Zendesk Reviews

One of our use cases of Zendesk Guide is to create a knowledge base. We also use it to host our videos and PDFs for customers. With Zendesk Guide, we have the Multibrand solution that we are leveraging, and we are creating multiple health centers, customized for each of our clients. 

We are working with the SaaS version of this solution. 

One of the benefits we have seen from Zendesk is that it's very easy to use. Once you have figured out the basic modalities, it's very easy to use and very easy to segregate your content between different headings. The navigation is very robust, which enables us to really see the entire health center. At the same time, it can let you go in a granular manner to a piece. It lets me break down my articles into multiple, small chunks of information. Recently, they introduced something called article reuse—I can write the article in one location, and then put it in different locations in the same health center, but only have to maintain that one article in terms of actually updating it. The content reuse feature is a very smart thing to have. 

One of the most valuable features is that Zendesk gives you a lot of configurability, and a lot of leeway in terms of customizing the look and theme. Zendesk offers you the facility to design your own landing page, as well as the look and feel of the entire knowledge base. At the same time, they offer themes that you can simply purchase and implement. Either way, it can really be turned into the right look and feel of the knowledge base required by our company, which is very important—if you have a bland-looking page, most of the time, people will lose interest. Zendesk also allows you to test the customizations before you publish it. It gives you a sandbox location where you can test everything new that you're trying to create and publish, which is very interesting. 

Another valuable feature is the security, which is very robust. The JWT and the SSO give us peace of mind, knowing that our content is secure and that nobody else can access it. They have tie-ups with various video platforms, so we can host our videos there, and then we can just add the code here once. Then, when the video changes, we don't have to update the code—it happens seamlessly. 

I could go on and on. Another valuable feature is that we can customize user access for content. In Zendesk Guide, we have various levels of approval which the content can go through before it is released. We can actually set the release date for particular content in the future, so that we don't have to keep track of it, and it automatically gets released then. Also, the labeling feature enables us to conduct very smart searches. 

Zendesk Guide could be improved by allowing us to put our assets in one location. What happens now for each article, for example, is we have to upload the images for that article to that location, so the image reuse is still not something that they have perfected. If they could allow us to update all the images in one location, and then pull the image from there, it would be easier when working on Multibrand projects. There are no Multibrand updates available—we have to update each brand manually. For my company, I have come up with an API tool which allows me to push the content to multiple brands together, but if you don't have something like that, you have to manually do it. 

They're still evolving, and though I feel like there is a lot that they can improve on, I am seeing ongoing improvement. Another improvement they could make is in regard to article editing. When you edit an article, the facilities provided aren't customizable. They could make it customizable and let the user choose their own font for headings and the paragraph, the number of headings they want, and just let us do a little bit more. When you add an image, even the resizing of the image is manual—they could provide an image resizing tool, to let us pick the size of the image, and make the process easier. 

As for additional features, I have noticed that Zendesk is concentrating more on the suite: messaging services, chatbot, etc. However, what they don't seem to realize is that most of their customers are using Zendesk for the knowledge base. They need to make the features within the knowledge base a little more robust. We are also looking for some enhancements. For example, I wanted a PDF download facility, but I just had to code it internally because Zendesk has an app, but you need to buy it and plug it in. 

I have been working with Zendesk Guide for almost three years. 

The stability and performance have been perfect. We have not had a single day of downtime, to date. 

As far as I've seen, this product doesn't require any maintenance. They are pretty smart about deploying new products, letting people know that it's all in there, and since it's a SaaS product, we don't have to handle manual updates. 

This solution is pretty easy to scale. You can put a lot of data in there—it doesn't seem to affect it at all. However, in terms of Multibrand, you have to make the updates manually. There is no feature to push to update to all the health centers. 

We are a six-people team, and we all work with Zendesk Guide. As far as usage, we have over 1,000 customers who are accessing Zendesk Guide, and we have more than 12 health centers that we have deployed. 

I have been in contact with Zendesk support. They have different levels with different levels of support. We are an Enterprise level, the highest that they have, so we have something called 24/7 online chat support. If we have a question, we are connected with a live agent, and they help us resolve our issue. The support is okay—I haven't had any issues. 

Before using Zendesk Guide, I was working with Confluence for almost a full year. Confluence makes it much easier for me to import a Word document and convert it into an article, whereas Zendesk doesn't allow you to do that very easily. It will ask you to upload it to Google Drive, and then from there you can import it. This isn't something most companies will allow, since Google Drive is not a very secure site to upload your confidential data. Downloading a PDF was also much easier in Confluence—I could just go there, click, select "PDF", and the entire case would get exported as a PDF. With Zendesk, in order to convert any section, article, or category into a PDF, you will either have to buy their app or do your own in-house coding. 

The setup process was pretty straightforward, and they have a very smart way of doing it. They have something called a brand, so we just go there, key our credentials, generate the certificate, merge it, and then we take that code and put it in our software, and it goes live. So the merging of Zendesk's health center is a pretty simple process. As the documentation writer, I was involved in the process, and we had our IT team handle the connection. In total, the process took about 24 hours. 

Zendesk's licensing is not cheap. For Enterprise, we are paying $200 per agent. It's a per-month cost, so it's pretty steep. There are some services you need to pay extra for. For example, with Zendesk Guide, we had to buy the most expensive offering in order to get Multibrand and everything. We also had to pay a lot of money for themes. 

Compared to this, Confluence doesn't work out very cheap either, but then Confluence is a game of numbers—if you have a lot of people in your company and you're planning to buy it for everybody, then even the documentation team can leverage that. 

To those considering implementing this solution, I would say Zendesk Guide could be suitable for your company if you're planning to leverage all its features: the ticketing, talking to customers, using the chatbot, etc. It makes more sense when you are using it as a comprehensive sellout product. If you are only using it for the knowledge base, it may not be the best product. 

I rate Zendesk Guide an eight out of ten. If I were rating it only as a knowledge base, I would rate it a seven and a half out of ten. 

Our primary use case of Zendesk Guide is for care and use instructions, or for web shop instructions. We use it to provide basic knowledge about how eCommerce products work—for example, "How do I cancel an order?"—as well as for contact forms, like registrations of warranty. It's not standard, but you can build several contact forms for one brand. A use case we are building now is for storing product pages and information so that our support team can sell products that are not on the web shop. We also use it for information about the company and we link it with the live chat so that we can share articles on the Zendesk Guide directly into the live chat, which is a great help to customers. 

We have 23 brands, which means we have to develop 23 Zendesk Guides, all in different languages. I'm pretty sure this solution is cloud-based because we don't store anything into our system. 

One of the most valuable features is the ease of use. If you take the standalone product, it is so easy to use, but if you want a tailor-made Zendesk Guide, you can't do it yourself. However, you can use a template that already exists—they have a lot, and they're very cheap, around 300-400 euros—and use it on all your brands. It's a very easy product to use. 

Zendesk Guide's customization could be improved. I would like it to be easier and maybe open-sourced, so that if you have a developer in your company, you can do it yourself. Right now, that isn't allowed, so you need to have it done via the integrator. Another improvement—this is nit-picking—is that it could be less easy to make changes. Some things are so easy that they sometimes look a little amateur-ish. Most of the templates are built-in so they can be used directly, so they are very simple. 

An additional feature I would like to see is an option to pay more for a more refined template.

We have been using Zendesk Guide for the last year. We acquired Zendesk three years ago, and we started to develop Zendesk Guide when we outsourced the customer service.

There are about six people involved with Zendesk Guide in my organization. We have plans to increase our usage. 

The tech support is very good, and was provided by the integrator himself. They know this solution a lot better than we do, and I have no complaints. 

Our company didn't previously use a similar solution. We used to build it ourselves on our website, but it was very disappointing. 

The installation is very easy. There's nothing to do because once you pay for the license, it's effective. For the first one, it took us about two to three weeks to totally set up and deliver, because we used an existing template. 

The integrator will set you up in the beginning, and then give you the key to upload everything. For deployment, I would say you need a team of three: the integrator, project manager, and operations—someone who is going to fill everything in. 

We had an integrator help us with implementation in the beginning. 

We receive less questions from customers, so this is a big win for our support. 

Zendesk Guide is linked to your Zendesk license, so there are no additional costs. 

I rate Zendesk Guide an eight out of ten, but I would never give a ten out of ten anyway. It's a very good product for the price you pay. 

To those considering implementation, I would advise you to draw up your plan before you buy the solution. 

We use Zendesk in multiple ways. We use it as a ticketing system for our reporting requests that come in for HR reporting. We also use Zendesk as a kind of workspace. 

We receive requests all across the enterprise, not just from HR employees. So, we work through that with the customer within Zendesk, and we communicate back and forth with them through the tickets. We also communicate with each other. We have a triage person who assigns a ticket to an analyst to complete the ticket. We get requests for a list of names, term dates, or something else, and we assign it to someone on our team, and then that person will create that report and send it to the person.

We use Zendesk as a kind of workspace. We've put up education around HR reporting in terms of what's available and who can have access to what within the Zendesk workspace within T-Mobile.

It is very easy to connect back and forth between the requester and the person fulfilling the ticket.

One of the drawbacks of Zendesk is that it doesn't provide a secure way for us to send data. So, we usually use a secure SharePoint folder link. We put that in the Zendesk ticket so that the requester has a secure way of getting to their data. 

I've dabbled a little bit in the reporting features, and it seems like they're a little bit limited, but it might be because of how we have it set up. It might be how we're configuring it or because we're not buying the higher-level reporting system for it.

I have been using this solution for three years.

It was pretty straightforward, but I'm not the one who configured it. Basically, there is a site to which you're given access, and you go through how to use it.

I would give it a seven out of 10.

We primarily use the solution for customer-facing tickets.

The solution is a kind of standard SaaS support for our customers when they have technical issues. Usually, they'll generate the ticket, sometimes they are not sure and may contact me as the main point of contact for our partnership. I'll generate the ticket with them CC'd on it. Then our support team takes it from there. Sometimes there's an additional contact that the customer may have provided and I'll add those in. We use the Slack integration with Zendesk Support. I'll usually add the additional context via the Slack integration, so it's added to Zendesk.

It's just offers really good collaboration flow between the customer success team that I'm on and the support team they're on. We obviously have a lot of back and forth sometimes, especially with our larger customers and more complex situations that we need to kind of go back and forth on.

I always find myself exclusively on Slack using Zendesk. I really enjoy the Slack integration. I don't think I've ever been the actual interface for Zendesk. Our support team of course lives in the Zendesk interface every day. I kind of just use the Slack integration. 

The stability is very good.

The initial setup is simple and straightforward.

An area of opportunity for Zendesk is probably just when there's a long email chain and everything gets forwarded to support, I know it can be time consuming for them to extract the important information from the email chain. Sometimes if there was a way to just flag the actual issue out of those email chains - that would be really helpful.

It's just so time consuming, especially trying to find attachments too. I think it'd be good to have just one place, "Here's all the attachments and the 24 emails that's been sent in this chain."

It's hard to say what needs improvement being someone who usually does the communication was Zendesk in Slack rather than the actual interface. However, on the customer success side, it would be really, really helpful if I can somehow categorize all these Zendesk tickets by customers, so that I can see all the outstanding support tickets. That way, the status is in one place for that customer. Right now I really have to check by ticket number. 

We use Pendo, which is another complete different software, however, they have something called NPS scores. I just do a quick search in Slack for the customer's name. Then I see all the NPS scores out of the search results. If I put in the customer name, it's just kind of not associate on the account level in this solution.

It's my understanding that we have been using the solution for about a year and a half.

The stability of the solution is excellent. It doesn't crash or freeze. there are no bugs or glitches to speak of. Its performance has been reliable and very good overall.

The scalability capability seems pretty straightforward. I can't speak to how the support team is using it, to be honest. I can't speak to if they actually have attempted to scale it in any meaningful way just yet.

Our support and customer success teams are the main users of the product. We have about 15 people in total on the solution at any given time.

We also use Jira internally. We also use Pendo.

I was not involved in thte initial setup of the solution. I can't speak to how straightforward or difficult the process was.

We are customers and end-users of the solution.

We are using the current version of the solution.

I would rate the solution at an eight out of ten. It works really well. It's very seamless, and is very good software. Just from the customer success side, based on what I do, I would just like a more centralized account organization kind of feature.

I'm in support and I'm using it basically for incident management and things like that.

It's very convenient to use. 

We can add the time, including the time it takes for a particular incident ticket to be resolved. It's convenient that we can add the time taken for each incident ticket. It helps illustrate how long issues take to resolve.

The solution is quite fast.

It is quite a stable product overall.

Zendesk used to have a whole reporting tool, which they have actually terminated. That has been a small blow for us, however, it used to be a feature where they had that tool that allowed you to just have reports on the go, on the fly. They should bring this feature back. 

They have something called Zendesk Explore, which isn't as good as what they had in place previously. The reporting and analytics part should be improved even more. The effort taken from the user side to configure the reports is a bit more when it's compared to the solution that was there earlier. 

I've been using the solution for about one year or so at this point. It's been only a short while.

We've found the solution to be very, very stable. It doesn't crash or freeze. There are no bugs or glitches. It's quite good.

I used to use TOPdesk. We switched to Zendesk. Now we are comparing the two to see which we'd prefer. Some of my colleagues are still using TOPdesk, however, I am exclusively on Zendesk.

I'm actually currently working on a comparison between this solution and TOPdesk. I'm also looking at Jira Service Management, however, I don't know if it is the best out there or not.

We are just customers and end-users. We aren't partners with Zendesk and we don't have a business relationship with them.

I'd rate the solution at an eight out of ten. Largely, we have been happy with its capabilities.

I'd recommend the solution, especially if a company is considering a choice between this and TOPdesk. TOPdesk is somewhat inferior and Zendesk is a better choice. 

We are in support. Zendesk is being used by the IT group help desk and also by our team. We are an internal team that supports SharePoint, Salesforce and Tableau. So we use it for tickets for customers' issues. And then of course I see folks use it for the help desk for everyone else internally.

In terms of the most valuable features, we like the SLA options and the reporting feature because it runs a report.

Additionally, it has good management, the ability to sign tickets based on content, multi-channel support, the self-service portal, the integration with Salesforce, the setup process, and the product features as we are currently using them.

We go in there and we set up our requests for how we want it for each of our groups, meaning for the Salesforce team, and so forth. And then we change it accordingly, adding different features or attributes based on the need, and then run reports.

In terms of what could be improved, it was not easy to set up so we're only using a third of all of the features, and we wanted something that was easier to configure and set up. I asked my director how come we don't just keep Zendesk because it doesn't cost anything, we're already paying for the file. Why would we turn around and buy a Cadillac, like ServiceNow for IT? He said because we're only using some of the features. We don't have anyone who has the skill set to do the configuration. And the way the service model is with ServiceNow, we have a team that uses it in our organization. So we have the internal expertise instead of relying on a vendor for support.

I have been using Zendesk Guide for probably three years. I believe we've been on the Core Optimization package.

Zendesk has been very stable. Which is why I was trying to understand why we were switching. The director said that there are other features that we want that ServiceNow offers and Zendesk doesn't. So instead of me learning about the new features, he wanted to go with ServiceNow from an infrastructure standpoint.

We are a service IT company. We have Zendesk for our employees internally and for external folks, but it's just used internally and ServiceNow is being used as a practice for external customers. They are also using it at ProKarma. They have the means so that experts can set up whatever we need. The director made a decision to go over and start using ServiceNow internally instead of Zendesk. I think he was more interested in ServiceNow from a roadmap perspective.

In terms of scalability, that wasn't even something that we were considering, just that there were so many things that ServiceNow does that Zendesk doesn't from an IT infrastructure perspective. And we were looking at those features for future-state from the roadmap, security, asset management, and so forth.

We only have about 24 people interfacing with Zendesk. They are admin or developers. Then there's a few BA who are mostly either engineer support for the help desk IT or they  belong to one of those internal groups that we support, Salesforce developers, SharePoint developers, or Tableau developers and architects. These are the people who need to resolve the tickets when there's an issue.

Our IT director set it up. He said he has some basic things in there, a very simple workflow, an SLA, a change management, and I do a few reports. I have a couple of things where I set up the processes so that certain things get kicked back to IT to follow up on. But he said he set up something that was very simple and basic, and it's working for him. But he knew that there were more features that he should be using but he didn't know how to use them. And then we found out from the vendor that there were a lot of features that were grandfathered in and we're not even utilizing those features. At that point I think he made a decision that from an infrastructure perspective there are other features that he wanted that ServiceNow provides that Zendesk doesn't. I think it was more on the infrastructure and security sides.

We are still in a contract with Zendesk until the end of the year. And then they will make the decision whether to switch or extend the contract. So nothing has been done at this point. 

It took less than three months to set up, maybe about eight weeks.

I don't know about the deployment because they haven't made any significant changes. All I know is it took about eight weeks to create the processes and the flows that we currently have.

We did the implementation and maybe used some internal resources to set it up.

The licensing is yearly and it's less than 30 grand, I believe. We had a lot of things that were grandfathered in, so we were using a lot of things - Zendesk Guide Professional, Zendesk Explore Professional, Zendesk Gather Professional and Zendesk Sunshine Lite. All of these things are not being leveraged today. So it looks like we were just using Zendesk Support Enterprise, and the vendor was sharing with us basically what we had and what we were using.

You really need to know how you are trying to service your customers to make a decision on whether or not to go with it. We were looking at three products, ServiceNow, Zendesk and Service Cloud. And you wanted the infrastructure component, the Cadillac version, right? All three different, too. That was another thing you really need to know - what are your requirements? What are your needs? And also look at your future roadmap. To me, those should have been the driving factors for making a decision. Just to clarify, those three solutions are the possible replacements if we decide to phase out the Zendesk Guide. We were looking at Service Cloud and I don't know if we made a decision on it because we are already using Salesforce.

They have a help desk for it, but it came with a cost where you had to pay for every user who actually wanted to use it. We have 3000 or 4000 employees. They also had some type of restricted user license and that can be very expensive if the company is growing. But that would be good. It would be something just to follow up on to find out with ServiceNow. 

The total cost of ownership was a significant differentiator for Zendesk. I thought they were very reasonable. ServiceNow is very expensive, and adding each component every time you want to add a module and you're taking a lot of money. And they still decided to go with it.

One of the things that they showed me in ServiceNow is that they have an asset management component. That was pretty cool. So when you assign a computer to someone, they actually had a picture and they basically had a little card. Anyway, it was easy to click on and set up. I thought that would have been nice if they had some type of asset management component. I think we were using Salesforce to do asset management. Anything that's related to the HelpDesk, where they're tracking your device, your phone, that kind of stuff. So, it would be nice if that was included.

To be honest with you, I thought Zendesk was a very good product. I didn't understand why we were moving to something else when we weren't using all of the features. Usually you use everything and then you outgrow that solution and look for a new solution. But to me that wasn't the case. So the biggest lesson for me was all three products. This is not an apple to apple comparison. You have to know what your requirements are and the roadmap, which is what I mentioned, but I didn't feel that Zendesk fell short at all. I felt management was making a decision without knowing what the future roadmap looked like. Meaning, when I say, "What do you want for the future?", "I don't know, but we are thinking about the infrastructure component" and then they decided to go off and do ServiceNow.

So I guess my lesson learned is to make sure your requirements and your future-state roadmap are all in alignment with your strategy. And I didn't feel that that was the case because I felt that they were making the decision without any ROI analysis to back it up. I'm being honest. That's how I felt. But I felt Zendesk didn't fall short. So what's the issue? And they just said, "We don't know how to do all of this stuff, and we already have an internal group that uses ServiceNow with the infrastructure components. So we're going to go with that product." I said, "it is going to cost a lot of money. They said they were okay with that. They thought that they could still bring down the cost based on their usage. And they went with it.

On a scale of one to ten, I would give Zendesk Guide a seven.

To make it a ten, they should offer some more teachers to compete with the other folks for Help Desk, and other components like asset management. That was another thing that Service Cloud does. It's totally different. I had a feature matrix that showed me those comparisons. There was something that Service Cloud does that makes them more integrated. There was an issue with integration between Salesforce and Zendesk, but the vendor said they fixed that issue and now the integration should work. So that was another concern about just integrating with the internal tool, making sure it's an easier API connector, making it easier to integrate with other tools.

We are in support. Zendesk is being used by the IT group help desk and also by our team. We are an internal team that supports SharePoint, Salesforce, and Tableau. We use it for tickets for customer issues. We also use it for a help desk for everyone else internally.

The product offers very good management. It has a great ability to assign tickets based on content.

There is multi-channel support and a self-service portal.

The product integrates well with Salesforce. 

The product features as we were currently using them are fantastic.

The solution offers a very good SLA. 

We concerned with and want to understand more about the change management features of the solution.

The solution itself wasn't easy to set up. 

We're only using a third of all of the features, and we wanted something that was more simple to configure and set up. We don't have anyone who has the skill set to do the configuration. On top of that, the way the service model is, we have a team that are practicing within our organization. We would like to have the expertise internally instead of relying on a vendor for support.

Anything that's related to the HelpDesk, where they're tracking, your device, your phone, that kind of stuff, would be nice if it was included.

The solution should offer API connections to make it easier to integrate between other solutions.

We've been dealing with the product for about three years at this point.

The solution has been very stable. IT's why I was curious as to why we were considering switching. However, apparently, there are other features that we want that ServiceNow offers and Zendesk doesn't offer. 

We didn't really talk about scalability previously. That wasn't even something that was considered as there were so many things that ServiceNow does that Zendesk doesn't from an IT infrastructure perspective. We're looking at those features for the future in terms of our roadmap, security, asset management, and so forth.

Currently, we have about 24 people on the solution. They are admins or developers, for the most part.

At this point, we don't intend to increase usage.

I've never been in touch with Zendesk technical support. I met with the vendor and they were very, very helpful. We were going to use one of them to expand on some of the features, however, we now have plans looking at something else.

We are a service IT company. We have Zendesk for our employees internally and ServiceNow being used as a practice for external customers. They also have a practice at ProKarma and they are using it. Now we are experts and can set up whatever we need. We're trying to decide between Zendesk and ServiceNow.

Our IT director set it up. He set up something that was very simple, and basic, and it's working for him. However, he knew that there were more features that he should be using, however, he didn't know how to use those features. Then we found out from the vendor, that there were a lot of features that were grandfathered in, and we're not even utilizing those either. At that point he made a decision that from an infrastructure standpoint, there are other features that he wanted that ServiceNow provides however, it was more on the infrastructure and security side. Therefore, we may be moving away from the product.

We are still in a contract with Zendesk until the end of the year. And then they will make the decision whether to switch or extend the contract. Nothing has been decided at this point.

The solution originally took less than three months to set up. If I recall correctly, deployment took about eight weeks. We don't have anyone assigned to regular maintenance.

We had the solution set up in house using our own resources. We didn't require any outside assistance.

I'm not sure if we can really point to an exact ROI, however, it would be a good item to watch in the future.

We pay for the solution on a yearly basis and my understanding is that the cost is about $30,000. That's the cost for 24 to 25 agents. There are no other fees. Many items were actually grandfathered in. We have Zendesk Guide Professional, Zendesk Explore Professional, Zendesk Gather Professional and Zendesk Sunshine Lite. All of these things are not being leveraged as of today. It looks like we were using just Zendesk Support Enterprise, and the vendor was sharing that with us.

We looked at Service Cloud. They have a help desk on it, however, it came with a cost. You had to pay for every user who actually wanted to use it. We have 3000 or 4000 employees. We would have to have some type of restricted user license. That can be very expensive if the company is growing. 

We're using the Core Optimization package. We also have Zendesk Explore Professional, even though we're not really using it as well as the Zendesk Sunshine Lite. I'm not sure of the exact versions of the solution we're using.

You really need to know how you are trying to service your customers to make a decision of whether or not to go with a particular solution. We were looking at three products. We were looking at ServiceNow, Zendesk, and also Service Cloud. You really need to know what are your requirements? What are your needs? And what your future roadmap? Those should have been the driving factors for making a decision.

Zendesk is a very good product. I didn't understand why we were moving to something else when we weren't using all of the features. Usually, you use everything and then you outgrow that solution and you're looking for a new solution. To me, that wasn't the case. 

Overall, I would rate the solution seven out of ten. I would give it higher marks if they were offering some more features like asset management or if they were more integrated like Service Cloud. 

We use Zendesk Support to receive customers' requests. So, we basically emanate me a customer and get a submit a request from our Zendesk. We just pick it up from Zendesk and respond to their requests. You can also receive chats through Zendesk. 

Overall, Zendesk works well for me. The icons here are not overwhelming, and I only need to contact support once a day. Then, once you receive a request, you'll get an immediate notification, and you can respond to the client right away. Additionally, on Zendesk, you can create different items to categorize requests from clients in different regions, such as the US or other areas. We should definitely support that.

Additionally, Zendesk has a profile and knowledge base. You can connect Zendesk from Notion as well because we use Notion too. Any information you type on Notion, you can easily bring it in on Zendesk, which is super, super cool. Then if you want to get more information about the client you're working on, you can get them on Zendesk, which is super cool.

I have a concern regarding the side conversations. Instead of creating a separate transcript, you can simply click on the side conversation tab to communicate with clients. It should be within the same interface. 

So when you respond, you can easily switch back to them without opening another ticket or creating additional back-and-forth conversations. It's more streamlined that way. It keeps everything organized and avoids cluttering the interface with multiple tickets for one conversation.

I have been using Zendesk Support for two years now.

There is always a network issue with Zendesk. But we don’t know whether it is managed. The network issue is that when I call, it does not let us. It could be from Zendesk, which I think they should work on.

I would rate the stability of Zendesk Support an eight out of ten.

It is a scalable solution. But for me, there is maybe some Slack thing, really for me. Slack becomes more than the same time. But all those decks, once you open Zendesk to attend to the customer’s request on the phone and all, and hence I would rate the scalability of Zendesk Support a nine out of ten.

Around 400 users who are using Zendesk Support in our organization. With Zendesk Support, you can also create the same Macro on Zendesk. The time you use to type in the calculator will take you more time. So it is better just to create a Macro instead of you wasting like five minutes typing.

Once you have already created the Macro, you can just send whatever response you want to decline if you are sure you know what the feedback really is. So I can resolve a customer request immediately.

The customer service and support experience were okay. When contacted, they respond really fast. I’ll give it to them on that angle. Once the network is down, within five or ten minutes, they will fix it.

Positive

For me, the initial setup for Zendesk was straightforward. It is not complex. 

I think the advice about Zendesk Support should be to use Zendesk essentially if you are in a customer support role. It is very important. Even if you are in pair with your customers onboarding, Zendesk is user-friendly. You can easily get the customer's request immediately to resolve and then create a Macro on Zendesk. We can import information from the Notion page to Zendesk, and you can even import and connect articles on Zendesk.

Overall, I would rate the solution a nine out of ten.