Fieldproxy vs. SAP Field Service Management

SAP Field Service Management fits our SAP EAM strategy and natively integrates with our landscape. SAP Field Service Management works well with all of our short cycle work that is primarily executed by our internal work force, but we did not use SAP Field Service Management for our long cycle work. Initially SAP Field Service Management did not fit our needs, but we will look to re-evaluate - since there has been substantial improvements with Crowd Service.

Incentivized

• In my experience, SAP Field Service Management is user friendly
• SAP Field Service Management has good integration with c4c and s4
• In my experience, SAP Field Service Management has easy configuration

Incentivized

• In activities and sub activities
• Sync between all the environments
• Development functions must be same in mobile , ui and windows app

Though it is good tool but still having issues with stability and need good amount of technical support to implement. The Industry still do not have good resource available for supporting this product. SAP should provide lighter user manuals/ set up documents. The ones which are already there looks very complex and requires lot of time to go through

Incentivized

SAP Field Service Management has definitely very nice interface and mobile application. Also thanks to advanced business rules we can automate a lot of processes and many AI functionalities can be used to help dispatchers, technicians and service team in their work. It also has strong integration capabilities (using e.g. SAP CPI or Proaxia Connector).

Incentivized

Support is not very good. Actually one way to support this product is to have flexible and robust support. As it is a relatively new product and continuously evolving so it is better that SAP provide quick support on issues which may feel are trivial.

Incentivized

I haven't worked with others.

Incentivized

• We have digitalized and standardized the process

Incentivized