Flowdock vs. Sherpany

Flowdock is well suited for small teams and to environments that doesn't need too much reliability. I think it has some management problems that can make your life difficult if you have to manage a big amount of users. If you want just a tool communication with basic features (without using any integration or robust features) it can be suitable for you. You should try Flowdock using its free version for a small team and compare with others similar products. Flowdock delivers team chat and collaboration features, but is not necessarily the best product. Maybe some usability problems that disturb me won't be so relevant to you.

Incentivized

Independently Invited by TrustRadius

A de minimis incentive was given to thank the reviewer for their time. The incentive was not used to bias or drive a particular response, nor was the incentive contingent on a positive endorsement. More Info

Sherpany helps us to retrieve information from previous meetings quickly. Participants for conferences can be contacted and their records can be viewed every time, wherever, and whether they are provided by the data they collect.

Incentivized

Independently Invited by TrustRadius

A de minimis incentive was given to thank the reviewer for their time. The incentive was not used to bias or drive a particular response, nor was the incentive contingent on a positive endorsement. More Info

• Mobile app experience
• Software integrations
• Notifications

• It makes preparation for a board meeting very easy.
• It allows us to easily retrieve data from earlier meetings.
• It helps me to keep track of important information.
• It avoids the need (and burden) to carry around paper binders.

• One thing a little bit annoying is that a lot of links to others Flowdock sections (preferences, external services, etc) will open a new window/tab. Each click may take you to a new window and you can get lost easily.
• There isn't a quick access list to members of your organization to start a private chat. I took a while to find how to do that. The interface and usability could be better.
• There isn't an app for Windows Phone.
• Sometimes you try to load some conversation and it doesn't show anything. It is not frequently but happens sometimes.

Incentivized

Independently Invited by TrustRadius

A de minimis incentive was given to thank the reviewer for their time. The incentive was not used to bias or drive a particular response, nor was the incentive contingent on a positive endorsement. More Info

• Changes with new versions should be well communicated in advance and consider in more detail the impact on existing boardrooms
• Too expensive
• Generally, more possibilities for customizing e.g. it should be possible to define security levels for access individually (why do I have to retype my email every time I synchronize?) or it should be up to the users whether and how they want to use labels (why can I only have one label per document?)

I go with the flow because I'm a newer employee and Flowdock works as advertised. If it were my decision to choose a team communciator for the organization, I'd recommend we go with Slack for its robust features and ever-changing/evolving software integrations. Slack is the outright innovator in the space and will continue to hold that role for some time.

They're good when needed. Sherpany offers a much more efficient way of working

Slack is a similar software.

Private chat or channels are well implemented in both softwares and both are also very easy to setup.

Besides of some usability problemas I think Flowdock is still better than Slack in this user experience and design.

The second point is the price. Flowdock is half price of Slack ($3/month). If you are a student or a non-profit organization, you are able to get some special license.

Incentivized

Independently Invited by TrustRadius

A de minimis incentive was given to thank the reviewer for their time. The incentive was not used to bias or drive a particular response, nor was the incentive contingent on a positive endorsement. More Info

Much easier to annotate documents, better User Interface which makes it very easy to access material discussed in earlier Meetings; also very easy to navigate between different topics on the agenda.

• Our company uses it by default.
• I enjoy the ability to communicate outside of text messages...keeps the conversation on in it's own bucket.

• The only negative thing I can see is that members can be victims of technostress and sometimes forget their password, how to find a document in a session. My role is to help them, reassure them and find a solution with them
• The positive is that all our members are often members of several committees at once and instead of receiving folders with a ton of documents, which are often cumbersome and heavy, everything is on the IPads. They can also annotate their documents as they want.