Try our new research platform with insights from 80,000+ expert users

Hornbill Systems Supportworks vs JIRA Service Management comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive SummaryUpdated on Dec 29, 2025

Review summaries and opinions

We asked business professionals to review the solutions they use. Here are some excerpts of what they said:
 

Categories and Ranking

Hornbill Systems Supportworks
Ranking in Help Desk Software
36th
Ranking in IT Service Management (ITSM)
36th
Average Rating
7.0
Reviews Sentiment
6.8
Number of Reviews
2
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
JIRA Service Management
Ranking in Help Desk Software
2nd
Ranking in IT Service Management (ITSM)
2nd
Average Rating
8.2
Reviews Sentiment
6.8
Number of Reviews
88
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
 

Mindshare comparison

As of February 2026, in the IT Service Management (ITSM) category, the mindshare of Hornbill Systems Supportworks is 1.0%, up from 0.6% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of JIRA Service Management is 7.3%, down from 11.0% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
IT Service Management (ITSM) Market Share Distribution
ProductMarket Share (%)
JIRA Service Management7.3%
Hornbill Systems Supportworks1.0%
Other91.7%
IT Service Management (ITSM)
 

Featured Reviews

it_user1262703 - PeerSpot reviewer
Service Desk Team Leader at a healthcare company with 5,001-10,000 employees
Excels in call logging and call flows but is limited in terms of scalability
I'd advise others to map their processes out before starting with the solution. Hornbill has recently generated a new version of its product and it meets some of the requirements that we would have been looking for. It's a bit more scalable, a bit more responsive to a customer-focused model for support, and they've improved a lot of things like process flow and self-service. In terms of rating the solution, it's difficult to grade. It really depends on the size of the organization that's trying to use it as that tool. One of the reasons why we're looking to shift is because we've grown quite a bit over the years that we've had it, which makes it difficult for it to meet our demands. However, for an organization the size of what we were when we started our journey with it, I'd rate it ten out of ten. Where we are now, with our company size and needs, I'd rate it six out of ten.
Sohaib Ahmad - PeerSpot reviewer
Vice President Service Delivery at quixel
Comprehensive workflows and data views have supported complex teams but still need cost improvements
JIRA Service Management is costly. The pricing structure needs improvement. When I add some plugins, I have to pay the cost for every user whether they are using it or not. For smaller companies, the detailed workflow editing and the kind of details that JIRA Service Management provides would be complex. For startups and smaller companies, JIRA Service Management would be complex. The cloud offering is easier because I don't have to manage the infrastructure. There are two templates of the project: company-managed and team-managed. Team-managed is a newer feature, which is good for startup-kind companies where they don't need control over data from multiple projects displaying in one dashboard. For startups, JIRA Service Management is somewhat complex with its schemes and everything. Capacity management should be improved in terms of additional features in the next release of JIRA Service Management.

Quotes from Members

We asked business professionals to review the solutions they use. Here are some excerpts of what they said:
 

Pros

"The solution's business process flow is quite strong. Its reporting is quite good. The standard, basic ITSM functionality like call logging and call flow, for example, are areas the solution really excels in."
"The initial setup is pretty easy."
"Customizations are most valuable. The customization of workflows is the main power of the Atlassian tools in general."
"This is the most complete and versatile enterprise task management product and issue tracker."
"We use JIRA Service Management for tracking purposes, planning, and execution."
"The dashboards are nicely laid out."
"Automation capabilities allow for automatic ticket creation using monitoring tools."
"One of the main advantages of JIRA is that it can be customized for our solutions. I live in Iran and we translated some parts of it into Persian and customized it with extra features. We hid other features to customize it right to the point. We provide this solution for our customers."
"JIRA Service Management is a very user-friendly solution."
 

Cons

"It's worked well for us for a significant period of time. However, we are kind-of outgrowing it at the moment. We're struggling a bit with making it meet our requirements."
"We faced challenges with integration for different frameworks like TestComplete."
"Generally requires the purchase of additional plugins."
"In general, JIRA has no relation to customers or financials. Therefore, marketplace add-ons are needed to make it work for customer-facing systems."
"The price is a point of contention for me. It does overall work out as a significant amount of money that will be spent over a shorter period of time."
"The solution should be more formalized. It could be more user-friendly."
"Currently lacks an asset management module that can affect deployment."
"Jira Service Management could improve by offering more control similar to Monday.com, such as easier automations, file addition, and sharing with different people."
"The interface could be made easier to use. While it is not the worst, there is still room for improvement."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"Our organization pays about $40,000 annually. There are ongoing consultancy costs and if we want to change anything, we're charged a day rate. Other than that, there are no other extra costs involved in working with the solution."
"The price of the solution is becoming expensive and it should be reduced."
"We may upgrade the license that we have. The license that we currently have is good for 500 agents, and it's not full yet."
"The cost has recently increased. It might be around $20 to $25 per user license."
"I rate Service Management four out of 10 for affordability. The price could be better, especially for companies using more than one Atlassian product. It's suitable for SMBs that can afford it. I don't think there's another tool that's both better and cheaper. All help desk tools are relatively expensive."
"Jira Service Management has affordable license fees. It's $12 a month per person."
"I am using the free version, but my clients are paying for it. When they start, they evaluate it for 30 days, and after seeing the value, they move to its paid version."
"Costs are about $50 per user per year. JIRA is sold in user tiers of 25, 50, 100, 250, 500, 2000, 10,000, and unlimited users. It is bad when you have 51 users then the price is based on that 100 user tier. Users at 100 will be the most cost effective."
"We need a license because we have a higher number than the free part."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which IT Service Management (ITSM) solutions are best for your needs.
881,384 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
No data available
Financial Services Firm
9%
Computer Software Company
9%
Manufacturing Company
9%
Educational Organization
7%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
No data available
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business30
Midsize Enterprise24
Large Enterprise33
 

Also Known As

Supportworks
JIRA Service Desk, Atlassian Jira Service Management
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Aylesbury Vale District Council
mgm technology partners, Telestream, Build.com, Zend Technologies, OfficeDrop, PGS Software, American Diabetes Association, NEPTUNE Canada
Find out what your peers are saying about Hornbill Systems Supportworks vs. JIRA Service Management and other solutions. Updated: January 2026.
881,384 professionals have used our research since 2012.