Likelihood to Recommend IFS Field Service Management is well suited for ad-hoc reporting and querying of your dataset(s). It also is great for inventory management, processing orders, and handling EDI transaction sets to third party partners and suppliers.
Read full review Small deployments, where you have some specific need for ServiceMax and absolutely need offline capabilities, and are willing to deal with the problems. Otherwise, you may be better off looking at the built-in Work Orders and field service module that
Salesforce is now providing. Their app is direct competition for ServiceMax and integrates much better with cases and knowledge articles.
Read full review Pros Order Placement - IFS makes placing orders quite easy. From the simple interface down to selecting inventory, the experience is simple and clean Reporting - Querying database records is straightforward and easy to do. Queries can then be drilled down to individual records or exported to excel for further manipulation and analysis. Customer Creation - Creating new customers and managing and maintaining existing records is a simple and easily repeatable exercise Read full review As it's built on Salesforce, the reporting tools are fairly robust The service flow managers can be setup to easily lead technicians to entering data in the right place Read full review Cons Field Customization - Adding fields or inputs to particular entities is not very easy. In a world of point and click development, IFS is behind the curve Order Automation - for bulk order placement it would be nice to have an easy mechanism to upload orders via an Excel or csv template. We've written some custom programs to perform this, but a more user friendly, "out of box" solution would be welcomed. Read full review Dispatch console seems slow and the data is more of a pull than a push into the database. It seems to be a Ferrari and takes a lot of labor hours to configure. Still does not integrate with Apple's products very well. Read full review Support Rating Engaged account management. Support is based worldwide but handoffs have not been too painful.
Read full review Alternatives Considered I was not part of the software selection process and cannot provide insight into any of the alternatives in this arena at this time.
Read full review ServiceMax has an offline capability, and also integrates with our
Salesforce side of business. At the time,
Salesforce did not have a field service application so we could not consider it, but if we could now, we would probably go with that instead. ServiceMax is also expensive. But at the time, ServiceMax was the only offering out there that integrated with
Salesforce , had mobile offline capability, and could operate at the scale we needed.
Read full review Return on Investment Positive - streamlined order processing has allowed our business to scale without requiring additional bodies for that specific need. Positive - Reporting has allowed valuable insight into historic business trends which has allowed us to be proactive instead of reactive in many areas. Negative - Customizations have proved costly and cumbersome when upgrading to the next version of the software. Read full review ROI for ServiceMax is mostly dependent on how in depth the organization wants the software. Our ROI is expected within the second year of operation due to the complexity of integration and the initial training requirements for in-house programmers. Inventory control ROI is expected within year three or four due to the number of technicians and creating the foundation of information to import into ServiceMax. Expectations are the front end programming will be complete and our programmers will be better acquainted with the modules and architecture to make the inventory integration smoother than the initial integration. Our organization has been working with ServiceMax for ten months and beginning to incorporate the financials to the work orders. This process has not been as seamless as once projected and the root causes are under investigation. It appears the original fields available to track time between employees were not in depth nor segregated sufficiently for granularity. Read full review ScreenShots