We performed a comparison between JIRA Service Management and Kayako based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out what your peers are saying about ServiceNow, Atlassian, BMC and others in Help Desk Software."The customer portal with connection with our knowledge base has been most valuable."
"It is much more controlled and allows for different kinds of customization that we can plan and implement based on the project requirements."
"Reporting and easy export to Excel spreadsheets."
"The dashboards in Jira have been the most useful feature."
"I like the precise ticket management capabilities. JIRA Service Management is easy to use as well."
"The stability of JIRA Service Management is good."
"The product is not lacking anything that a QA will want to use."
"JIRA helps integrate Kanban Board features and for this reason what it does it does well."
"The most valuable feature of Kayako is its flexibility. We can do anything we want with it, which is nice."
"The reporting function of this solution, particularly the filters in the portal, could be improved."
"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."
"JIRA Service Management could improve the forms. When you complete the form for the ticket, for example, to have more information given to the team. If they needed this information, you can give it to them. They need to add additional information for a better understanding of the whole picture of the issue or problem."
"We have tried exporting some of the test cases into Jira from Excel. The interface for that isn't very user-friendly."
"I'd like to update the dashboard so that more features are available."
"When you raise a ticket with Jira, there's no ability to see your other JIRA tickets."
"What needs to be added in Jira Service Management is the user screen. You'll find it very weird if this is your first time using the solution. The user-friendliness of its interface needs improvement."
"JSM's ability to handle large volumes of emails isn't great."
"Some of the reporting in Kayako could be improved. It only has two levels of classification and if there were additional levels added for reporting purposes it would be awesome for our environment."
Earn 20 points
JIRA Service Management is ranked 2nd in Help Desk Software with 73 reviews while Kayako is ranked 43rd in Help Desk Software. JIRA Service Management is rated 8.2, while Kayako is rated 8.0. The top reviewer of JIRA Service Management writes "Customizable, stable, and integrates well". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Kayako writes "Flexible, straightforward implementation, and helpful support". JIRA Service Management is most compared with ServiceNow, ManageEngine ServiceDesk Plus, BMC Helix ITSM, Freshdesk and PagerDuty Operations Cloud, whereas Kayako is most compared with .
See our list of best Help Desk Software vendors.
We monitor all Help Desk Software 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.