Appian vs Jira Service Management (Jira Service Desk)

• I have observed after version 17.1 we have a lot of good features in Appian that improve usability (UX). This adds real value in this competitive Digital space.
• You can understand business use case and convert it to a logical process automation.
• Process Modeller has improved a lot and providing smart services use adds more value.
• Service integration helps us to seamlessly integrate with third-party systems

Read full review

• Highly configurable Notification Scheme, allowing free customization on who receives notifications and when
• Ability to add extra features through the highly diverse Atlassian Marketplace.
• Simple and highly customizable ticket interface. The Software can be almost completely branded in every aspect to represent your organization.
• Integration with Jira Software allows support tickets to be moved into other Log Term projects as necessary.

Read full review

• Advanced functionality requires use of the Appian expression language. The more advanced the logic, the harder it is to build with the expression language. This means development expertise is more relevant if you need advanced functionality, which I imagine applies almost all the time. I would much prefer if they allowed some common language such as JavaScript out of the box.
• Debugging has proved difficult. It’s easy for developers to get the app to or feature to a “working” state but it needs robust alpha testing.
• Deployment can be tricky. When a solution gets big and there are many teams and dependencies, it needs a careful process to ensure things don’t break.
• Reasuability of Appian objects is both a pro and con. Reusing objects across apps may be more trouble than its worth because of creating heavy dependencies. Experience is helpful to strike the right balance.

Read full review

• Some of the built-in functions and workflows are surprisingly limited given the fact that you can customize a lot with JQL. These limited areas do not allow you to use JQL. For instance, the built-in notifications are lacking. They have one that is great-- "notify on critical ticket creation"-- EXCEPT that it does not allow you to notify a group or anything, only individual users.
• The ticket interface is a little odd for agents. Changing the status is not a simple drop down from unassigned to open to in progress to pending, etc. There are a couple of tabs ("investigate", "pending", "workflow") where you can change the status in different ways. Maybe I am just not used to this way of doing it, but I feel like it could be simplified.
• It can get complicated deleting/changing some of the out-of-the-box fields and rules, because you never know what will break workflows or other automated/built-in features.

Read full review

• Our objective to reduce customer effort when dealing with government by 25% was exceeded. In the process of applying for an alcohol licence renewal alone, we saw approximately 80% reduction in time and effort for the business customer - and that was just a prototype! Imagine the possibilities when this is taken into a live environment!

Read full review

• We would not be very organized as a software company without using JIRA and it would in turn reflect negatively across the entire studio and the products that we release.
• Almost everyone in our company uses JIRA in one way or another from developers to testers to marketing and every team in between.
• The only time I have witnessed that JIRA has a negative effect on our objectives is if they suffer a major failure on their part and JIRA is not accessable or usable for a length of time. Thankfully in over 3 years of using JIRA this has only occurred a handful of times.

Read full review