ManageEngine ServiceDesk Plus Reviews

We use this solution for our help desk, and for change management.

This solution has provided a way to manage request tracking and resolution.

The most valuable feature is the tracking of service requests.

Improvement is needed in the Software Assets Management functionality.

Our primary use case for ManageEngine ServiceDesk Plus is to service our internal employees with in our company. We're continually optimizing this solution.

This solution has helped a lot by freeing up valuable time, allowing the IT personnel to work on other more critical areas, key projects, and perform their fundamental job requirements on time without interruption.

The most valuable features are the ticketing system and ticket handling features. I place a lot of value in our solutions centers. The solutions center functions as a troubleshooting hub as well as a problem-solving assistant. Finally, the remote desktop support service is of great value as they are very prompt and efficient.

When I think of improvements the first thing that comes to mind would have to be the active management function. I have encountered some bugs with this aspect of the tool. I wouldn't necessarily identify these issues as bugs, they're more like processes issues associated with the scanning assets; the process could be improved.

The solution is quite stable. No issues so far. In reference to the downtime, we're hosting on our client's premises.

The only thing I would change regarding the scalability would have to be the capacity. We need to use a different database to manage more than 1,000 employees.

Technical support has been very good. They respond on the same day, and if the issue persists they are agile and responsive in their dealings concerning ongoing support. For example, they offer remote assistance; they can debug the issue remotely. 

We didn't have a previous solution. Before this, we used traditional email messaging and placing phone calls. When our user base increased significantly we started to think about investing in ticketing, or a service desk management solution.

We evaluated other providers. We had a short list which included SysAid, and Freshservice. 

I rate this solution a solid 7.5 out of ten since the tool comes with different modules. Albeit some of these modules, including exit management module, need some improvements. But regarding the ticketing as a stand-alone, it's pretty good. But the other modules need improvement.

I recommend this tool for anyone thinking of implementing enterprise IT management software for their service management, operations management, active directory, and security needs. The tool offers the ability to manage different employee groups along with the option of providing other services for different company structures.

Our primary use case for this product is providing technical support for our platform. This solution allows us to create the support tickets and forward them to different technical groups for resolution.

This product helps us with tracking customer queries, and managing the issues effectively. The auto-routing feature saves a lot of effort, where we used to spend a lot of time manually assigning things. Automatic tracking of the SLAs has also helped us become more efficient.

I have found several features to be quite valuable. The first is the support ticket auto-routing mechanism, where we are able to create business rules that are used to automatically assign the ticket to one of our predefined groups.

Another feature I find valuable is the SLA calculating, where the product is able to apply different rules based on the SLA. You can create your own SLA definitions.

The third feature that I find very useful is the solutions module, where you can create a knowledge base. It is quite helpful when the agent is taking the information directly from the end user. Using this feature, we are able to increase the percentage of cases where the customer can be helped during their initial call.

The main thing that I find lacking in the product is the ability to do custom reporting. They have canned reports, but apart from that, I am unable to define my own reports based on my needs. It requires a lot of external customization.

I would also like to see better integration with external software. It is possible, but it is tough. The APIs are not very flexible, so you really have to write a lot of code to create that integration. Opening it up for external integration would allow for easier customization of the existing autobox workflows. It would help with the user's perception.

One final issue, on the topic of business rules, is that more can be implemented. I have seen CRM systems over the past twenty years that can do much more than this. For example, you should be able to customize your workflow completely. I would like to draw my own workflow and go with that. Also, I would like to be able to write a custom feature and include it in the workflow. These things are missing from the product.

I would rate the stability of this solution to be very good.

This is a product that will scale up to, a mid-sized organization. I would say one with less than around three or four thousand items, but not more than that.

In terms of the entire architecture, I find it not so robust. It starts misbehaving after approximately five or six hundred concurrent connections. In particular, it demands a huge amount of CPU usage, as well as the other resources.

I found the initial setup to be straightforward and very simple. I would say that anybody who has a little bit of software knowledge, in terms of application installation, could take care of it without worry.

The cost of licensing is approximately ten dollars per suite, per month. When scaling up, there are a lot of other expenses such as infrastructure, the telecommunication companies, etc.

An annual maintenance contract is available for an extra cost. There are also consulting services available.  

We considered several solutions including Zendesk, Freshdesk, Freshservice, and ServiceNow. The main advantage we saw in this solution is the auto-routing feature, which was not common at this price point. The product was ranked among the top in the ranking list, and it was also one of the most stable ones when we selected it. Essentially, it had all of the features that we were looking for, which is why we chose it.

In general, it is important that the product quality is in line with the current trends in the industry, and cost-effectiveness is essential.

This is a cost-effective product that meets all of the required, basic needs for the company. The workflow for the ticketing system and the service management systems work well. Apart from that, more customizable workflows, better integration, increased robustness of the knowledge base, and more flexible integration gateways would improve the product.

I would rate this solution six out of ten.

We have a toll free number for our company, customers call us and ask about their problem. We issue the ticket to the customer as well as our local internal team. Then after the team tickets the number and the particular client coded up. We resolve the issue and after the issue is resolved we close the ticket. This is our main mode of operation. When we go through the audit, the company requires that all of these tickets require the solution. That's why we use this application. Mainly for auditing purposes for this application.

The main benefit we see is in the performance appraisals. This is a benefit for our engineers and our team. We then take up a particular engine to see how long they take. The performance is what the solution provides.

We improve day by day with this solution. Initially, mistakes took four hours time, now they can be completed in one to two hours. This is an improvement. We look at the performance, how long tickets will be opened for, after that how long it takes to close the tickets. This is the main focus for how we are working to provide the best services to our clients. This is the main feature of this application.

The most valuable features are project management, change management, and the flow according to the mail chain. 

They could improve the screens. 

I would rate this solution a nine out of ten. 

I am enjoying the report features, they are quite good.

I expected more features than it has. The flexibility is missing. I was also expecting a different level of configuration and segregation. 

Stability is actually good.

It is scalable, but sometimes there are performance issues.

Technical support is quite good but they are not very quick to respond. It takes time to resolve the ticket.

I was not involved personally with the initial setup but from what I hear, it is not complex.

I was not involved with this part of the decision process.

ServiceDesk Plus is good to support internal IT help desk systems, external customer support systems, and request management within the company. 

ServiceDesk Plus manages all our requests, both internal and external requests, for not only ticketing but also users' requests. We started by using the free version (limited technicians), and now we use the professional edition with the asset management functions.

• Request management
• SLAs
• Business site

We not only handle tickets, but also requests from many departments. All are easy to manage.

For ITIL functions, it should be more complex, including financial functions. We are expecting it to be easier for customization within workflows and templates.

no

We handle a lot of users, and it's still stable

easy to contact

We used open source ticketing, with limitation and need to enhance, so we migrate to servicedesk plus

no, very simple

inhouse team

2 years

we implement the on premise servicedesk plus because it's affordable

We install and implement ServiceDesk Plus for various industries, starting from common enterprises up to IT companies running data center services. They are happy to use SDP, even the standard version, with Service Catalog add-ons.

ServiceDesk Plus with Service Catalog and Project Management add-ons are a good place to start for companies wanting to use it. 

Service Catalog and Project Management are awesome features. Customers love them because they are easy to use, simple to install, and we set them up quickly too.

People ask to implement the product not only for their IT help desk, as we do that, but also for HR and general affairs, allowing them to use SDP for their services.

No issues.

No issues.

Some customer used LANDESK solutions, but since the reporting function was too complicated, they switched to ServiceDesk Plus.

The initial setup is very simple.

Two years.

The prices are attractive. Customer can use a subscription if they do not have enough budget.

It has resulted in a positive experience to integrate ICT project management to our IT business reality so we value the following features:

• ITIL integration
• main ITIL processes on real application
• easy to use and customize
• initial deployment and additional customization with reliable logical application
• consistently sufficient on results and data management
• possible to adapt to our business reality
• purchase order control
• parametrization and business rules allow personalized customization of this module for great control
• integration to third party applications for monitoring and reporting
• no bugs or blocks in SQL integration
• fundamental for our environment
• versatile, powerful, and simple administration
• project management integration

We had outsourced most of our IT services and to have this application as support together with the benefits of full control for implementing service delivery, gave us the confidence to implement a CSI from the very beginning.

Request management is not clearly separated form incident management and the conditions to customize this are tricky and unique for our organization.

We have been using the solution for four years.

We have had only one small stability issue which was corrected with an update.

Growing with the tool from zero cases to reach almost 1000 cases in a relatively short time, having no issues, reflects our good experience with this product.

I would rate the technical support at 8/10. Some questions were dealt with centrally and it has not been necessary to contact the local support for additional services, apart from common queries and questions.

We used Cherwell and CA Service Desk previously, through an outsourcing company.

Implementation was a bit heavy in terms of customization, but based on a well-structured ITIL process, it was a manageable import. Integration to SCCM and AD made the integration to our IT environment easier.

It is cost effective and well balanced in terms of benefit.

We evaluated Cherwell, CA Help Desk and Atlassian Service Desk.

Give them the chance to implement a demo and put in a short practice and you will see how easy and effective the solution is.