We performed a comparison between Cherwell Service Management and JIRA Service Management based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two IT Service Management (ITSM) solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."The dashboard and the reporting functionality are the solution's most valuable features."
"Clear processes with transparent responsibilities led to more efficiencies within the teams."
"The dashboard is very useful to get a quick overview of current tasks."
"Its integration features, orchestration features, and discovery tools are the most valuable. It is also pretty stable, and it can be as scalable as you want."
"All our activities are carried out in the one place."
"The most valuable features are problem management and change management."
"Service Management is great if you're an Atlassian shop already using JIRA for the development team and you want another tool for help desk ticketing. When it's all under the same umbrella, I can easily take a ticket from the help desk and move it to the development team. You can't beat that integration between two products."
"JIRA helps integrate Kanban Board features and for this reason what it does it does well."
"Jira Service Management has a workflow feature you can configure for your specific requirements. It also lets you efficiently manage service requests with team members."
"We have an Agile environment and using Jira makes it easy to adhere to Agile best practices."
"In Jira Service Management, the most beneficial features are process improvement, workflows, and escalations."
"The links between the help desk and Jira issues and between Confluence and Jira issues are most valuable. I can write requirements in Confluence and link them to user stories in Jira and test cases. I can see my test coverage and all that kind of stuff. The integration between these three is very useful. It is pretty customizable, and it integrates well. There are a lot of add-ins and a lot of connectors to third-party products. In my last company, we used Test Royal for managing all the tests, and it integrated perfectly with that. For any issue or bug, we could see what tests have been run and the complete history of the tests."
"The most valuable feature of JIRA Service Management is a plugin we are using for the front end for simple user forms."
"What I really like about this solution, is how it manages the queues, the tickets and the routing."
"Application service mapping, GRC, SecOps, and things like that need improvement."
"Areas for improvement would be the service catalog and customer catalog, which is not very user-friendly. The shopping cart experience is also terrible - you submit and go straight to the cart, you can't continue shopping or see your overall cost."
"The stability, specifically in the on-premises deployment model, could be improved."
"Access is only available if we're on VPN."
"In general, JIRA has no relation to customers or financials. Therefore, marketplace add-ons are needed to make it work for customer-facing systems."
"There is room for improvement in support."
"JSD has some analytics, but it's pretty much basic and simple dashboards. There's no mobile application for JSD. It really would benefit from better implementation with other vendors. We're heavily reliant on some external marketplace applications."
"The solution should be more formalized. It could be more user-friendly."
"Include a split configuration in a layer part to allow cloud services to have almost full admin rights in SaaS."
"JIRA Service Management should make reporting easier. I would like something integrated with DevOps tools."
"The way it handles subtasks can be improved. We would really like the ability to have different types of subtasks. If we have a user story for a feature, we would like to have a subtask for documentation, a subtask for requirements, a subtask for development, and a subtask for testing. Right now, we just make four subtasks, but there is no way to specify their type, so we have to add a custom field to specify what type of work is this. It just means you've got to look at more data. For logging time or time tracking, we would like to have something using which we can define the work type we're doing. We would like to log whether we're working on a bug, a new development, scope change, or rework. We've got a user story for which we do the dev, and then we have to do more dev. It is the same story, but some of it could have been a scope change, and some of it could be a rework because we either screwed up the first time or missed something obvious. Currently, we have to have a custom field and track that separately. It would be nice to have some kind of work type for logging time."
"The main issue with this solution is there's no limited subscription available for plugins we only use for a few people. If we only have a team of twenty using a plugin, we still have to purchase a subscription for the whole 200 users."
Cherwell Service Management is ranked 13th in IT Service Management (ITSM) with 6 reviews while JIRA Service Management is ranked 2nd in IT Service Management (ITSM) with 73 reviews. Cherwell Service Management is rated 7.2, while JIRA Service Management is rated 8.2. The top reviewer of Cherwell Service Management writes "Having everything in one location has significantly improved our efficiency and reporting". On the other hand, the top reviewer of JIRA Service Management writes "Customizable, stable, and integrates well". Cherwell Service Management is most compared with ServiceNow, whereas JIRA Service Management is most compared with ServiceNow, ManageEngine ServiceDesk Plus, BMC Helix ITSM, Freshdesk and PagerDuty Operations Cloud. See our Cherwell Service Management vs. JIRA Service Management report.
See our list of best IT Service Management (ITSM) vendors and best Help Desk Software vendors.
We monitor all IT Service Management (ITSM) reviews to prevent fraudulent reviews and keep review quality high. We do not post reviews by company employees or direct competitors. We validate each review for authenticity via cross-reference with LinkedIn, and personal follow-up with the reviewer when necessary.
