JIRA Service Management Reviews

We are a management warehouse that provides services to different customers in different sectors. Primarily, we serve the banking sector and the military sector. We manage all the software delivery projects through tools such as JIRA Service Management or TFS.

Confluence is a great tool for documentation and tracking. Additionally, Bitbucket is essential for controlling the source code. JIRA itself is valuable for managing tickets, user stories, and pipeline. The integration between different tools provided by Atlassian products is also significant.

The licensing model could be improved. There needs to be a different licensing model for large numbers of employees, as it remains one of the main barriers to using JIRA Service Management across our entire company.

I have been using JIRA Service Management for more than 15 years.

JIRA Service Management is generally stable. I did not face any issues with its stability.

The scalability is rated eight out of ten. It is quite scalable for our company environment.

I have contacted Atlassian support maybe once or twice, and the support was good.

Positive

We are also using TFS for several projects. TFS is good, however, it lacks the ecosystem found in Atlassian products.

The initial setup is not difficult. Since we are using the cloud version, there are no issues with the installation. On a scale from one to ten, it's rated as an eight for ease.

While JIRA Service Management saves time, direct cost savings are challenging due to licensing fees. Currently, it costs around $150 to $200 per user, a significant expense, especially given the large number of employees.

We evaluated TFS before using JIRA Service Management. It is also good, however, we prefer the Atlassian ecosystem.

I recommend JIRA Service Management and rate it eight out of ten.

We use it primarily for test case management and raising bugs. It is a centralized tool that we use to track test cases, integrate with automation, and manage bug fixing.

The most valuable feature of Jira is that it is free of cost, which is a significant advantage. Bug raising is easy, and integration with other tools is straightforward. 

The centralized feature allows us to track test cases and integrate with automation and bug fixing.

We faced challenges with integration for different frameworks like TestComplete. The support we received was not fully provided at that time. The free version of Jira does not have many features. AI features for integration, test case scheduling, and requirement management could be enhanced.

We have been using it for two to three years.

In the initial period, only 25 team members were using it, and it worked for us without requiring changes.

The support provided at that time was not fully sufficient.

We used Team Foundation Server, now known as DevOps, after we stopped using Jira due to the availability of licenses and the needs of our clients.

We used Jira's free version for some time, and we used it as an offline service without communicating with the Jira team regarding the license.

I'd rate the solution six out of ten.

I use the solution in my company as it is a good project management tool.

The tool's ticketing is very good. It uses an agile methodology for delegating tickets, workload, reports, and tracking.

The product does not allow customization of reports. Only specific out-of-the-box reports are available, so you cannot customize reports very easily, which is a drawback. It is meant for some complex environments, making it a tool that is not easy to use. You need to get a minimum amount of training on the system to be able to use the product.

I have been using JIRA Service Management for seven years. I am a user of the solution.

The tool's stability is very good.

The product is scalable only if you purchase the premium license for the tool.

The solution's technical support is good. I rate the technical support a nine out of ten.

Positive

The product's initial setup phase is complex since it cannot be managed without vendor support.

For deployment, the packages are not readily available for download. One has to purchase the license to be able to use the product, making the complex process for which support should be made available from JIRA Service Management's team.

The solution can be deployed in less than an hour by one person.

Vendor support is required to take care of the product's deployment.

In terms of the tool's ROI, I feel everything is good. With the use of the tool, one can save a lot of manpower and time.

It is a cheaply priced product.

The automation capabilities of the product are limited. You cannot integrate with each and everything. Within NetSuite and Confluence, JIRA Service Management's integration capabilities are easy to manage, but with some other tools, it can get complex.

The product is not easy to integrate with other tools.

It is easy to integrate the product with the AI part. AI helps with tracking purposes, management purposes, reports, and project execution. The tool is used a lot, making it a very useful product.

My company uses JIRA Service Management to collaborate with Confluence.

I believe it is a complete package and one of the best project management tools in the market.

I rate the solution a nine out of ten.

We use JIRA for user support, specifically first-level user support. 

Additionally, we use it to plan project steps. With the Carbon dashboard, it is possible to break the project into multiple steps. You can review what is done, what is set to be done, and what has been completed during the predefined time slots. For ITSM processes, we primarily use it for access processes. 

We also utilize its automation capabilities, such as automatically creating JIRA tickets from monitoring tools during batch execution errors.

JIRA allows us to easily monitor what the team is doing and which subjects team members are working on. The dashboard feature enables us to see task statuses and facilitates task management through drag-and-drop functionality. This has improved our productivity by making it easier to track tasks and team activities.

The most valuable feature compared to JPS is that JIRA is focused on user support and project management. It is easy to communicate with end users through the application, and for specific tasks, it's possible to break them into smaller tasks and link them together. Features like the dashboard and drag-and-drop functionality for updating task statuses make it user-friendly. 

The ability to create a Deep Bucket branch or link tasks from JIRA to another JIRA is also beneficial. Automation capabilities allow for automatic ticket creation using monitoring tools.

It would be beneficial if we could turn comments into subtasks or other JIRA tickets directly. If this feature could be added, it would enhance the user experience.

I have been working with JIRA and ServiceNow for the past three years.

In our environment, JIRA is very stable. We have different JIRA instances for testing, and with our architecture, the application remains stable except during major changes or updates. Daily operations are smooth and fluent.

As an end user, I find it difficult to comment on scalability. However, our dedicated deployment team manages the architectural aspects to ensure scalability.

I have not had any interaction with JIRA's technical support, so I cannot comment on their customer service.

Positive

Previously, I worked with GLPI for about six years before switching. I stopped using GLPI because I changed jobs and moved to a position that uses JIRA and ServiceNow.

From my point of view, as an end user, the initial setup was slightly challenging due to the new user interface compared to GLPI. However, over time, it became more user-friendly, and I discovered many good options.

A dedicated team focuses on maintaining the JIRA infrastructure. When new options are needed, they evaluate and include them, making the experience better for end users.

We have seen improvements in productivity since it is easier to understand team activities and task statuses through the JIRA dashboard. Comparing task management features, JIRA significantly outperforms GLPI.

I do not have information about the pricing or licensing cost of JIRA. The last time I checked, there was a cloud version available for subscription.

For a small enterprise or team, GLPI may be a suitable option due to its free version. However, for a larger, more stable, and highly improved solution, I would recommend JIRA. I'd rate the solution eight out of ten.

We use Jira Service Management (JSM) to manage tickets. 

It enables us to track, monitor, and manage user requests from initiation to resolution. We use it for the end-to-end process. We can add comments, and close requests., so our primary use case for JSM is ticketing. 

The interface is good and easy to use. We can track, monitor, and get all the details we need from the end-user's point of view for any service request.

The search function could be improved. We have to search a certain way. There is no generic search, it is more object-oriented search. The interface could also be more user-friendly. 

So, the interface and search could be improved.

Additionally, I would like to see more accessibility. It would also be great if there was a Jira mobile app.

We have been using JSM for more than two years. We have gained extensive experience with the tool during this time.

It is a stable solution. I would rate the stability a nine out of ten. 

It is in the cloud, so it is a scalable solution. I would rate the scalability an eight out of ten. It is very scalable. 

Currently, it is being used by the entire organization, but for my team, we have around 10 to 20 people who use it regularly. In total, around 50 users have access to it.

It is available, but we haven't had to use it much. We have been able to solve most of our issues on our own.

However, since it is a German-based product, there may be geographic issues with ticket routing.

They could improve it by providing support specific to the geographic location. They could also make 24/7 support available based on the availability of the support center.

Positive

We have used a few other Service Desk tools, but they are not at Jira's level.

Jira is a better tool to capture end-to-end details, which provides more visibility than the other tools.

It's easy to deploy because it's a cloud-based model. There is no on-premises deployment required if you are using the SaaS model.

If you use the SaaS model, the maintenance is taken care of by the SaaS provider.

It is one of the premium products on the market, but it is very costly, especially in the Indian market. Smaller organizations cannot afford it.

We pay monthly licensing costs. We only have to pay for the subscription model that we choose.

Overall, I would rate the solution an eight out of ten. It is a good tool, but it is expensive. However, it does provide the information needed to make good decisions about operational development and performance. It provides good visibility, but it is also very expensive.

We are using Jira Service Management along with a series of other tools. We use it primarily for developing our knowledge management and for scaling our service-level agreements management. 

There are two things that I value very much about this product. One is the service levels management – the SLA agreement management part of it – and knowledge management.

The other part that I haven't used as much, but I do value, is the reporting and analytics part of it.

When looking at the overall suite of tools, I know there's a problem with the administration side of things since I have never come across a person who I would say is an expert in the administration side of things.

Some Jira products, or particularly this one, have a duplication of entries problem. That needs to be sanitized on a regular basis and that can itself prove cumbersome if the administrator is not a subject matter expert. 

The training manuals, patches, and release notes could be improved to be a bit more accessible. In the next release, this product should improve on the educational side to include webinars and training sessions. 

Also, I would like something that can measure better performance output.

We're looking to use it more, particularly in the context of incident management and problem resolution. However, we're finding that, like everything else, there are always challenges with every tool. We've had to look at getting more training done because it's quite a steep curve for people who haven't used the solution. It's only a handful of us that have actually really been exposed to the Jira suite of tools, and we're gradually taking our time with it.

The vendor, who is no longer in business, negated to tell us that the total cost of ownership was going to be quite steep. So normally you have tools where the total cost of ownership over a period of time, means it pays for itself either in terms of how you use it or in terms of how you implement it if you're servicing other third-party clients. However, because of the pandemic, our total cost of ownership has become a bit longer and it's taking more time to get to speed with how to get to use the tool, and how to get it customized in a particular manner. And then, over a period of time, we still have to "decide whether it is the most suitable in terms of a service management tools."

I have been using Jira Service Management Service for a couple of years. It falls under the Atlassian suite, so I have used the actual project management tool for over 10 years. Over a period of time, we've graduated within the entity to use other aspects of Jira Service Management, particularly within the context of its ITSM capabilities, which is IT Service Management, just for being explicit. But it provides us with a lot of aspects relating to incident management. From a chain management perspective, it's allowed us to get an insight into how to better plan and improve our decision-making process.

When it comes to the stability of this solution, I would rate it a six, on a scale from one to 10, with one being the worst and 10 being the best. 

I would rate the scalability of this solution a five, on a scale from one to 10, with one being the worst and 10 being the best. I think in terms of what it offers from a scalable point of view, it's not too cumbersome. There are times when it looks as if it's quite complex.

I would rate their technical support a six, on a scale from one to 10, with one being the worst and 10 being the best.

Neutral

I would rate the initial setup process a four, on a scale from one to 10, with one being the worst and 10 being the best. The reason for this mark is that it's a challenging process and it's very time-consuming and it requires dedicated resources for the setup.

We implemented this solution in-house.

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. We are having to review what we are paying for the solution now, which means that we are probably putting out too much money for it.

At this point in time, we've accepted the hit and it's going to be a huge investment in terms of time and resources. We can't do anything about that now. We're going to have to make the best due of what we have for now. 

I believe, right now, we are averaging between 250 and 500 users a month, whereas we started off with something around $50 a month.

I would rate this solution's pricing model a seven, on a scale from one to 10, with one being the worst and 10 being the best. This rating was done through a comparison of other tools like ServiceNow. ServiceNow was more expensive which is why we moved away from that solution.

Overall, I would rate the JIRA Service Management solution a six, on a scale from one to 10, where one is the worst and 10 is the best.

We upload the tasks for the team, working with them, and they know the status of the tasks.

It helps with time management and team management of the new tasks.

The status of the tasks and the ability to assign any task to any person are valuable features.

It should be easier to log in. When I first tried to log into Jira, I faced issues accessing my company account.

I've been working with Jira Service Management for the same duration as Wazoo, which is about three months.

I would rate the stability a nine out of ten.

All of the teams in the company love Jira. 

I didn’t need to call customer support.

Positive

I didn't work with other log management tools before, but I know some information about platforms like Splunk, IBM QRadar, and others.

For Jira, the setup is good. It is an eight out of ten.

I was not involved in the implementation.

I did research about platforms like LogRhythm, Splunk, and IBM QRadar.

I recommend Jira Service Management. It helps with time management and team management of the new tasks.

I would rate it a nine out of ten.

We are not using the systems we have at Jira, however, we are using the Jira environment of a client known as Electrify America. We are serving Electrify America and using their environment for managing tickets.

Apart from ticket management and workflow, the Kanban board is one of the helpful tools in Jira.

There should be some AI integrations now as AI is in the picture. One should have some risk analysis done and auto code analysis done on the ticket.

I have been working with Jira Service Management for almost three years now.

There are not really any issues. It is pretty much easier to use.

Scalability is good. I can rate it as eight out of ten.

My leads have reached out to customer support.

Positive

I have used ServiceNow. It depends on the clients. Some clients use ServiceNow, so we have to use it.

I have never dealt with the initial setup as it is done by the client side.

My lead handles the deployment.

I have had experience with ServiceNow.

Users should use the end-to-end tools related to project management. It is very useful in project management.

I'd rate the solution nine out of ten.