Once you absorb the information it's fine and it's not so complicated. You just need two or three people to deploy the solution.

We deployed the solution ourselves.

We have yet to see an ROI because we are just a new business, but we do expect to see it in the future.

We are on a yearly subscription and use the on-premises deployment model of the solution.

For our 500 assets that are using the professional version of the solution, we pay somewhere between $4,000 and $5,000 per year.

We don't pay any costs beyond the standard licensing fee. You might add on if you have more assets, for example, an operation number. They do have features where you might need to add extra fees above your standard cost.

We did not evaluate other options. I used this very solution about ten years ago at another company and returned to it because I liked its functionality.

I would advise those adopting the solution document their configuration because it makes it easier.

I would rate the solution 8.5 out of ten. With a simpler configuration, I would rate it a bit higher.

We're using ManageEngine ServiceDesk Plus for ticketing, incident management, and change management.

What I found most valuable in ManageEngine ServiceDesk Plus is its ticketing function plus change management, which helps us monitor all service requests within the team and even extend the requests to level two support.

I also found the ManageEngine ServiceDesk Plus user interface intuitive and its menus, display, and report creation great.

In any product, there's always room for improvement, and my team is further evaluating which improvements should be added to ManageEngine ServiceDesk Plus or any workaround or features that my team has yet to leverage with, but the file where my team listed the information isn't with me right now.

Customization has room for improvement in ManageEngine ServiceDesk Plus. Currently, it's tricky to customize.

In the next release of the solution, I want the capability to add more fields to the dashboards.

I'm new in the company, so I'm a new user of ManageEngine ServiceDesk Plus. I've been using it for almost two months.

ManageEngine ServiceDesk Plus is stable, and I can even access it off-premises or outside of the office.

ManageEngine ServiceDesk Plus is a scalable solution, so my company was able to add more users and utilize its features.

The technical support for ManageEngine ServiceDesk Plus is good, considering it's partnered with a local company here in the Philippines.

My colleagues previously used ServiceNow before using ManageEngine ServiceDesk Plus. Pricing was the reason the company switched to ManageEngine ServiceDesk Plus.

When I joined the company, ManageEngine ServiceDesk Plus had been set up, so I have no information on how my company set it up.

ManageEngine ServiceDesk Plus has reasonable pricing because my colleagues mentioned that the solution is more cost-effective than the previous one the company used.

We're evaluating ManageEngine OpManager, ADSS, and 360.

My company uses ManageEngine ServiceDesk Plus and Desktop Central.

In the company, roughly two thousand plus people use ManageEngine ServiceDesk Plus, with less than twenty admins in charge of the maintenance.

My advice if you're planning to implement ManageEngine ServiceDesk Plus is to define the processes for which you want to use it. Next, you must have a dedicated person who will map your processes against the system's capability so that you can leverage or maximize the features offered by ManageEngine ServiceDesk Plus.

My rating for ManageEngine ServiceDesk Plus is eight out of ten. If it was easy to customize, I could give it a ten.

My company is a ManageEngine ServiceDesk Plus customer.

I've been involved in implementation and configuration and all the fine-tuning stuff. It's easy. 

The product helps us a lot in many respects. We have ten branches, and each branch has an average of 300 users. We're talking about 5,000 to 6,000 users across the sites. It would be very difficult if the users had to call and the IT analysts had to receive the calls. That would be a long day and a headache. 

ManageEngine has made our job a lot easier. We can handle the tickets for the users and initiate incident management, problem management, et cetera. Without SDP, we wouldn't be able to do it.

The chat box between the requester and the IT analyst is good. This feature is amazing. It can easily be between the requester and the IT analyst. 

SDP offers good customization for all workflows, which is useful. This one is very helpful in general. 

It's stable. 

We have found the solution to be scalable. 

In terms of support, actually, they take a long time. They need to be faster. They have to work on technical support. This is number one.

The UI for the app needs improvement. ManageEngine SDP hasn't had any changes in three years. There are no major changes in the UI, and other platforms get updated rather often. 

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

The solution is stable. 

I strongly recommend, before migrating or updating to any version, to make sure that your SQL database has no alerts or warnings or any kind. That could be an issue. Also, the path for the program needs to be excluded from the antivirus.

The solution is scalable. It can adapt based on your business, on workflow.

In our company, across all the IT teams, and we're talking about a three-tier system with network and onsite support, we have almost 50 to 60 people.

We may scale another ManageEngine solution in the future.

Technical support needs to be faster and more responsive. 

Neutral

We have used AD Manager and the AD Audit as well.

We had three people managing the deployment and maintenance aspects of the solution. 

We have seen a return on investment. We have seen how the users have grown in their IT background and knowledge. There is a return on investment in many aspects.

I can't speak to the exact cost of the solution. 

I'm using the current version of the solution. 

I would recommend users design the product very well at the outset. They have to make sure that the database is installed correctly, and the Windows server and the Windows server for SQL both should be on the current version and matched to avoid any troubles. This is very important.

I'd rate the solution seven out of ten.

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.

The product has been valuable and is working for us, looking from the angle of dealing with vendors, the AIOps space, as well as the SOC side of things. 

Cost-wise, we're quite happy. 

We engage with customers or vendors from Europe looking at AIOps products as well as SOC, and one downside to the solution is there are no native integrations between the systems. We're not even aware of any. This is a bit of a concern for us.

The problem I'm dealing with is now we have to employ people to do integration coding for us. We would love to have native integration between systems. ScienceLogic, Splunk, and Sumo Logic are three vendors we're considering currently, in a POC, for going forward with the AIOps side of things.

From the SIEM perspective, from the SOC, we're dealing with LogPoint; for SOAR purposes we're using inbound SOAR. None of these systems can natively integrate into ManageEngine. However, all of these systems can integrate into ServiceNow. If we consider the complications in our world, for integration purposes, and the amount of work that needs to be done for all these systems to talk to one another, that's definitely something. If ManageEngine can say, "we're going to help you with this," then we will most likely stick with the product.

ServiceNow can integrate, and there's a silent push towards ServiceNow, which I don't like because I'm quite keen on sticking with ME. ManageEngine should improve to help us to integrate the systems.

Then there's a customization level that needs to be done from our end, and it's quite a big concern. We're basically putting together all systems and software packages. 

I have been using the solution since we implemented it about a year and a half ago. We're still onboarding the rest of our clients. From an MSP perspective, we're managing multiple clients.

I would rate the solution a nine out of ten. There's no problem with the software. I'm happy with what we can do with the system. I think the biggest concern for my industry is really a case of integrations between outside parties.