JIRA Service Management Reviews

JIRA Service Desk is used as a support solution with the support team to manage support service delivery to customers. I coached a big banking company using JIRA Service Desk to record customer incidents that require support. With the product, we have two different layers of incident management. Level one is for the call center and level two is for the agents who repair or try to resolve the incident using a software team.

If their team can't resolve the problem, we create particular bug issues in JIRA software, and the development team creates a plan to correct the issue and confirms the experience in order to provide a resolution. The issue is returned back to layer two, and layer two discusses the problem with layer one. After that, layer one speaks to the customer and explains the status of the problem.

It helps us to provide better customer service.

The best part of the application for me is the ability to manage the issues. Within the different layers, you can set priorities, define task management, assign tasks to the software team or to different groups or functions to help manage solutions in JIRA. I use different features in JIRA Service Desk for the software team. It is a broad solution that affects different layers of the organization.

Because the software team and development team can use the solution to manage and track projects more efficiently and work together as a team, they find and resolve problems better.

I think that JIRA Service Desk is a very good product and that it is full of features that work well to manage tasks. It has the flexibility to handle many different activities and it is very good at this. Especially in the latest version, it has some new features and capabilities that were added so that it is even better.

The one thing I would like to see is better capabilities to integrate with products other than parts of the Atlassian system. For example, if there is a Microsoft product that is better for another team the integration may be difficult or impossible.

Any one business process software can't do everything a system needs. For example, I have experience with JIRA and TFS (Team Foundation Server). TFS is a very good application and a good solution for software development teams. It's not the perfect solution for all parts of an organization and maybe does not fit an organization's needs well. In some cases, it may be better. It depends on the use. If you want a broad solution for your company, for task management, or issue tracking, TFS is not a good solution. For software development, TFS is very, very good and may be just what you need.

After using the product and knowing the benefits of TFS, I thought that combining the systems would be the best solution: the combined system could help the company to decrease the time it took to process software issues. I think JIRA Service Desk does not have features that are as good for tracking fix times or bottlenecks in the process. You can use different plug-ins for JIRA Service Desk to add some functionality, but these plug-ins are very expensive. It would be nice if JIRA Service Desk added in some of these features for this type of support.

But about the plugins, I found one plug-in — its name is Actionable Metric I think — and it is $3000. That is very expensive for users in Iran. For most customers, I would not be able to propose this solution because it's very expensive. But it is also very important to some of the projects I consult with. Because of that, it eliminates JIRA Service Desk from consideration, because we can't integrate them into the system.

The product seems very stable. We have never had a problem.

I think the product is very scalable as long as the hardware can handle the usage.

We have never had a problem. Two years ago, I had a launch of Service Desk in a bank in Iran and we had 8,000 issues to track for the core banking system.

This launch was very, very good because we used an IT framework in this company and returned used a post egress system for response to bank customers or bank users. We could use Jira software for the response to this incident and resolve that.

We had 8,000 issues two years ago, and the company continues to use this product and I am sure that they have been able to scale and track more.

The Atlassian technical support is actually very good and responsive.

I worked in a different company and when I was there they were using a different solution. It was an airplane company in Iran. For part of my job, I was tasked with finding the best solution for managing tasks in different layers of the organization — different tasks for different departments. For example, I wanted them to record requirements for cost and team level or management level. Unfortunately, with the product they were using, I could not find these solutions for task management. As this was critical, I needed to do some research into other task management solutions. After a search I found some reviews on ITCentralStation.com, I found from the reading that the Atlassian system would be better to serve our needs because of the features. I looked at other solutions and reviews but I finally chose the JIRA system. 

This is the best application for me because it supported different solutions and could be one big solution for different layer of the organization using JIRA Service Desk, JIRA software, or JIRA Core.

While I think the installation and deployment were very simple for me, the company should have different ways to find solutions independent of technical support and they need a better installation guide for installing different applications. My team and I tried to do an installation on the last server for a new client in a different environment than we usually use. We installed different portals for addressing that and I have had experience installing two or three of the top DevOps tools. This was very easy by comparison.

There have occasionally been some problems, but it is usually very good and very simple.

I am an Agile development coach and systems consultant and our team does our installations ourselves.

I think I had the opportunity to learn a few things by working with JIRA Service Desk. It has been a good solution and supports good practices, but it is not everything every company needs. I can't find a better single solution for a better approach to tracking and better customer satisfaction. I have a better picture of customer needs and gradation.

I have more experience in JIRA software because I worked with it in many different companies now. Some years ago I was a Java Software developer and had a lot of experience with Scrum and agile development and we used JIRA software. I think I can speak better about JIRA software because I was a software developer.

On a scale from one to ten, where one is the worst and ten is the best, I would rate JIRA Service Desk as a ten. For my experience, it is the best product on the market for use in enterprise installations.

What I really like about this solution is how it manages the queues, the tickets, and the routing.

I think the solution has a lack of capabilities from the user's perspective. I would, for example, be able to see all the phases instead of only being able to create a ticket. I want to be familiar with all the steps and be able to change things during these steps. I would like to see that improved. 

What's more, we wanted to be resellers for this program, but it was denied, unfortunately. The claim of the developers was that they didn't need other resellers or partners. I think they made a mistake because we work with a lot of customers. So I think that needs to be improved because we sell and we are business partners of IBM and Microsoft, for example. But with Atlassian, it's very, very hard. 

The solution is very stable.

I don't think the program is very scalable. It lacks scaling capabilities from the performance perspective and load balancing and some other infrastructure capabilities. This is a real disadvantage if you compare it to other tools.

The technical support was average.

My advice to others would be to use the solution as is, and not to try to perform some sophisticated solutions. If it fits to your needs, take it. If not, use another solution. I rate this solution a seven out of ten, and in the future, I would like to see better infrastructure, more scalability, better performance, load balancing and things like that. 

The primary use case of this solution is for storing project data on the cloud. 

The deployment model we are using is on the cloud.

This solution has helped us a great deal in project management tracking and forecasting.

The most valuable features of this solution are the JIRA Bots and the dashboard. I am satisfied with these features.

Some of the areas that could be improved are with the customizations. For example, if I wanted to add a new user with the same name, or start a new bot, add a new caller, or even just want to add a new column, it is complicated. This area can be simplified. 

The foundation needs to be simplified.

As an additional feature, I would like to see some permissions and definitions added or to allow us to add things such as a surname or additional rules in the work tools. 

Rules are needed for the configuration also, giving us access to writing the rules.

JIRA protects the end-user, but for the configuration, more rules could be added to improve the workflow.

The workflow could be more user-friendly.

This solution is stable. There are constant updates every few days.

This solution is scalable.

We have large teams with multiple users that use this solution. For small to medium-sized organizations it's perfect, but for large organizations, they may require more from JIRA, possibly having a portal.

There have been some issues when upgrading JIRA. It was not responding. We contacted customer support and within two hours the issue was resolved.

It wasn't always this efficient because they were not aware or couldn't see that the systems were down, but they always reassured us that it could be resolved.

We previously used different solutions, and we could have used both, but we found that JIRA was a good solution. 

We found it to be user-friendly, and it had a better market share. Although there are some differences, the other solution is very robotic and JIRA is very intuitive, it is very usable.

While I didn't do the installation, I do believe that it would be easy and straightforward.

I did not install this solution, rather, it was my boss who completed the installation. 

I am responsible for the setup and management of this solution. 

I am handling the setup for the JIRA Bots, the frames, and all of the releases.

I started using JIRA in 2016 when I joined this company. It was a new software-house-startup company.

They asked me if I would like to use JIRA or any other tool. I chose to learn JIRA and not do any R&D. I was very comfortable and the team will be comfortable.

We are a hiring team, so we have the authority to impose on our people.

I didn't install this solution, but I use it and I configured it. 

What I learned is that JIRA is all about the team. If you know the tool, but you don't communicate with your team then it will not be of any benefit. On the other hand, if you want to benefit from using this solution, first you have to learn how to use the solution, and then you have to translate that to your team and teach them how to use it.

I would recommend JIRA to everyone, including my friends.

I am working on owning my own business and I plan to use JIRA for project management.

I would rate this solution an eight out of ten.

We primarily use this product to log issues that require investigation or solutions.

It allows tracking and communications to be sure issues are resolved. This helps us remain on task and keeps clients happy.

The product is valuable for logging and tracking issues. We can use it on multiple platforms and make it accessible to other people in other streams.

The product could be improved by integrating better with mobile numbers. For example, creating a WhatsApp platform would extend the solution and make it more useful. For now, when the issues are logged here, requests and responses go through the email server. The additional opportunities for connectivity would make it possible for quicker responses and more immediacy. With Micro Focus, one of the tools we used, we were able to build in a script that would send a response through WhatsApp instead of sending emails to the project group. JIRA would be better if that type of thing were possible, or even better if the solution was actually built into the product instead of having to use another service.

I think if JIRA can get that one right, it will be more desirable in the marketplace in general.

More interactive reporting would also be helpful.

We find that this is an excellent tool and it is very stable.

JIRA is an excellent tool. We still have room to improve how we use it. It can cater to multiple needs and purposes which enhances its demand. The fact that we can use it for multiple tasks alone makes it scalable. It's very good at what it does.

We have more than ten people currently using it. Most of them are testing consultants and developers. We also have project managers using it.

For deployment and maintenance, it may take only one to three guys. It depends on the complexity of what you are planning to do with it, so it will vary from case to case. There's no absolute answer to how many people will need to be involved.

Our deployment of the project is changing and growing on an on-going basis. It is used extensively and consistently and seems to be more useful as we explore what it can do.

I won't lie and say they are good because I am not the one who is in contact with support when something goes wrong. The development server had a problem that they solved, but the technical guys on the projects are the ones who would know about that. I haven't heard any complaints about support.

We previously used the defect module for Micro Focus ALM.

In most cases, we don't have to set it up from scratch. The stakeholders usually already have it installed. The amount of time it takes for deployment depends on the complexity of what a client needs.

We used an in-house guy for the implementation.

We have seen a return on investment in that it makes us more efficient and that in turn will make our clients happier.

I do not have a good idea of the costs as that is not my department, but it is a valuable solution for handling and tracking multiple projects.

We did not really evaluate other products when making the switch to JIRA. It seemed to be an intuitive choice.

On a scale of one to ten, I would rate this solution as an eight. It is a good solution and it helps to boost productivity.

We use this solution as a help desk. It's a place where the users upload tickets related to a new project, new ideas, new incidents, and things like that.

The solution has provided us with a tool for ticket management.

The most valuable feature of this solution is that it is user-friendly. It is web-based and can be accessed from everywhere.

This solution lacks features for project management. I would like to see more reports.

This is a stable and reliable solution.

We have a contract with a local partner for technical support and they are fine.

This solution was in place before I joined the company, so I don't know about the initial setup.

Our local partner handled the implementation for us.

I would rate this solution a seven out of ten.

Optimizing the IT and support departments to handle tickets without "going under" in the amount of work that they are doing by organizing the most important and urgent things first.

JIRA SD releases pressure on the IT department and generates statistics. It also makes the department more transparent and helps the employees. JIRA SD also helps for much better feedback on the work being done. All colleagues can see what is happening. When the customer calls, everybody can see what is happening and the feedback via email when a ticket is modified makes sure the customer is informed and does not start calling. This releases pressure too.

Transparency of the system helps both internal and external persons involved. Statistics allow us to deploy resources where needed. It shows problem zones and where more capacity is needed or more training. JIRA SD also makes employees better as it helps them to feel more important when it comes to customer satisfaction.

In general, JIRA has no relation to customers or financials. Therefore, marketplace add-ons are needed to make it work for customer-facing systems.

No, it is running very stable, but only when you have a test system to try out things. As it is designed for developers, it is hard to convince developers to tamper with the production system.

Yes, a plain vanilla installation will only last for less than 100 users. Handling more requires better hardware and configurations.

Atlassian only has a very expensive enterprise support contract (>$100K) or email/JIRA-Ticket support. That support is included when you buy the license. After a year, you only pay for this support and not the license anymore. It is 50% of the new license costs and called a "renewal".

I would suggest to always buy licenses through an Atlassian partner, so you can also rely on their expertise. This way you have two support contacts and does not cost you anything more, such a partner will also come to the location, which Atlassian will never do (Atlassian only does email (JIRA-Ticket support). Phone calls to Atlassian will always be sales support advising to file a JIRA support ticket. Tech support is mostly concentrated in Australia, so there is always a time zone delay for the tickets you raise.

We previously used CRM systems, like Vtiger CRM and SugarCRM. These are not intended for a development department.

Setup (install) is straightforward, but needs tweaking when you are a heavy user.

Setup of the projects is made easier, but there is a lot more you can do beyond initial setup. The automations will really help the company by delegating work the way your company operates.

We implemented with the aid of the vendor and external consultants.

It is hard to calculate costs you do not make.

It is also hard to calculate growing efficiency. 

I can see that JIRA avoids chaos and makes the whole company work more efficient as all feature requests and internal/external requests are all visible in the JIRA tickets and the Confluence wiki system.

It made money the first year already.

Costs are about $50 per user per year. JIRA is sold in user tiers of 25, 50, 100, 250, 500, 2000, 10,000, and unlimited users. It is bad when you have 51 users then the price is based on that 100 user tier. Users at 100 will be the most cost effective. 

JIRA Service Desk has different pricing as it is based on agents. On average, the price is about $300 per agent.

Do not forget to calculate add-on costs. These cost a percentage of the JIRA purchasing costs and are based on the number of JIRA users.

Not really, as it was much better than Bugzilla which we used before.

Buying a software solution is only a half part of the solution (or even less). You need to optimize usage of the software by hiring professionals who will help you to make the most of the software, especially in the beginning. 

Repeat hiring of external consultancy every couple of years as knowledge fades out (people get different tasks to do). You should optimize your software infrastructure and re-evaluate it every three to four years to make optimal use of your infrastructure as the outside world changes very fast. Requirements also change.

Service Desk and implementing typical ITIL processes (change, incident, problem, support management, etc.).

• Allowing customized processes for our service contracts.
• Reporting and easy export to Excel spreadsheets, or similar.

• Code available
• Emails for groups
• Usability 
• Bang for the buck (in small and mid-size organizations)

• SaaS version for large organizations (more than 2000 users) is not available.
• Include a split configuration in a layer part to allow cloud services to have almost full admin rights in SaaS.

The system is relatively straightforward to configure. The ability to add custom fields is useful as is the ability to customise the individual queues for the service desk requests to sit in.

It does not integrate very well with our email system (MS Outlook). When users log issues they sometimes include a paragraph of text, or a report, with some of the content highlighted in order to draw attention to a problem. The email integration seems to read only the ascii text and throws away all of the formatting. Also if a user emails an issue in and CC's their colleagues in, the system seems incapable of also CC'ing them in on any reply and subsequent dialogue.

Just completed evaluation

Atlassian Customer service is some of the best I have experienced. We have a 500 user Jira system (Without the Service Desk add-on) and I have raised a number of issues with Atlassian support. They have all been dealt with quickly and effectively.

We used a product called Infra which is being discontinued in it's current form. We decided to review other products as we had decided to 'jump ship' with Infra.

Licensing has been much improved recently. In their previous version of Service Desk Atlassian were insisting that the customers (people who raised tickets) were all licensed Jira users. They have dropped that now and the product came back onto the radar for a lot of organisations who had previously dismissed it, purely on the shortcomings of the license model.

We also looked at Vivantio Service Desk and will probably implement this instead of Atlassian Service desk.

Our product lifecycle management is done in JIRA Service Management. All the daily BAU tasks are tracked in JIRA Service Management on the Sprint device.

Our scrum team may be able to give more details, but the visibility features are great. It is user-friendly and fast, and we can relate the tasks.

There could be more optimization, and the pricing could be better too.

I joined the company three years ago, and we've been using it since then. It is a cloud-based solution.

The stability is good.

It is a SaaS service, so it is scalable. We have 5000 users using JIRA Service Management, and we plan to increase the number of users. However, we require some basic staff, mainly managers, for maintenance.

We have not required technical support.

We previously used ITAM, BMC Remedy and some other tools, and JIRA Service Management is comparatively better. Integration is also easy.

I am unaware of the initial setup, but it requires a signup and a purchase plan.

I am not aware of the licensing costs.

I rate this solution a nine out of ten and recommend it to others.

We use JIRA Service Management for internal product development. We use it as a ticketing tool, for issues and bugs, for user storage, etc.

I like the precise ticket management capabilities. JIRA Service Management is easy to use as well.

I think the performance can be better.

We've been using it for six months. It is deployed on the cloud.

It's pretty stable.

It's very scalable. We currently have four to five staff using this solution.

My experience with JIRA's technical support has been fine. I'd give them a nine out of ten.

Positive

The initial setup is straightforward.

I advise you to go for it. JIRA Service Management is user-friendly and can help you achieve what you want to achieve.