We performed a comparison between Clarity SM and OpenText Service Manager based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Help Desk Software solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."As of late, I really like the BI functions."
"It's fairly easy to use, from a UI standpoint."
"XFlow (Temperature) and Service Point together provided an extremely user-friendly and collaborative experience to the point of making it easy for all users of the product, whether end-users or analysts."
"Self-service interface means people can check their own tickets."
"Solution is scalable. It does work. We can modify it up better to make it the way we want it to work. We have implemented it for larger and smaller companies."
"It has all our configurations. All our infrastructure configurations are on a single pane of glass to view, allowing for one single point of information."
"Ability to write macros, which can in turn trigger some condition or could be conditioned to basically trigger notifications, the workflow desk, or web calls. It is huge benefit to customize it."
"We are benefiting by being able to put time to what our technicians are doing."
"Micro Focus Service Manager is fine. It's a good solution for small accounts with minimal reporting. Micro Focus is a good option because you don't have to worry about the budget."
"Incident management is the most valuable because we're using it to manage tickets for an accounting system. With the reports that are available, it allows us to track and identify trends at the type and item level. It also helps us in managing the workload better than what we had in Remedy, which is what we were using before 2013."
"Technical support is pretty good."
"The initial setup is easy."
"It gives us better understanding and control of service management."
"The solution is simple to set up."
"It can adapt to any process in the organization."
"The solution will streamline productivity and also improve automation. That would bring efficiency as well the ability to handle a big number of enterprise-wide service needs. Productivity and collaborative capabilities are some of the key benefits."
"Compared to some of the other products, I think we are bit behind."
"We would like to see them integrate more of a service catalog, which is more of an Amazon-type fill in your bucket, then sign in, once you decide what you want."
"I would also like to see a simpler reporting tool. They went from one fairly robust, very complex, reporting tool - it was great - and then they went to another one that was also fairly complex and robust. That's a great tool for people who are report writers, but for the average person who just wants to get a quick little report, it's like handing somebody a chainsaw because they have to break some toothpicks in half."
"The cost of this solution is too high, which is why we're leaving."
"Diversifying notification methods with pop-ups or ready-made WhatsApp or Skype integration packages would be welcome."
"Improvements would include simplification in the user interface, being more expandable, better documentation. The user interface is fairly cluttered, and we can update it the way we need to, but it just seems dated."
"The product needs to have a better user experience in the interface and mobile functionality."
"The monitoring tool is in need of improvement."
"There's a lot of manual work, which is error prone and time consuming, in how the code gets transported from one system to the other."
"It needs to be easier to use for the end users because one problem we had was that we are handling different kinds of cases."
"I think the best recommendation to Micro Focus would be to increase awareness and the marketing for this product."
"Customization can be difficult at times because scripting is often required."
"I don't see anything lacking."
"We aren't able to take emails that come in and turn them into tickets, especially when it comes to attachments. When an email has an attachment, like a screenshot, it is a very cumbersome process, and it does not work very well. I shouldn't have been paying technicians to cut and paste attachments from an email into the ticketing system. It should do that automatically. Other solutions are able to do that. This is something that needs to be improved. Test manager and knowledge management areas are probably amongst the worst parts of this solution. We try to use this solution for knowledge management, but it is not user-friendly. Therefore, it has limited ROI as you need to spend time to try and fully capitalize on the knowledge management system."
"Service Manager is at the end of its life. The architecture, performance, and look are all way behind."
"I think one area which is the most painful from my point of view is if you need to integrate a lot of the tools, and being able to make that a lot more seamless."
Clarity SM is ranked 23rd in Help Desk Software with 107 reviews while OpenText Service Manager is ranked 17th in Help Desk Software with 48 reviews. Clarity SM is rated 7.8, while OpenText Service Manager is rated 7.2. The top reviewer of Clarity SM writes "Quite good back-end architecture for end users but the API is very, very bad". On the other hand, the top reviewer of OpenText Service Manager writes "A solution that works out of the box. The solution's real strength is its ability to change for your organization's infrastructure". Clarity SM is most compared with ServiceNow, JIRA Service Management, BeyondTrust Remote Support, OpenText Service Management Automation X (SMAX) and IBM Maximo, whereas OpenText Service Manager is most compared with ServiceNow, JIRA Service Management, OpenText Service Management Automation X (SMAX) and BMC Helix ITSM. See our Clarity SM vs. OpenText Service Manager report.
See our list of best Help Desk Software vendors and best IT Service Management (ITSM) 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.
