Yammer Reviews

We use it for communication and collaboration on specific topics.

Yammer is an enterprise social software. We have it in our company for five years, but it is not well socialized. A few people in our company use it. We are using Microsoft Teams more.
It is a product that is fading away for us. We may or may not use it in the future.

The user interface and the way we can share and search information are the most valuable. It is very easy to use. 

The way you want to control the communication could be an issue. It depends on what kind of company you are. We are a public company, and there are some regulations that we need to comply with. Its ease of use can be an issue for a company because anybody can subscribe and use it.

There are many competitors that are overlapping. Since Microsoft bought Yammer, it tends to be in the shadow. It is not put in the front from the service perspective.

I have been using Yammer for five years.

It is stable.

It is scalable.

We didn't have to contact them for support. We had a call with them from a security standpoint to see if they can improve the way to control communication with external companies.

The initial setup was straightforward.

I don't know about the pricing. Now that Microsoft has bought Yammer, it should be a part of our subscriptions for Office 365.

I would recommend this solution if it fits the purpose. It is a great tool, but you need to look at whether it overlaps with other tools. 

I would rate Yammer a seven out of ten.

We use the solution for organizational communication.

Its most valuable features are the storyline and communities.

The solution's feature for sharing could be better.

We have been using the solution for one and a half years.

It is a stable solution.

We have approximately 1,50,000 solution users in our organization. I rate its scalability an eight out of ten.

We have the solution deployed on the cloud as well as on-premises.

Our IT team takes care of the solution's maintenance.

The solution's cost is included in the license bundle for Microsoft.

Compared to Facebook, the solution displays fewer advertisements.

I recommend the solution to others and rate it a seven out of ten. It has good UI and UX features.

I just wanted to try out the program to know what it was and how it works and if it could enhance our office communications.  

I do not see the point of the product, and I do not like it to be honest. For example, one thing which I do not like overall with Microsoft products is that they are constantly changing them. The issue with that is that most of the updates and features which they are pressing users to adopt are not good or just not wanted or needed by the customers using the products.  

As an example, we did an email migration. Some of our users had contacts that were linked with the Outlook linking feature. This is a newer feature in Outlook, and nobody wanted it in the first place. It just made things confusing by adding unwanted information automatically, and a new feature does not need to be confusing. It shoul be tested first, it should be optional, and the current software trend is to do public beta testing. One person in our company had something like 30 linked contacts — emails and full phone numbers which were not his actually his own contacts. In the migration, these contacts all showed up as his.  

Microsoft has too many updates and they are updates that are not wanted. I could understand if updates were discussed or features are wanted, but Microsoft just throws things out there. In this case, they actually rolled back the feature some time after releasiung it. That should not be necessary and it just makes for further confusion. I think I am actually saying nothing new here, but lately almost every update which is coming out has some bugs or stops something else from working. Sometimes it is a driver problem, sometimes it is something else. But the frequency of the rollouts just increases the frequency of the bugs. It is not the best plan for software management.  

I would say the whole experience was negative, so that is why we stopped using it.  

We used the product recently for a short period of time less than a year ago.  

We did not use it long enough to really do testing and evaluation of the stability.  

It is enterprise software and was meant to be scalable. We never got to the point of rolling it out for the company.  

I have contacted technical support and it was okay but not very helpful. Many times the support people can not actually do anything. If I call about a problem with a feature or a bug, they can not fix it over the phone. So yeah, maybe they are trying their best and they are polite, but if you call about an actual problem rather than how to use a feature, they can not really be of much help. The support guys were great, but the issue is that they are not magicians.  

The initial setup was straight-forward. We were able to set it up on and we did it by ourselves.  

On a scale from one to ten where one is the worst and ten is the best, I would rate Microsoft Yammer as a four-out-of-ten. It was probably not useless, but it was of no help for our company and our situation.   

We primarily use the solution for the social sharing of announcements, pictures, and articles related to our sector, among other things.

The most valuable aspect of the solution is that anyone can post anything. It's free and people can do it on their own. They don't have to translate to publish. 

It's really easy to use the solution.

Because we are in Belgium, we have two languages and the program is only in one language. It could have been interesting to have it in both French and in Dutch. 

We tried to integrate into SharePoint, but it was not really efficient.

The solution is stable.

The solution is scalable, We had no problem scaling it. We have about 300 users right now.

Technical support is okay. I don't think we've had to contact them a lot.

As I recall, the initial setup was easy. It's very straightforward. We have two people handling maintenance currently.

We use the cloud deployment model.

I've heard people say that we have lots of tools for doing things that are quite similar to Yammer. People in our organization don't really understand if they have to go on SharePoint, the internet, or Yammer. My advice to others would be to inform people how to use the tools and the purpose of these tools and give their team training. 

I'd rate the solution seven out of ten.

I primarily use the solution for business related chatting. We use it mainly to publish and to have social communications on the business side. On a business level, it's used for the internal team to publish their opinions or their ideas, and share them to the group.

The design of the solution is its most valuable feature.

Yammer shall not stay an independent non integrated service and shall not duplicate what team and outlook services do - it can be the heart of outlook conversations / publishing

The solution is stable.

I've found Team or Skype for Business are more useful than Yammer.

I'd rate the solution three out of ten.

I did not find Yammer too useful for my type of business. You cannot sell a Ferrari to someone who does not drive very fast, for example, as they would give Ferrari a low rating because they aren't using as it's meant to be used. For my type of business, I need something to be more flexible on integration. I'm not on the marketing side and do not need to publish something on Yammer for everyone to see, or for everyone to share their opinion on. 

If Yammer were to have more integration, the product might be more useful for me. I'd probably rate it at a nine or ten in that case. However, for me, in terms of helping my type of business, it's not ideal and I'm rating it rather low.

The integration with Teams is the biggest value for us. In fact, it has only become more valuable now that it has integration with Teams. Teams allows you to stream, so that's good.

The solution must be able to stream by itself, without integration, the same way that you are able to do it on Facebook Live, Instagram, etc. Streaming must be embedded into it.

The ability to just be live, I think is very important. You don't want to leave the app to go live. You want to be able to just go live within the app. So I think that their internet streaming ability would be a very good feature to add.

I'll give it a six out of ten because I'm comparing it to what's out there. It's not the best solution out there. It doesn't compare well to the new tools that are in the market. It's not the best, but it's getting there.

We are system integrators, and we use this solution in our group for social networking.

The most valuable feature of this solution is the communication events. We can set up meetings and events. 

I would like to see secure communication channels for our group.

This solution needs to be integrated with the Microsoft Cloud.

This solution would be improved if it was well integrated with other communication applications.

We have a lot of applications for communication, including WhatsApp, Facebook, and Instagram. In the future, I think that we need to have only one application for communication.

I would rate this solution a seven out of ten.

Primary use is for workgroups. We already have some in place. Yammer is quite good.

Users can access their own workgroups and it improves the communication among people, particularly people who have the same task to perform in different locations, in different countries.

The integration with Microsoft Office and the fact that it is in the cloud. Also, it's quite easy to use.

I would like to see a fancier user interface. That is one of the weak points of Yammer.

I haven't had any complaints from users about the availability of the system.

Scalability is good. The only point of concern we have is that you need to be registered in Active Directory, and that can limit usage. But apart from that, I think that we can grow with no particular issues.

As far as I know, we have not had any requests for support. We are able to manage it internally. I don't have any open requests for external support. However, I'm not the person who manages it.

We didn't use any workgroup tool before Yammer. We adopted Yammer because it was included in the Office 365 toolset.

Our most important criteria when selecting a vendor, apart from the product being easy to use, accessible, cloud-based, include security - that is another big and important criterion for us - and, finally, the ability to reach people who are not in our Active Directory domain.

The initial setup was not that easy because of managing the tenant in Office 365. The migration to that tenant for countries that are not in the same domain was not easy, the domain synchronization. Managing the forest of different domains was not as simple as expected.

Specifically, my search was related to a tool for employees to communicate to all employees; not really for work-grouping, but more related to one-way communication, top-down, from the HR people to the employees. The point is how to reach people which are not IT or IS users. Not all our employees are IT users and we need to communicate with them through their own devices, typically their smartphones.

Yammer and Facebook were the only choices on our shortlist.

Look closely at the Office 365 context you are in, and be sure that the accessibility or the availability of the system will be spread as much as possible throughout the organization.

I would rate Yammer at eight out of 10 because it's good, it works, it's reasonably easy to use. But, again, the weak point would be that the user interface is not as fancy as people are used to having, like when using social networks. It is less social network-oriented than Facebook, for instance, in terms of ease of use and user interface. And again, there is the point that users need to be in the Acting Directory to exploit the features.