Fin vs. Vision Helpdesk

Fin is well-suited to most use cases as long as it is trained accordingly. With a robust, well-designed knowledge base, Fin can extrapolate information from help articles and provide detailed instructions to an end user without simply sending a link to the article without context. In my experience, Fin is best suited to standard support requests. As the product becomes more complex and product types change, Fin seems less successful at accurately supporting those requests. It is best to maintain Fin's knowledge sources continuously.

I think that there is probably nothing that Vision Helpdesk can't do given enough work to customize it. The problem is that you almost have to have someone dedicated to knowing everything there is to know about the system and then have them be the administrator of all the customizations and feature additions you want. It's great that it can do so much, but it's not great that it's so complicated and has very little out-of-the-box configurations.

Incentivized

• It is very easy to train
• It does a great job of recommending answers when little context is given.
• I love the ability to create a snippet to address issues in the moment or in the long term, based on FAQs.

Incentivized

• The best thing for us - the timer. It's really cool. We can start the timer and end it when support finishes. It's very important for working with other companies we give support for.
• Good-looking, with good visualisation and usability dashboard.
• Ticket transfer between support users, comments, ticket printing.
• The best price and functionality, comparing to other help desks.
• Support. Best support I have seen on internet. Helped with setup, and helped with few minor questions.

• It seems some users really struggle to figure out how to escalate to a human (especially through email).
• Not excited about how "soft" resolutions still count as resolutions and are paid for. Though some abandoned cases appear to be able to be concluded as "the user got the answer they needed", there are others where they clearly didn't, because they just open up another chat (or even more), trying to get more info. This pads the resolution stats and makes it seem more effective than it actually is.
• Cost -- Fin is quite expensive. It helps us with scaling coverage, but we're not really saving money.

• Chat feature.
• Remote desktop.
• Get more integration with other software and Mobile apps.

We have been and will be continuing our journey with Intercom and nothing too concerning has happened that I have experienced or heard of that has us on the edge yet. If it ever happens it will be something along the lines of "Outgrowing" the use of need of the platform.

Incentivized

For us it's really best solution.

Much improved and improving feature set, but overall navigation of the interface and platform is cumbersome. While it's worthwhile to continue building out new functionality and features, there should be some effort to make overall usage more intuitive. Becoming an admin requires either months of daily usage or more complex training.

Really simple, good-looking interface, many features and customizations

always there

Incentivized

Fin is super quick and top notch.

Incentivized

I can get help by asking Fin questions about itself. It answers accurately, citing its own Help Center resources with visuals. It can reason and dialogue well. But when it comes to getting human support for Fin, it is not as quick. It can sometimes take a few days. They are polite and well-meaning. Some things aren't their fault (product limitations), but there was one occasion where something took a long time to resolve with lots of back and forth but it was I who found out the error in the end that they missed, so they didn't really help resolve it.

Incentivized

Support from Vision Helpdesk was rather lackluster. We uncovered a bug pretty early on in our use of the system and it took them about a month to fix it. Our internal admin of the system had to keep pestering them to get it fixed. It wasn't critical to our business but was something we needed fixed and it just seemed like they didn't care that much about fixing it.

Incentivized

It was great. We were able to walk through step by step and get our questions answered along the way.

Incentivized

The implementation was surprisingly easy but we are having to adapt from our old process to work well with Intercom.

Incentivized

Our previous support platform didn't offer an AI agent (they used it internally for their own tickets, but there were delays with shipping it to their users, i.e., us, so we migrated to Intercom). Our colleagues from different brands within our own company demoed a different chat-only tool, but it looked much less impressive than what Fin offered, so we haven't considered it either.

Vision Helpdesk was more open for an NGO while the other companies were more attended on the "big-money", which we don't have as an NGO. Second point is that Vision Helpdesk is very easy and simple to use. Not too much installation, programming etc.

Incentivized

The product is very scalable and has helped us scale our user base and onboard 10x the users in just one month. We couldn't have done it without Fin

Incentivized

• New role opportunities — Using the “Fin-first” approach has reduced the workload for our Tier 1 team, giving them more time to focus on their own career growth. It’s also opened the door to a dedicated, AI-focused role, where a team member regularly reviews Fin’s answers and makes updates to help it perform even better.
• Enabling Fin has also reduced our response time and allowed us to meet SLA's.

Incentivized

• Most cost-effective help desk software I have researched from Kayako to SAAS [products] like Zendesk.
• We got more features and easy customization done with Vision Helpdesk which where not possible for Zendesk and Kayako was too costly.
• Ticket tracking has been easier and faster with Vision Helpdesk; for our web hosting business we prefer a download version which is not possible with SAAS help desk providers ( Zendesk or Freshdesk).