We performed a comparison between IBM Maximo and ManageEngine ServiceDesk Plus based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out what your peers are saying about IBM, IFS, Oracle and others in Enterprise Asset Management."Provides great flexibility."
"Its capabilities let us organize our work."
"We are very thankful to have IBM integrated with our own Legacy cloud-based system"
"We were doing all kinds of paperwork for every type of order and to maintain our assets but with the use of the IBM Maximo application, we can automate a lot of the processes."
"The most powerful features are the database and integration with CMDB."
"I have found Work Order management the most valuable feature. Additionally, it is a very robust and powerful solution."
"Reliable, very configurable, and it's all integrated in the same database."
"Work order management and scalability enables the businesses' needs to be met."
"The most valuable feature of ManageEngine ServiceDesk Plus is ticket management."
"ServiceDesk Plus manages all our requests, both internal and external requests, for not only ticketing but users' requests."
"I can't think of any single feature that stands out, but it's an excellent product for a fair price. Nothing is missing. ServiceDesk has a lot of features, and we aren't using all of them. We have to implement the ones we already have before we move on to the others."
"Referring to its on-premises deployment, it is easy to use and easy to deploy. Cloud deployment is done on its own. It is very easy to navigate, and the GUI is quite friendly. In terms of product functionality, we really like the ESL version. We can host multiple instances of services on a single server, such as one help desk and multiple instances."
"ManageEngine is flexible and user friendly. Creating a ticket is quite easy. So is configuring SLA's and generating reports. It is straightforward to use."
"ManageEngine ServiceDesk Plus is meeting all my needs, it is a good solution. The integration and security are good. The solution is under-friendly."
"It ensures the tracking of all costs for end-user issues."
"The solution offers a lot of opportunities for integrations."
"Could use some alignment regarding some standards and the tracking of the IT assets. Even though they have all of the information (i.e. where are the assets, who owns the asset, etc.), they were not mapping it to different cyber standards."
"Areas for improvement include: an enhanced Service Catalog on Mobile; Agent intelligence; better dashboards for KPIs."
"The solution is not stable. We can have one day when it is stable and another day it is not. Sometimes it crashes or becomes very slow, and there are times we are not even able to download all the databases. Without the database, we cannot work on that application. These are the small glitches, and stability issues we are facing."
"It's not user-friendly. It could use shortcuts for frequently requested services."
"The mobile solution has a lot of room for improvement, especially in geopositioning capabilities, tracking capabilities, and configuration capabilities, in order to let the tech operate online and offline."
"It needs full-service visibility. There are a lot of things that are hard for users to find out. For example, the Service Catalog is not too friendly. You really have to know what you're looking for."
"The interface is not very easy or user-friendly and is in need of improvement."
"Vendor management needs enhancement."
"A 360-degree view of the asset life cycle should be integrated with the service desk to provide better understanding and asset management."
"Its reporting could be improved. The current list of predefined reports seems to be fine for most of the customers, but there should be some tools to allow us to create highly customized reports for measuring different KPIs. We should also be able to connect some kind of BI to it. We haven't yet implemented it, and we are currently evaluating it. We are looking for advanced integration options where we could integrate it with our SCCM and Azure environments as well as with other Office solutions. For direct communication with customers, we are looking for a chatbot or a similar feature."
"We should be able to monitor the performance of assets, not only documents. For example, printers. We should be able to monitor ink levels and get notifications when the ink is low. In another operation manager I use, they send me a notification when the device is off, or has something to perform."
"I think the user interface needs to be improved and needs to be enhanced to be more supportive to users."
"The interface is not the best. The user interface could be more intuitive."
"I would also like to see better integration with external software. It is possible, but it is tough. The APIs are not very flexible, so you really have to write a lot of code to create that integration. Opening it up for external integration would allow for easier customization of the existing autobox workflows. It would help with the user's perception."
"Lacks some flexibility in the configuration of workflows."
"I would like to improve the task management module and analytics."
More ManageEngine ServiceDesk Plus Pricing and Cost Advice →
IBM Maximo is ranked 1st in Enterprise Asset Management with 23 reviews while ManageEngine ServiceDesk Plus is ranked 4th in Help Desk Software with 57 reviews. IBM Maximo is rated 8.0, while ManageEngine ServiceDesk Plus is rated 8.0. The top reviewer of IBM Maximo writes "Work order management and scalability enables the businesses' needs to be met". On the other hand, the top reviewer of ManageEngine ServiceDesk Plus writes " Easy to configure and affordable compared to other software options". IBM Maximo is most compared with ServiceNow, JIRA Service Management, ABB Ability Asset Suite EAM and IFS Cloud Platform, whereas ManageEngine ServiceDesk Plus is most compared with ServiceNow, JIRA Service Management, Freshservice, BMC Helix ITSM and Zoho Desk.
We monitor all Enterprise Asset Management 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.