JIRA Service Management Reviews

ITIL Service Management - Multi National Service environment 

Interoperability of all the modules;

A unified view of work

Dev and Ops that flow

JIRA Service Management feature request List.

The products functionally is expanding rapidly, hence there is a huge backlog of Jira product feature requests that are focused on the detail functionality.

There is not enough effort focused on solving the detail functionality of Jira.

I have used JIRA Service Management for approximately three years.

I have found JIRA Service Management to be stable.

JIRA Service Management is scalable.

The technical support from JIRA Service Management has been responsive.

I've previously worked with a couple of similar solutions, such as ServiceDesk, HP OpenView, and Zendesk.

We have a complex environment, but the JIRA Service Management was quite simple to implement.

I price of JIRA Service Management is reasonable.

I would advise others that this solution is similar to any other service management solution. There's nothing out of the box, there is always a level of development that has to happen for it to work well.

I rate JIRA Service Management an eight out of ten.

I'm the vice president of digital strategy and executive delivery.

The solution is easy, even if you want to dock on something, it's easy to add the documentation and it easily integrates with other tools. I think that's the best part of it.

I think there are other IT ticketing tools that are better in terms of routing or work flows than Jira Service Desk. If you work at an enterprise size company, it might be preferable to use ServiceNow than Jira Service Desk which is better for smaller companies.

I'd like to see a well integrated solution. For example, if I wanted to do some testing, I don't want to have to buy another testing tool and integrate it with Jira. If Jira had a place for it to connect the requirements to the testing, that would be amazing.

I've used the solution for a long time but it was only implemented a few months ago at the company where I now work. 

The stability is good. 

The scalability of the solution is good. We have around 100 people using it, generally the business analysts or the program managers. Within that number, we have around 10 admins. 

I haven't really needed to use customer server, using the solution has been very easy so we haven't had much contact. They've been fine when we've used them. 

The initial setup is very straightforward. 

I would rate this solution an eight out of 10. 

We are using Service Management for the ticketing for our IT Help Desk. We are a government organization and I'm a senior manager.

We went with this product because the customer portal allows users to register tickets themselves.

Since we've moved to the cloud we've seen some improvement in foreign languages. What is lacking is the communication around these changes because we come across them almost by chance, and not because of any notification we've received. 

We've been using this solution for six months. 

The solution is very stable. 

The solution is scalable. We have currently deployed it to about 35 agents and it will be deployed to around 1200 customers. All of them deal with creating and resolving tickets.

I have no complaints with customer support. We contacted them a couple of times and even though the problem was at our end, they helped to resolve it satisfactorily. 

The initial setup was quite straightforward. We used two in-house people and one very helpful external consultant. We had about 15 half-day workshops with the consultant over a six-month period. We took our time and didn't work continuously on the implementation. 

Licensing costs are standard and can be seen on the Atlassian website. It's not an expensive solution. 

I would recommend that when deploying use an external consultant who has already used the product before. It makes things easier because they'll know what to do and, more importantly, what not to do. 

It's an ideal solution and I rate it 10 out of 10. 

The simplicity is good for our clients. The price is good. 

You can increase users without any difficulty. 

There should be better connections with access management. They should improve the connectivity. 

I have been using JIRA Service Desk since 2016.

It is very stable. Our clients don't have problems with stability. 

We do the technical support for our clients. 

I have worked with HP products, BMC Remedy, and Service Manager. 

Our customers think that the pricing is high. Compared to the competitors, I think the pricing is fair. 

I would rate JIRA Service Desk a seven out of ten. 

What I really like about this solution is how it manages the queues, the tickets, and the routing.

I think the solution has a lack of capabilities from the user's perspective. I would, for example, be able to see all the phases instead of only being able to create a ticket. I want to be familiar with all the steps and be able to change things during these steps. I would like to see that improved. 

What's more, we wanted to be resellers for this program, but it was denied, unfortunately. The claim of the developers was that they didn't need other resellers or partners. I think they made a mistake because we work with a lot of customers. So I think that needs to be improved because we sell and we are business partners of IBM and Microsoft, for example. But with Atlassian, it's very, very hard. 

The solution is very stable.

I don't think the program is very scalable. It lacks scaling capabilities from the performance perspective and load balancing and some other infrastructure capabilities. This is a real disadvantage if you compare it to other tools.

The technical support was average.

My advice to others would be to use the solution as is, and not to try to perform some sophisticated solutions. If it fits to your needs, take it. If not, use another solution. I rate this solution a seven out of ten, and in the future, I would like to see better infrastructure, more scalability, better performance, load balancing and things like that. 

We are using JIRA for accessing our help desk when other companies have problems with programs and to let them login when somebody needs to create a new ticket.  

I think that one of the most valuable features is when I am typing in my question for a ticket JIRA does a search for the answer at the same time. If it finds my answer, then I do not have to raise the ticket because I already found the answer in the knowledge base. This is good in saving time for customer service workers.  

For us, one of the weaknesses of Service Desk is that we can not check every issue in the queue raised for one product. If we have more than one customer using a product that has raised a ticket, we can not see the complete list of issues for the one product from all sources. It is not as easy or efficient to handle tickets without that capability.  

For this reason, we have an add-on administrative tool that we had to purchase separately for use with JIRA to help make the workflow more efficient. This could be added to the base product for all users.  

We have not been using the JIRA Service Desk for too long. We started doing our testing which lasted for just a few weeks and then we sent out a notification to our clients to use it. It has been in use at the company for maybe less than one month.  

We have not had the product in use long enough to scale the usage upward from the volume of our current client base. I do not think it would be a problem.  

I think the initial setup for the product is easy. It is not too complex or time-consuming to set up.  

We are very satisfied with the pricing of the product. Because we are an associate partner it is free for us.  

On a scale from one to ten where one is the worst and ten is the best, I would rate JIRA Service Deskaybe as maybe and eight or nine-out-of-ten. For our use case, and putting aside the need for the plugin, it is a nine.  

One of the primary things we use JIRA for is the Kanban Board feature. We use it for managing our projects and issues as well as accountabilities within the company. We have a homegrown — I suppose you could call it a Six Sigma type — approach. We identify the six main projects and the six areas where you can make the biggest difference within the company. Then we identify six projects that we're going to work on within those areas.

We use the Kanban Board extensively. We use the Confluence facility on the backend. Really,  we use Confluence and JIRA both together: Confluence for global planning and JIRA for issue and project management.

It simply helps us shape our project management workflow.

The implementation that we have is highly customized, so I can't talk to the capabilities of JIRA product independently because I'm not familiar with all of the different things that can be done with it. It's very useful in terms of the dashboard for the office, and the overview of all the different issues and props, what's on backlog, what's in progress, what's been resolved. That kind of thing, is very helpful.

One of the best additions to this product would be a single centralized point in which to store all the documents that are involved in progressing with tasks. For instance, if you're working on a JIRA task and you attach a document to it, not everybody will share a centralized storage facility where all the documents are. The idea would be to make it so everybody can see (or view) the same current document. They would get specific privileges (e.g., view or edit). But if a document is shared now, as it is in potentially an older version, it may not be accurate. Better to share the current document so that everyone has the same information.

Centralized document storage would allow all documents to be linked to any issue where it was pertinent rather than having to be attached to specific issues and limiting the viewers.

The product itself seems stable. We don't run into issues where we blame JIRA directly for failing.

JIRA can really scale perfectly for our needs. We have both end users and admins using this product. Really, everybody in our company uses it. No one has a problem with getting access and we scale as needed.

I haven't had any access to JIRA's technical support at all directly, I've never had any need to call them in. Generally, that would be someone else's responsibility. I'm not aware of having anyone in the company having issues with support on call or other contact.

We have looked for solutions in terms of the enterprise applications that are used by my company. We already have Confluence, we have JIRA Service desk, and we have Quest KACE Endpoint Management. We also use VMware AirWatch, virtualization productivity, and Dell hardware. A solution that works with these existing tools means that there is lest to change and train.

I wasn't involved in the setup of JIRA, so I can't really comment that much on that aspect of the product. It was set up by one of my other team members. However, I've been told it was a relatively straightforward process. The customization, which is substantial, has been difficult. That is obviously not the fault of the product itself.

We had specific goals in using a suite of products and we are doing our own deployments based on goals that we define. Essentially we didn't need outside help.

When considering a solution it is best to stay as standard as possible when adopting it. The further you get off the standard path the more difficult it is to adopt or adapt to other solutions if that becomes necessary or desirable in the future.

I can't actually give it a fair appreciation at this stage of the capabilities of JIRA as a stand-alone product because of the way we have implemented it in a cluster of other products. 

At this stage, I would give it a five out of ten. This is mostly because we rely on other products for certain services or features. If JIRA had more comprehensive coverage of what we require, or if it was easier to implement what it already does, the rating would be higher.

We use this solution as a help desk. It's a place where the users upload tickets related to a new project, new ideas, new incidents, and things like that.

The solution has provided us with a tool for ticket management.

The most valuable feature of this solution is that it is user-friendly. It is web-based and can be accessed from everywhere.

This solution lacks features for project management. I would like to see more reports.

This is a stable and reliable solution.

We have a contract with a local partner for technical support and they are fine.

This solution was in place before I joined the company, so I don't know about the initial setup.

Our local partner handled the implementation for us.

I would rate this solution a seven out of ten.