ManageEngine ServiceDesk Plus Room for Improvement

Bhavani Prasad Paragi
General Manager at Qwikcilver
The main thing that I find lacking in the product is the ability to do custom reporting. They have canned reports, but apart from that, I am unable to define my own reports based on my needs. It requires a lot of external customization. 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. One final issue, on the topic of business rules, is that more can be implemented. I have seen CRM systems over the past twenty years that can do much more than this. For example, you should be able to customize your workflow completely. I would like to draw my own workflow and go with that. Also, I would like to be able to write a custom feature and include it in the workflow. These things are missing from the product. View full review »
Carlos-Garcia
Senior ICT Consultant
Request management is not clearly separated form incident management. The conditions to customize this could be tricky and unique for our organization. To clarify this concept: We develop two different processes based on ITIL models for reporting cases or taking request from users : - Request fulfilment - Incident Management These two cases are the main inputs to the system, SD+ has a generic name for incidents and requests and we had to do an internal agreement to differentiate request from incidents, at the moment to see the “request” ( names assigned by SD+ ) given also to incidents, it causes a small confutation to the new service delivery agents. This should be clearly defined or leave the option to the users to create request at the level of incidents in two different categories. No we have new incidents with categories of Request of Information or requested for other aspects. ( this is something that we considered not a good element) View full review »
Gamal Elsabbagh
IT Engineer at arkas egypt
When I think of improvements the first thing that comes to mind would have to be the active management function. I have encountered some bugs with this aspect of the tool. I wouldn't necessarily identify these issues as bugs, they're more like processes issues associated with the scanning assets; the process could be improved. View full review »
CarlosGarcia1
Senior ICT Consultant
Request management is not clearly separated form incident management and the conditions to customize this are tricky and unique for our organization. View full review »
Mohsin Ghani
Account Manager at a tech services company with 201-500 employees
They could improve the screens. View full review »
Fanky Christian
Director at Daya Cipta Mandiri Solusi, PT
For ITIL functions, it should be more complex, including financial functions. We are expecting it to be easier for customization within workflows and templates. View full review »
Ariel Gutierrez
National IT Support Head at a construction company with 11-50 employees
There could be some improvement regarding integration with other platforms like Sharepoint. View full review »
Fanky Christian
Director at Daya Cipta Mandiri Solusi, PT
People ask to implement the product not only for their IT help desk, as we do that, but also for HR and general affairs, allowing them to use SDP for their services. View full review »
PradeepKumar12
Team Lead at a comms service provider with 1,001-5,000 employees
I expected more features than it has. The flexibility is missing. I was also expecting a different level of configuration and segregation. View full review »

Sign Up with Email