Vanessa HodgesPlatform Scrum Master at a comms service provider
We asked business professionals to review the solutions they use. Here are some excerpts of what they said:
"The incident management feature is good because it allows you to keep track of and classify issues."
"The most powerful features are the database and integration with CMDB."
"We are very thankful to have IBM integrated with our own Legacy cloud-based system"
"It's easy to set up the solution."
"Some of the most valuable features are simplicity, ease of configuration, and ease of customization."
"The SLA, speed, the comments from agents' side, and the dashboard for agents are the most valuable features."
"The most valuable features are the management tools."
"One of the best things about JIRA is that it searches for answers while questions are being typed so some tickets do not need to be submitted."
"Easily integrates with other tools."
"The simplicity is good for our clients. The price is good."
"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."
"I feel that the interface is a little too complicated with a large number of fields to enter."
"The interface is not very easy or user-friendly and is in need of improvement."
"You can get lost using the application"
"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."
"At times you will need add-ons or additional software, so built-in features would be helpful."
"From the customer side, it's not friendly used compared to other competitors, like ServiceNow or BMC. It's also not fully ITSM management if you compare it with ServiceNow or BMC. They have a full model of ITSM. In BMC they have TrueSight, they have Discovery, which helps IT to discover IT equipment with a serial number, with the specs, capacity of the server."
"If we can have an easier way to deploy this solution without the help of a consultant and a more reliable way of deploying procedures, it would be quite helpful."
"The product does not have the capability to sort queued tickets by product. This would be useful in making workflows more efficient."
"Integration could be improved."
"There should be better connections with access management. They should improve the connectivity."
"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."
"It's not really expensive, especially when you compare to ServiceNow or other solutions, and it's not expensive to maintain."
"We may upgrade the license that we have. The license that we currently have is good for 500 agents, and it's not full yet."
"The pricing is free for us because we are an associate partner for the product."
"Right now, there are only two of us who are both agents on the help desk and developers. We might be on the free version because we're less than three agents or users. I'm looking at Zephyr tests, which have a $10 a month flat rate, so right now, it is $10 a month. There are lots of add-ons. They do a free version, a standard version, and a premium version. In the last company, we started on $50 a month. By the time I left, we were paying $4,500 a month. That was mainly because we had 100 users on Confluence. I bought an add-on for Jira software for which we had 10 users, and that was $5 per user per month. It was costing me $500 a month, whereas it should only be $50 a month. I don't know if licensing fee has changed. I'd like our whole company to use it, but the big problem is the licensing because the Confluence side is what is really useful, but if I add 30 users to Confluence and then buy an extension for Jira software, I've got to pay for 30 licenses, even though I've only got two users in Jira software. It is the one big disadvantage of cloud software. You always have to pay for the number of seats regardless of which product you are on. This will probably severely limit how many people would use it because I'm not going to start paying $10 per user per month for a Jira software add-on when there are only two people using it."
"We need a license because we have a higher number than the free part."
"The pricing is very competitive and I think that it is okay."
"I am using the free version, but my clients are paying for it. When they start, they evaluate it for 30 days, and after seeing the value, they move to its paid version."
Earn 20 points
Jira Service Management empowers teams with everything they need to get started fast. Check out capabilities for ITSM practices like request, incident, problem, change, and configuration management.
IBM Maximo is ranked 2nd in Enterprise Asset Management with 3 reviews while JIRA Service Management is ranked 2nd in IT Service Management (ITSM) with 13 reviews. IBM Maximo is rated 6.4, while JIRA Service Management is rated 8.0. The top reviewer of IBM Maximo writes "A great solution for enhancing an asset's lifecycle". On the other hand, the top reviewer of JIRA Service Management writes "Customizable, stable, and integrates well". IBM Maximo is most compared with ServiceNow, Oracle Enterprise Asset Management, ABB Ability Asset Suite EAM, IFS Applications and Infor CloudSuite EAM, whereas JIRA Service Management is most compared with ServiceNow, ManageEngine ServiceDesk Plus, Zendesk Guide, PagerDuty and BMC Helix ITSM.
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.