We performed a comparison between IFS Cloud Platform 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 most valuable feature is the distribution module."
"The main reason for the ERP project was to bring together our fourteen sites, which had until then worked in separate silos."
"IFS Applications is an all-in-one solution for finance, accounting, and production."
"The workflow of the solution is very good."
"A high level of ERP can be handled in IFS."
"One of our favorite features is the "Info-Zone", which provides operational intelligence in flight and in context to guide both business users and support teams to productivity."
"I like the connectivity and interfaces. In V10, it's easy to modify the interfaces and layouts, but it's becoming more complicated in the cloud. IFS is excellent at asset maintenance and incident management. They have specialized modules for IFS that cover incident and asset management and everything else connected to finance. The reporting in IFS is also easy to use."
"There tends not to be a massive weakness in the product itself, as weaknesses can quickly be resolved in the next patch or the next release."
"This service management solution has a good user interface. It helps improve your IT request requirements and makes tracking requests easier."
"The customization is the most valuable aspect of the solution. I can customize full workflows. It's very flexible. We can use mail if we want to open requests as well."
"Allows customized processes for our service contracts."
"It is much more controlled and allows for different kinds of customization that we can plan and implement based on the project requirements."
"Jira gets the basics right in terms of the product backlog and a scrum board teams can use to manage sprint backlogs."
"Customizations are most valuable. The customization of workflows is the main power of the Atlassian tools in general."
"One of the valuable features is that an automatic response or action can be taken on tickets."
"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."
"An area for improvement would be transactions, which can be tedious to complete as the process is very complex."
"IFS Applications is not robust enough to handle high-volume transactions, so it's not suitable for larger enterprises."
"The solution needs to improve its documentation and user-friendliness."
"The integration is a bit complex, and post-implementation support services need to be improved. They have a service center based out of Sri Lanka. The support aspect is good, but the response time is a little slower than we anticipated. In the next release, it would be better if Warehouse Management could be improvised. They have a product line that's a data warehouse management system, but it's still premature and requires a bit of enhancement."
"I'm a business analyst, so I do a lot of customer-facing work. I take calls from businesses I have to troubleshoot. One thing that bugs me is the error messages you get from IFS. If I get an error message, I have to dig to find the cause because, often, the error message doesn't precisely describe the problem. It'll hint about where the problem lies, but you have to work to find the root cause. It doesn't help in my situation. You expect an error message to point to the field or what is causing the issue."
"The user interface can be improved. When you're clicking through the screens, there are some icons or symbols that really need updating and would be more useful and noticeable if they are aesthetically pleasing."
"There are certain digital features that need to be incorporated, such as IOP."
"Customization needs to 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."
"SaaS version for large organizations (more than 2000 users) is not available."
"The initial setup is very complex."
"Every time there's a problem with JIRA Service Management, you have to have a look at how to solve it, and there's always a feature request or the feature request on the solution is too large and the development cycles are too slow."
"I would like to see improvement in the ability to filter completed tasks."
"If JIRA were more of a substantial stand-alone product that covered more needs for project management, we wouldn't be using a suite of products."
"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."
IFS Cloud Platform is ranked 6th in IT Service Management (ITSM) with 29 reviews while JIRA Service Management is ranked 2nd in IT Service Management (ITSM) with 73 reviews. IFS Cloud Platform is rated 7.8, while JIRA Service Management is rated 8.2. The top reviewer of IFS Cloud Platform writes "Robust, customizable, and modern". On the other hand, the top reviewer of JIRA Service Management writes "Customizable, stable, and integrates well". IFS Cloud Platform is most compared with SAP ERP, SAP S/4HANA, Oracle E-Business Suite, Microsoft Dynamics 365 Business Central and IBM Maximo, whereas JIRA Service Management is most compared with ServiceNow, ManageEngine ServiceDesk Plus, BMC Helix ITSM, Freshdesk and PagerDuty Operations Cloud. See our IFS Cloud Platform 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.
