Freshservice Reviews

We're using the product for an HR service center.

We had a historical kind of email-based contact center. What it's allowed us to do is bring everyone in our department into the journey of customer experience and customer service. When you're just dealing with Outlook and mailboxes, those are typically only limited to certain teams. This allows us to scale. It allows us to scale and engage other people that may be required to help support a ticket. We may need a certain level of expertise or help from a subsidiary area, allowing us to bring them into the conversation much more quickly without losing sight of the ticket or the customer. You don't get lost in multiple emails. You can, essentially, manage everything off an initial inquiry.

We really like the Freshchat widget that allows people to engage with our FAQs on any kind of webpage or web property. We really like that. 

We really like the auto-routing. 

The rules-based automation that they've got built into auto triage and auto disseminate to the right groups. 

We really like the auto-responses, as well. 

Their dashboard and their ability to follow the history of the ticket to see who's all engaged is very useful. It allows us to see who's engaged with it.

Their analytics need improvement.

Some of their integration could be better as well. 

Maybe this might be new in some of their newer versions. However, the chat should be an inherent part and shouldn't be a separate module.

The way they run their service portal, it would be nice if you didn't require users to log in. If they could go to a login agnostic model and be able to, using AI, auto triage and recognize if somebody submitted a ticket before, they should be able to do that in an automated fashion. They shouldn't force users to log in anymore.

I've been using the solution for about two years. 

We've had no issues with stability or downtime at all.

The solution can scale well. 

We have a couple of different deployments. In our specific deployment that I'm attached to, we would have about 40 users.

We have seen growth inside of our organization. We're not the only team that uses it. There's a second team, and they're much larger. They have about 150 users.

We've seen other scaled deployments for other purposes because of the success we've seen with Fresh. Will we see more growth in our specific HR area? Probably not. We're a small HR shop.

They're not very good at technical support.

Neutral

I've used some of the Oracle products, like RightNow. I've had some ServiceNow utilization, as well.

The initial setup wasn't easy or difficult. It was kind of in the middle. There's a lot of configuration you can do on your own. There is some stuff where you've got to involve your IT department. Overall,  that's what I like about Fresh compared to something like ServiceNow. It's pretty lightweight. It's pretty scalable and has a much simpler ease of implementation.

It requires very little maintenance. Maybe we had one person attached to it. However, it wasn't a full-time job for them. We don't have to have an in-house Fresh technical expert. It's pretty easy to figure out.

We did it in-house with some of the initial onboarding direct from Fresh.

We have seen an ROI.

I'm not sure of the exact cost. I recall it being pretty small. 

When considering options,  I looked at Oracle again. We were looking at ServiceNow and Fresh, and we decided to go with Fresh, at least for short to medium term.

I don't know what version we are using, however, in terms of what modules we're using, we're using Freshservice and Freshchat.

Like anything, the tool doesn't fix your service issues. It can help, however, you got to have the right philosophical mindset and your process fundamentals in place because the tool isn't always your silver bullet. 

In terms of your process and your philosophy, I find doing an implementation like Fresh should get you in that mindset. The other piece of advice I would give people contemplating this is, for example, where I love dashboards and data, and Fresh doesn't do the best job in this space. It's not implementation and done. There's always fine-tuning required, and there's always room for improvement. That's where it's important to look at your data, look at your utilization, and always go back and challenge some of your concepts once it's implemented.

I'd rate the solution eight out of ten.

We use it for our case management solution, knowledge-based repository, and for service delivery case management as well.

I like that a lot of integrations are available with third parties. Another one would be ease of use. It's very handy and very easy to use.

The change management feature of Freshservice is very useful, handy, and easy to adapt to your needs. We use it for all of our change management.

It has an AI add-on called Freddy, and it's really good. It's really pretty good for what it is meant to do. There are improvement areas for it. 

For instance, it has a feature for analyzing similar cases, but you cannot give feedback to let it know which case is indeed similar or which is not. But for what it is meant to do, it does a pretty well job.

There are requirements, not only from our side but from different users worldwide. I work with some community groups worldwide, and we have been placing several requests. 

So, there are a few areas of improvement for this solution, like enhancing reporting for project management, which is also a feature it has, and some others.

We work on a daily basis with Freshservice from Freshworks.

We have been using it for almost four years. Three years on the app.

So far, we have not had any issues with stability. It works pretty well.

The scalability of this solution is very impressive. You can increase the usage, data types, and other stuff. So, it's very handy.

The support is great.

Positive

Other solutions we use include Zoom and HCL Domino. That's our daily use. We, of course, work with Microsoft Office and other stuff, but those are the main ones we work with on a daily basis.

The complexity of the initial setup depends on your needs. It can be complex, but more than complex, it's long. It's a long process. It could be pretty straightforward, but it can be long. 

So, depending on your internal needs, it might turn out to be complex. It took us four months to deploy it, from the very beginning to the end.

It is very resourceful. It has a lot of resources. In order to maintain it, there is a very vibrant and active community that I work with. So that makes maintenance easy. They have several support options for maintaining it. So, it's very simple to maintain. 

I subcontracted a third party, a partner, to implement it.

The return on investment is good. 

We're on the pro model and the pro license. 

It is kinda expensive. There are several licensing options. We don't use the higher license model, which is very, very expensive. So, there are three options, but they are limited, as with many solutions. But the full, complete solution is very pricey.

Overall, I would rate it an eight out of ten. There are a few improvement areas, but it is pretty good. Again, we use it on a daily basis. We love what it does, but there is always room for improvement.

It's a major lead to work with the IT architecture.

The admin feature is the UI, so it's very clean. The asset management and its model are valuable as well.

Day by day, they keep on adding more features which are making the application very slow. We're we're facing some slowness. For example, the analytics part takes a very long time to load.

The chat portal is not that great. It would be good if they could enhance the chat portal, and give us some options to customize it. 

I have been using Freshservice for three years.

We have faced some stability issues, which were fixed by the actual service team pretty quickly. I rate the stability a seven out of ten. 

It is a scalable solution. Presently, twenty thousand users are using the solution. 

The technical support team is very good. 

Positive

We were using Zendesk, then we evaluated other service desk applications. Freshservice is really easy to use, and it has some of the code features that we wanted, and that is why we chose it.

The initial setup is straightforward. Our main implementation strategy was to kind of move our existing agents and existing users as well as migrate almost four hundred thousand tickets to the platform. First, we created all the different fields. We imported all the users and mapped them to the correct queue. I provided access to the agents in different groups. After that, we migrated our tickets. It took almost two weeks to migrate everything and set up.

The integration was done in-house. 

We have seen a return on investment.

The pricing is reasonable.

I recommend the solution. I rate the overall solution an eight out of ten. 

I was mainly using it for the functionality related to changes, such as tracking and reporting production changes going into our live systems. I also used it for APIs for the automatic generation of changes based on triggers from Jira.

In terms of deployment, I'm pretty sure it was SaaS, and in terms of version, it would've been a fairly recent version because they'd only been using it for about a year or so.

It has a very easy, flexible model. You can open up a particular module and work on the next. That's what we did. Overall, it provides a simple way of getting your support teams up and running. That was one thing that I thought was quite easy to do.

We were able to automate a lot of internal processes, such as onboarding of new users via forms, which had integrated notifications. It was really easy to do. Form management was very good. That was probably the main benefit. The automation of the support calls was the other part from which we got a lot of benefit.

On the changes side, I found the workflow network quite easy to set up. I didn't need a lot of hand-holding in that. I didn't have to go through training as such. The flows were pretty basic to set up, which made it fairly simple.

The additional fields that were required for our change process were easy to set up. I was able to get it up and running pretty quickly. I was working as the head of the project management team. I got a few of the guys onto that, and then we rolled it out.

We did an evaluation of the project functionality. That was a fairly new area they were launching. It was fairly underwhelming, but they were gradually building out this area. That was one area where I felt they still have a long way to go. We did a review of our project management tool internally within the company, and it was one of the choices, but it didn't match up anywhere close to any of the other tools we were considering. It wasn't a good match.

On the reporting side, when we were doing reporting, one thing that was a bit of a limitation was when you had a data list containing a list of changes that have occurred for the whole time and you had to fit the list onto a page. If the list went over the page, it would just truncate it at the page. You wouldn't get all your data. So, it didn't work. That was one big stand-out for me. What we tended to do was convert things into a more readable format, and then we had more targeted exception reporting, but it would be nice to have a full list of things that could be automatically generated and that can flow over pages.

In terms of additional features, their strategy is quite good in that they incrementally change things. They must be using some sort of agile methodology. They tend to be doing these little releases along the way, and then they say, "Oh, we've got this new feature." I would definitely encourage them in that area. It is working for them. So, on the project side, being able to easily add risks and issues and more complex dependencies were probably the key areas in the project space where I saw that they let themselves down, but it was just a burgeoning area that they were launching into. It was just part of their initial offering. The plans for the future were still fine.

I used it in my previous role at another organization. I was there working on Freshservice for about seven months, and I was working with it a few times a week in various capacities. The last I worked with it would be in February.

I didn't see any real issues with it. I was there for about nine months, and I might have seen two outages in that time. I also didn't see any performance issues coming through on that.

Scalability didn't seem to be an issue. It was probably about working out the best licensing model. We had some administrative people, and we had users as well. For Freshservice, we had about 150 users.

I didn't have a direct connection to Freshservice's support itself. I used to go to our local support. Our IT help desk was the first line of support, and then they would contact the Freshservice desk if needed.

I was involved in the changes area. The base of Freshservice was already in place, and that was being managed by our support manager. So, the initial setup for me was around the changes area. It came out of the box and then it involved deciding whether or not we add additional fields. We added the additional fields that we required, and then gradually, we would check out the workflow and then say, "Okay, we want to have an approval step here." We'd then add an approval step. So, we incrementally worked on it as we saw it and then tested it all the way through, and when we were ready, we made it available for a sample group. We could then test it out.

We didn't do it as a big bang approach. It tended to be segregated to a particular system area, and then we rolled it out to other areas after that. That seemed to be a good strategy for us.

In terms of duration, for the changes piece, we had a working prototype within about six weeks, and that included documenting how we wanted it to run. If I had to look at just the configuration time, it probably took about four weeks to work through configurations. That was pretty quick for the changes side. 

For the APIs, it was probably a similar duration. There was a bit of requirements gathering and working out. We had trigger conditions where we wanted to trigger a workflow so that it automatically creates a change based on a trigger condition within Jira. The longer part was just setting up the base integration. The actual configuration with the actual tool was probably of the order of two to four weeks.

In the initial base setup, there was just me and another person. When it came to the rollout, we were up to about six different project managers, and there were a couple of integration people. There were probably 10 people all up. 

We also had API integration. We worked with an integrating company to do that. 

In terms of maintenance, there are definitely patches that come through all the time, but that tended to be managed through the support area. I wouldn't have as much visibility on that side.

It was a middle tier. It wasn't an expensive one. 

It was a tier model usage. Licensing costs varied between admin users and regular users.

ServiceNow was one. It was a much more comprehensive solution as compared to Freshservice, but it was also more expensive. ServiceNow is definitely more robust in terms of features, but Freshservice has a much better ability to configure. It is very flexible that way, from my experience.

Being a smaller company, we tended to keep fairly tight on cost. We didn't really want to spend a lot of money. My understanding was that ServiceNow was much more expensive, but I wasn't close to the details. Freshservice was considered to be about right for what they wanted to pay. It was in the middle of the range in terms of the subscription cost.

I would recommend it if you're looking for a really quick way of getting your help desk up and running with a ticketing system and some pretty cool automation with emails, notifications, etc. It is easy to set up and maintain, and it is reasonably priced for what it is.

I would rate it a seven out of ten. It is a solid product. It doesn't do everything that ServiceNow does, which is my only comparison point, but it definitely has good features for the price.

We use the solution primarily for ITSM, but also in the capacity of ESM. It incorporates ITIL elements such as changes, problems, asset management, and ticketing, which is the main concept in use.

The solution facilitates a transition from an organizational structure that is function-based to a process-oriented approach. This improves efficiency in ticket routing and eliminates the need for extensive triage.

The most valuable features include ticket routing, automation in triage, data control, and flat licensing. It allows for customization and offers a broad feature set.

I experienced some delay in response time for non-function critical queries. Moreover, there's limited experience with the CMDB or asset management features.

We implemented the solution approximately four years ago.

I have not had any real experience scaling with this solution.

The customer service is satisfactory, though there might be delays in response for non-critical issues.

Neutral

We compared this solution with others in terms of feature comparison, licensing, and scalability.

The initial setup is very easy, especially if the external components and organizational structure are pre-defined.

The solution offers flat licensing and appears to be cost-effective.

We evaluated Halo and compared it for feature capabilities and customization.

None of my personal information should be published, and my comments should remain anonymous under GDPR regulations.

I'd rate the solution eight out of ten.

At my previous organization, we had an alliance partnership with Freshservice. Part of that alliance involved me implementing Freshservice for North American and Europe clients. Freshservice is an ITSM product. The PLC would be done by the thresholds and as part of the alliance, and we would implement the Freshservice ITSM solution for the clients. It's completely based on the customer requirements, which modules need to be implemented. We will do the data collection, the requirement gathering, et cetera, and we will do the solution and implementation for the Freshservice to cater to the client's needs. As part of this, we'll do the infra, we'll do automation, orchestration, and everything as part of this integration with multiple sources. We'll do the portfolio management.

We like that the product is a SaaS-based service. You can just register and within five to minute minutes, you are ready to go.

It's very intuitive. It's not complex or anything. Anyone with some IT knowledge, IT service management knowledge, can just spin up an instance within the cloud and register for an instance. He can just go through configurations very easily. 

Maximum, within a week, if you have a basic ITL, if you have good technical instance, you can spin up an instance with a basic idea of some incident management for these catalogs.

The product itself comes at 60% to 70% configuration. It's already done for you. Out of the box, there are around 40 plus service catalogs available. You simply need to customize your requirements. The product is loaded with all the features you need.

At the moment, they are adding a lot of functionality to the product. It is beginning to mature. 

This product is very good for small and mid-level markets. However, I'm not sure about the enterprise level. I'm not sure about expanding to a 100,000 to 200,000 user base or more. 

We'd like to see a CMDB, a Configuration Management Database, in the future. 

I used the solution about six months ago at my previous company.

The solution is in the cloud and very stable. there are no bugs or glitches. 

The scalability may be limited. I'm not sure it can handle enterprise-level deployments. 

I've done implementations for up to 2,000 users. 

The users are unlimited. The licensing is based on how many agents and end users you have; there is no limit.

There will be a team managing the tickets. They are mainly on the service desk or customer support. As an end user, you will be raising a ticket and I'll be looking at the ticket. If I need to log into the system and look at the ticket, I need a license. It's based on that agent licensing.

Once you log into an instance, there is always chat support available. You can also email them. they are very easy to get a hold of. 

Neutral

The initial setup is very easy. It's a SaaS product. You just sign up and get going within ten to 15 minutes. 

The licensing is based on how many agents you have or need to manage tickets.

The licensing can be based on a monthly or yearly renewal.

Different payment options are available.

The pricing is available on their website. The pricing plans and everything is available. The cost is completely based on which plan you choose, as there are around four categories. The cost is completely based on the features the company must have.

I was a customer and end-user.

It's a SaaS product. The product is continuously evolving and growing, although I'm not sure how well it would benefit an enterprise-level organization. However, in general, it's good. It's a really agile platform. 

We cater to small and medium-sized clients, and this solution is perfect for us.

I'd rate the solution eight out of ten.

We are using Freshservice for IT service management.

The workflow and the change management process are valuable.

Freshservice automation capabilities are improving the way we respond to a few customers. There is a bit of delay when we must respond to the customer.

I have been using Freshservice for five to six years.

The product is stable. I rate it a nine out of ten.

500-1000 users are using this solution. I rate the solution's scalability a nine out of ten.

Support is quite good.

The initial setup is easy and takes two months to complete. I rate it a ten out of ten.

We have achieved ROI in 12 months.

The solution's pricing is reasonable.

There are different tiers or plans for product selection, so we can simply choose from a list of suitable products. This way, we avoid bundling features we do not necessarily need and do not have to pay for features we will not use.

Freshservice is feasible to implement. A third-party consultant is not necessarily required. The customer service is also quite intuitive and easy to set up. Upon onboarding, the team's productivity increases within three months.

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

Our company uses the solution to provide service desk assistance to clients. 

One use case is with a client in the insurance industry. Customers who have issues with their insurance send emails for assistance that are routed to us through the solution. We created five support group classifications to address particular insurance issues.

We currently use Azure servers only for connection and to authenticate Office 365 mailboxes. For now, we do not link the solution with Azure's products.

Our company's productivity has improved. 

The solution is very responsive with a 97% success rate in funneling customer tickets. 

A chat bot needs to be added to the portal.

Only one channel is available on the portal for service tickets. We would prefer one channel for tickets and one channel for chat support via a popup that is accessed from smartphones. Other products such as ServiceNow allow two channels. 

The solution has bugs with language translations. For example, our company translated the portal to French but some items remained in English.

I have been using the solution for one year. 

The solution is stable. 

The solution is scalable for users. We currently have 2,000 users and 150 agents who provide service. We utilize PowerShell when creating users and groups because it simplifies the task. 

Scaling to unlock cross-group or other features requires a pack upgrade. 

The technical support staff are responsive and reactive. 

We contacted support when we were having issues with language translation to French. They responded quickly and corrected the bug that was causing some phrases to remain in English. 

I rate support an eight out of ten. 

Positive

We previously used Microsoft's SCSM that is the part of SCCM used for managing tickets. After we were attacked by ransomware, we decided to migrate to the solution. 

The initial setup and implementation are easy. 

It took us a month to create various catalogs of service for our client and fully deploy. 

I installed the solution with assistance from a coworker. 

A team of seven technicians provide ongoing maintenance such as adding users or groups. 

The solution has an annual licensing model.

The standard pack is currently orchestrating 2% of our tenants. Our goal is to use the solution to manage all orchestrations but that requires a bigger budget. 

We also have to upgrade to gain access to cross-group or other features.

Pricing is rated a six out of ten. 

We evaluated the solution, ServiceNow, and a third product. After meeting with a manager at Freshservice, we decided it was the best solution for our needs. 

We purchased the solution's standard pack but it does have limitations. For example, we created five groups to match particular service levels. But, users in group one cannot see group two's tickets unless they are a member of group two. 

This is problematic for our insurance client because tickets for children need to be linked to tickets for parents, even though they are are not in the same service group as individuals. Cross-group features are not available unless we upgrade from the standard pack. 

Environments that require two cloud channels might fare better with ServiceNow. 

The solution is easy to deploy even with no prior experience. The portal is simple to use and customize.

The standard pack provides a good starting place for managing client services. 

I rate the solution a seven out of ten.