Zendesk Reviews

The first time I sued this product, I was working for a fast-growing startup and there was a lot of software. In terms of the service, there were 60% of questions based on issues. We could do a customized answer or handle customized activity to address this. However, 30% to 40% repeated certain questions over and over. We were able to prioritize our design based on these. Knowing what people were asking about gave us a direction. They helped us to prioritize features. 

We saw a decrease in the number of tickets. It was at least 25% less. There was an increase in customer satisfaction. And that was due to the fact that this solution helped us see what we needed to see and prioritize based on what most people wanted from the company. 

What is cool about Zendesk is that they invest a lot in their documentation. If you spend a reasonable amount of hours reading the documentation, you can have a good understanding of how the solution works. 

By default, by just using their predefined templates, you can get something very nice. 

I like how it works together with support. With Zendesk support we can insert articles in our resolution to close the ticket. Your colleagues can collaborate on everything as well including work and updating an article.

The fact that you can set up an approval process, where everybody can have their own opinion, however, in the end, I was the one that was validating or not. 

The insights they provide are great. For example, you can find out what are the most popular articles? What are the articles that are not that popular? What are the keywords that people search? In that case, if they don't find anything or almost nothing, that is a clear trigger for us to write an article or improve a current one about a specific topic based on search trends.

What is cool about Zendesk Guide is how it works together with others Zendesk products. Especially with support and with the analytics. Put those together for a small or medium-sized company and it's a really powerful tool.

If I write an article, and I have a team of 30 people, and they all have a Zendesk account, when I write an article, I send them an email. "Hey guys, I just wrote this article. It's one of the most popular topics this month on which we are not covered. Please check it and make sure that you include it in your resolutions". 

The issue is, once I send it to those 30 people, and they open it, the next morning, that article is the most popular article. It has 25 to 30 reviews, however, that's not right as 80% of those reviews were by my team, not by the customer. They need to find a way to separate internal link clicks from external ones. 

I've used the solution since 2014. I've used it across two different companies. 

The solution was stable. I never had issues. The scheduled maintenance was announced well in advance and was on the weekend during hours that I wouldn't have considered work anyway.

If you wanted to scale from ten agents to 1,000 agents, then it's tricky to do it by yourself.

That's the moment when you should go for an implementation partner or something. I tried to do it by myself. I tried scaling from three or five people to 30 people. And the biggest problem is when you have a structure, and you change the structure. I found that when I was doing extracts, I had a lot of data on the previous structure and I didn't have data on the current structure and I had to do a lot of manipulation in Excel. Basically, you are losing a lot of data in analytics at the moment you decide to change the structure of your team.

In my previous company, 30 to 40 people used this product. 

Support is not great. Their support is that specific support you get from a big American tech company. For example, instead of help, if you ask something specific, they point to an article with generic information.

That's why, if you don't figure it out by yourself, honestly, you are screwed. They don't help.

I can understand why it's like this. At the end of the day, you pay several hundreds of dollars per month. Only one person in the US is maybe paying $100,000 per year. I can understand why they are trying to optimize things, however, to do this through documentation, I don't know if it's effective. The bottom line is, sometimes when you ask a human question, you would like for them to receive a human answer. To get a human, sometimes it takes three days, sometimes one week.

There seemed to be only one guy handling my ticket. They were based in the US, and if I was trying to chase information about a ticket, it would take a while. They relied far too much on documentation and sharing articles. However, this seems to be a very American approach to technical support. 

Previous to having Zendesk, my company used a European solution called TOPdesk. We were the mother company, and we forced them to eventually use Zendesk. With this previous solution, we had more flexibility in building fields, however, it was a nightmare to do the integration and transition due to too much flexibility. That's why we switched.

I left the Zendesk world for Salesforce. So I'm not up to date anymore with what they're doing. I stopped using Zendesk almost a year ago. Salesforce was brought in so that we could have everything in one place. We wanted a CRM solution.

In terms of the initial setup, if you spend a reasonable amount of time reading documentation, you can do it by yourself with no issues. There might be one line of code. Not even. You can totally do it with point and click. That's very nice. 

We were a very small company. If we switched to anything to help make things more efficient, and we immediately saw an ROI. This was true with Zendesk as well. 

We found the solution to be a bit expensive. We were using the level just below enterprise grade. 

There aren't really any extra costs beyond the standard licensing. 

I'd advise those using Zendesk to make sure to connect Guide to analytics and to check what your customers are doing and improve the content according to their needs. This is the most important thing you can do.

I'd rate the solution at an eight out of ten.

One of our use cases of Zendesk Guide is to create a knowledge base. We also use it to host our videos and PDFs for customers. With Zendesk Guide, we have the Multibrand solution that we are leveraging, and we are creating multiple health centers, customized for each of our clients. 

We are working with the SaaS version of this solution. 

One of the benefits we have seen from Zendesk is that it's very easy to use. Once you have figured out the basic modalities, it's very easy to use and very easy to segregate your content between different headings. The navigation is very robust, which enables us to really see the entire health center. At the same time, it can let you go in a granular manner to a piece. It lets me break down my articles into multiple, small chunks of information. Recently, they introduced something called article reuse—I can write the article in one location, and then put it in different locations in the same health center, but only have to maintain that one article in terms of actually updating it. The content reuse feature is a very smart thing to have. 

One of the most valuable features is that Zendesk gives you a lot of configurability, and a lot of leeway in terms of customizing the look and theme. Zendesk offers you the facility to design your own landing page, as well as the look and feel of the entire knowledge base. At the same time, they offer themes that you can simply purchase and implement. Either way, it can really be turned into the right look and feel of the knowledge base required by our company, which is very important—if you have a bland-looking page, most of the time, people will lose interest. Zendesk also allows you to test the customizations before you publish it. It gives you a sandbox location where you can test everything new that you're trying to create and publish, which is very interesting. 

Another valuable feature is the security, which is very robust. The JWT and the SSO give us peace of mind, knowing that our content is secure and that nobody else can access it. They have tie-ups with various video platforms, so we can host our videos there, and then we can just add the code here once. Then, when the video changes, we don't have to update the code—it happens seamlessly. 

I could go on and on. Another valuable feature is that we can customize user access for content. In Zendesk Guide, we have various levels of approval which the content can go through before it is released. We can actually set the release date for particular content in the future, so that we don't have to keep track of it, and it automatically gets released then. Also, the labeling feature enables us to conduct very smart searches. 

Zendesk Guide could be improved by allowing us to put our assets in one location. What happens now for each article, for example, is we have to upload the images for that article to that location, so the image reuse is still not something that they have perfected. If they could allow us to update all the images in one location, and then pull the image from there, it would be easier when working on Multibrand projects. There are no Multibrand updates available—we have to update each brand manually. For my company, I have come up with an API tool which allows me to push the content to multiple brands together, but if you don't have something like that, you have to manually do it. 

They're still evolving, and though I feel like there is a lot that they can improve on, I am seeing ongoing improvement. Another improvement they could make is in regard to article editing. When you edit an article, the facilities provided aren't customizable. They could make it customizable and let the user choose their own font for headings and the paragraph, the number of headings they want, and just let us do a little bit more. When you add an image, even the resizing of the image is manual—they could provide an image resizing tool, to let us pick the size of the image, and make the process easier. 

As for additional features, I have noticed that Zendesk is concentrating more on the suite: messaging services, chatbot, etc. However, what they don't seem to realize is that most of their customers are using Zendesk for the knowledge base. They need to make the features within the knowledge base a little more robust. We are also looking for some enhancements. For example, I wanted a PDF download facility, but I just had to code it internally because Zendesk has an app, but you need to buy it and plug it in. 

I have been working with Zendesk Guide for almost three years. 

The stability and performance have been perfect. We have not had a single day of downtime, to date. 

As far as I've seen, this product doesn't require any maintenance. They are pretty smart about deploying new products, letting people know that it's all in there, and since it's a SaaS product, we don't have to handle manual updates. 

This solution is pretty easy to scale. You can put a lot of data in there—it doesn't seem to affect it at all. However, in terms of Multibrand, you have to make the updates manually. There is no feature to push to update to all the health centers. 

We are a six-people team, and we all work with Zendesk Guide. As far as usage, we have over 1,000 customers who are accessing Zendesk Guide, and we have more than 12 health centers that we have deployed. 

I have been in contact with Zendesk support. They have different levels with different levels of support. We are an Enterprise level, the highest that they have, so we have something called 24/7 online chat support. If we have a question, we are connected with a live agent, and they help us resolve our issue. The support is okay—I haven't had any issues. 

Before using Zendesk Guide, I was working with Confluence for almost a full year. Confluence makes it much easier for me to import a Word document and convert it into an article, whereas Zendesk doesn't allow you to do that very easily. It will ask you to upload it to Google Drive, and then from there you can import it. This isn't something most companies will allow, since Google Drive is not a very secure site to upload your confidential data. Downloading a PDF was also much easier in Confluence—I could just go there, click, select "PDF", and the entire case would get exported as a PDF. With Zendesk, in order to convert any section, article, or category into a PDF, you will either have to buy their app or do your own in-house coding. 

The setup process was pretty straightforward, and they have a very smart way of doing it. They have something called a brand, so we just go there, key our credentials, generate the certificate, merge it, and then we take that code and put it in our software, and it goes live. So the merging of Zendesk's health center is a pretty simple process. As the documentation writer, I was involved in the process, and we had our IT team handle the connection. In total, the process took about 24 hours. 

Zendesk's licensing is not cheap. For Enterprise, we are paying $200 per agent. It's a per-month cost, so it's pretty steep. There are some services you need to pay extra for. For example, with Zendesk Guide, we had to buy the most expensive offering in order to get Multibrand and everything. We also had to pay a lot of money for themes. 

Compared to this, Confluence doesn't work out very cheap either, but then Confluence is a game of numbers—if you have a lot of people in your company and you're planning to buy it for everybody, then even the documentation team can leverage that. 

To those considering implementing this solution, I would say Zendesk Guide could be suitable for your company if you're planning to leverage all its features: the ticketing, talking to customers, using the chatbot, etc. It makes more sense when you are using it as a comprehensive sellout product. If you are only using it for the knowledge base, it may not be the best product. 

I rate Zendesk Guide an eight out of ten. If I were rating it only as a knowledge base, I would rate it a seven and a half out of ten. 

Our primary use case of Zendesk Guide is for care and use instructions, or for web shop instructions. We use it to provide basic knowledge about how eCommerce products work—for example, "How do I cancel an order?"—as well as for contact forms, like registrations of warranty. It's not standard, but you can build several contact forms for one brand. A use case we are building now is for storing product pages and information so that our support team can sell products that are not on the web shop. We also use it for information about the company and we link it with the live chat so that we can share articles on the Zendesk Guide directly into the live chat, which is a great help to customers. 

We have 23 brands, which means we have to develop 23 Zendesk Guides, all in different languages. I'm pretty sure this solution is cloud-based because we don't store anything into our system. 

One of the most valuable features is the ease of use. If you take the standalone product, it is so easy to use, but if you want a tailor-made Zendesk Guide, you can't do it yourself. However, you can use a template that already exists—they have a lot, and they're very cheap, around 300-400 euros—and use it on all your brands. It's a very easy product to use. 

Zendesk Guide's customization could be improved. I would like it to be easier and maybe open-sourced, so that if you have a developer in your company, you can do it yourself. Right now, that isn't allowed, so you need to have it done via the integrator. Another improvement—this is nit-picking—is that it could be less easy to make changes. Some things are so easy that they sometimes look a little amateur-ish. Most of the templates are built-in so they can be used directly, so they are very simple. 

An additional feature I would like to see is an option to pay more for a more refined template.

We have been using Zendesk Guide for the last year. We acquired Zendesk three years ago, and we started to develop Zendesk Guide when we outsourced the customer service.

There are about six people involved with Zendesk Guide in my organization. We have plans to increase our usage. 

The tech support is very good, and was provided by the integrator himself. They know this solution a lot better than we do, and I have no complaints. 

Our company didn't previously use a similar solution. We used to build it ourselves on our website, but it was very disappointing. 

The installation is very easy. There's nothing to do because once you pay for the license, it's effective. For the first one, it took us about two to three weeks to totally set up and deliver, because we used an existing template. 

The integrator will set you up in the beginning, and then give you the key to upload everything. For deployment, I would say you need a team of three: the integrator, project manager, and operations—someone who is going to fill everything in. 

We had an integrator help us with implementation in the beginning. 

We receive less questions from customers, so this is a big win for our support. 

Zendesk Guide is linked to your Zendesk license, so there are no additional costs. 

I rate Zendesk Guide an eight out of ten, but I would never give a ten out of ten anyway. It's a very good product for the price you pay. 

To those considering implementation, I would advise you to draw up your plan before you buy the solution. 

We use Zendesk in multiple ways. We use it as a ticketing system for our reporting requests that come in for HR reporting. We also use Zendesk as a kind of workspace. 

We receive requests all across the enterprise, not just from HR employees. So, we work through that with the customer within Zendesk, and we communicate back and forth with them through the tickets. We also communicate with each other. We have a triage person who assigns a ticket to an analyst to complete the ticket. We get requests for a list of names, term dates, or something else, and we assign it to someone on our team, and then that person will create that report and send it to the person.

We use Zendesk as a kind of workspace. We've put up education around HR reporting in terms of what's available and who can have access to what within the Zendesk workspace within T-Mobile.

It is very easy to connect back and forth between the requester and the person fulfilling the ticket.

One of the drawbacks of Zendesk is that it doesn't provide a secure way for us to send data. So, we usually use a secure SharePoint folder link. We put that in the Zendesk ticket so that the requester has a secure way of getting to their data. 

I've dabbled a little bit in the reporting features, and it seems like they're a little bit limited, but it might be because of how we have it set up. It might be how we're configuring it or because we're not buying the higher-level reporting system for it.

I have been using this solution for three years.

It was pretty straightforward, but I'm not the one who configured it. Basically, there is a site to which you're given access, and you go through how to use it.

I would give it a seven out of 10.

We primarily use the solution for customer-facing tickets.

The solution is a kind of standard SaaS support for our customers when they have technical issues. Usually, they'll generate the ticket, sometimes they are not sure and may contact me as the main point of contact for our partnership. I'll generate the ticket with them CC'd on it. Then our support team takes it from there. Sometimes there's an additional contact that the customer may have provided and I'll add those in. We use the Slack integration with Zendesk Support. I'll usually add the additional context via the Slack integration, so it's added to Zendesk.

It's just offers really good collaboration flow between the customer success team that I'm on and the support team they're on. We obviously have a lot of back and forth sometimes, especially with our larger customers and more complex situations that we need to kind of go back and forth on.

I always find myself exclusively on Slack using Zendesk. I really enjoy the Slack integration. I don't think I've ever been the actual interface for Zendesk. Our support team of course lives in the Zendesk interface every day. I kind of just use the Slack integration. 

The stability is very good.

The initial setup is simple and straightforward.

An area of opportunity for Zendesk is probably just when there's a long email chain and everything gets forwarded to support, I know it can be time consuming for them to extract the important information from the email chain. Sometimes if there was a way to just flag the actual issue out of those email chains - that would be really helpful.

It's just so time consuming, especially trying to find attachments too. I think it'd be good to have just one place, "Here's all the attachments and the 24 emails that's been sent in this chain."

It's hard to say what needs improvement being someone who usually does the communication was Zendesk in Slack rather than the actual interface. However, on the customer success side, it would be really, really helpful if I can somehow categorize all these Zendesk tickets by customers, so that I can see all the outstanding support tickets. That way, the status is in one place for that customer. Right now I really have to check by ticket number. 

We use Pendo, which is another complete different software, however, they have something called NPS scores. I just do a quick search in Slack for the customer's name. Then I see all the NPS scores out of the search results. If I put in the customer name, it's just kind of not associate on the account level in this solution.

It's my understanding that we have been using the solution for about a year and a half.

The stability of the solution is excellent. It doesn't crash or freeze. there are no bugs or glitches to speak of. Its performance has been reliable and very good overall.

The scalability capability seems pretty straightforward. I can't speak to how the support team is using it, to be honest. I can't speak to if they actually have attempted to scale it in any meaningful way just yet.

Our support and customer success teams are the main users of the product. We have about 15 people in total on the solution at any given time.

We also use Jira internally. We also use Pendo.

I was not involved in thte initial setup of the solution. I can't speak to how straightforward or difficult the process was.

We are customers and end-users of the solution.

We are using the current version of the solution.

I would rate the solution at an eight out of ten. It works really well. It's very seamless, and is very good software. Just from the customer success side, based on what I do, I would just like a more centralized account organization kind of feature.

I'm in support and I'm using it basically for incident management and things like that.

It's very convenient to use. 

We can add the time, including the time it takes for a particular incident ticket to be resolved. It's convenient that we can add the time taken for each incident ticket. It helps illustrate how long issues take to resolve.

The solution is quite fast.

It is quite a stable product overall.

Zendesk used to have a whole reporting tool, which they have actually terminated. That has been a small blow for us, however, it used to be a feature where they had that tool that allowed you to just have reports on the go, on the fly. They should bring this feature back. 

They have something called Zendesk Explore, which isn't as good as what they had in place previously. The reporting and analytics part should be improved even more. The effort taken from the user side to configure the reports is a bit more when it's compared to the solution that was there earlier. 

I've been using the solution for about one year or so at this point. It's been only a short while.

We've found the solution to be very, very stable. It doesn't crash or freeze. There are no bugs or glitches. It's quite good.

I used to use TOPdesk. We switched to Zendesk. Now we are comparing the two to see which we'd prefer. Some of my colleagues are still using TOPdesk, however, I am exclusively on Zendesk.

I'm actually currently working on a comparison between this solution and TOPdesk. I'm also looking at Jira Service Management, however, I don't know if it is the best out there or not.

We are just customers and end-users. We aren't partners with Zendesk and we don't have a business relationship with them.

I'd rate the solution at an eight out of ten. Largely, we have been happy with its capabilities.

I'd recommend the solution, especially if a company is considering a choice between this and TOPdesk. TOPdesk is somewhat inferior and Zendesk is a better choice. 

We use Zendesk Support to receive customers' requests. So, we basically emanate me a customer and get a submit a request from our Zendesk. We just pick it up from Zendesk and respond to their requests. You can also receive chats through Zendesk. 

Overall, Zendesk works well for me. The icons here are not overwhelming, and I only need to contact support once a day. Then, once you receive a request, you'll get an immediate notification, and you can respond to the client right away. Additionally, on Zendesk, you can create different items to categorize requests from clients in different regions, such as the US or other areas. We should definitely support that.

Additionally, Zendesk has a profile and knowledge base. You can connect Zendesk from Notion as well because we use Notion too. Any information you type on Notion, you can easily bring it in on Zendesk, which is super, super cool. Then if you want to get more information about the client you're working on, you can get them on Zendesk, which is super cool.

I have a concern regarding the side conversations. Instead of creating a separate transcript, you can simply click on the side conversation tab to communicate with clients. It should be within the same interface. 

So when you respond, you can easily switch back to them without opening another ticket or creating additional back-and-forth conversations. It's more streamlined that way. It keeps everything organized and avoids cluttering the interface with multiple tickets for one conversation.

I have been using Zendesk Support for two years now.

There is always a network issue with Zendesk. But we don’t know whether it is managed. The network issue is that when I call, it does not let us. It could be from Zendesk, which I think they should work on.

I would rate the stability of Zendesk Support an eight out of ten.

It is a scalable solution. But for me, there is maybe some Slack thing, really for me. Slack becomes more than the same time. But all those decks, once you open Zendesk to attend to the customer’s request on the phone and all, and hence I would rate the scalability of Zendesk Support a nine out of ten.

Around 400 users who are using Zendesk Support in our organization. With Zendesk Support, you can also create the same Macro on Zendesk. The time you use to type in the calculator will take you more time. So it is better just to create a Macro instead of you wasting like five minutes typing.

Once you have already created the Macro, you can just send whatever response you want to decline if you are sure you know what the feedback really is. So I can resolve a customer request immediately.

The customer service and support experience were okay. When contacted, they respond really fast. I’ll give it to them on that angle. Once the network is down, within five or ten minutes, they will fix it.

Positive

For me, the initial setup for Zendesk was straightforward. It is not complex. 

I think the advice about Zendesk Support should be to use Zendesk essentially if you are in a customer support role. It is very important. Even if you are in pair with your customers onboarding, Zendesk is user-friendly. You can easily get the customer's request immediately to resolve and then create a Macro on Zendesk. We can import information from the Notion page to Zendesk, and you can even import and connect articles on Zendesk.

Overall, I would rate the solution a nine out of ten.

We've been satisfied with its general capabilities. 

The stability has been very good.

The licensing model needs to be more customer-friendly. At the moment you have to buy different pieces. ServiceNow, for example, provides just a part of their premium.

There needs to be better insights and analytics. Right now it's lacking.

The dashboard could be better.

We haven't bought service provisioning. We haven't bought the knowledge base, those were part of the main product. The chatbot is there, however, we tried it and it was lacking.

I've been using the solution for over seven years. It's been a while. 

We have found the stability to be quite good. It's reliable. There are no bugs or glitches. It doesn't crash or freeze.

We also are familiar with ServiceNow which has better licensing and better analytics. It also has a nicer dashboard.

I wasn't a part of the implementation process. I wouldn't be able to comment on how it went or what was involved. 

The licensing should be more extensive and not broken into individual pieces. It's hard to figure out what you need at the outset.

We are a customer and an end-user.

I'd rate the solution at a six out of ten. It's good, however, it lacks a few features across different areas.