Mhelpdesk is a field service software solution that manages field technicians, work orders, employee scheduling, and client billing. By combining and integrating multiple business management tools, Mhelpdesk provides a solution that eliminates double-data entry while giving business owners visibility over their field technicians in real-time.
$49
per month
ServiceMax
Score 7.9 out of 10
N/A
ServiceMax’s mission is to help customers with asset-centric field service management software. ServiceMax’s mobile apps and cloud-based software provide an overview of assets to field service teams. By optimizing field service operations, customers across all industries can better manage the complexities of service, support faster growth and run more profitable, outcome-centric businesses.
Mhelpdesk is perfect for smaller companies and mid-sized companies I would say. Larger companies may need something a little more advanced for lack of better words or able to handle thousands upon thousands of constant work orders, etc. Smaller companies or companies that are mid-size would benefit from this program the most as it provides the necessary programming to succeed along with its ease of use.
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.
mHelpDesk can be used to initiate work orders, track them, update them, and know when they have been completed without a log of phone calls or emails being necessary.
mHelpDesk allows administrators to see an overview of the workorders which have been placed or are in progress to analyze the efficiency of the operation.
mHelpDesk permits mobile updates, questions, comments, or completion notes to be entered and immediately seen by all involved parties (tech, dispatcher, tech supervisor, administrators, and originators of workorders).
mHelpDesk grew VERY fast during the time we used them. I think as a result of trying to cater to many industries and customers, they weren't able to add new features and fix bugs as quickly as they could have if they would have spent a little less on advertising and more on perfecting the product first.
Nesting layout. Looks very much like Quickbooks Online. If you open a customer, then a ticket, then an invoice, etc., - you have all these windows open and have to close out one at a time. When you're in a hurry and time is critical, this becomes annoying quickly.
Speed. mHelpDesk 1 was really fast. mHelpDesk 2 was SLOW! It's improved over time, but as pretty as it was, we ended up sticking with mHelpDesk 1 because it was so much faster.
Want to send your client a statement of all their invoices? Too bad! If you integrate with Quickbooks, you can do this - but mHelpDesk didn't have an option to simply send a statement of all invoices. This is such a simple thing that was needed and no great solution to do it. You could export to CSV, but how many customers want to get that?
Invoice/Commission tracking. Say you create an invoice and you want to track the sales person that created it - maybe for a quick purchase without creating a ticket. You can't do that in mHelpDesk 2. You HAVE to create a TICKET first, assign a staff member, THEN create an invoice. That's a lot of work to make a quick sale and track the commission. With mHelpDesk 1, we were at least able to make the invoice - it would automatically create a ticket, and then we could assign the ticket to the tech afterward. With Version 2 - creating an invoice stopped generating a ticket automatically. This was very frustrating and another reason we stuck with version 1.
This tool is very affordable, easy to use and to adopt than any of its competitors. Since we purchased this tool our field services feels smooth, seamless and professional. This has highly promoted to productivity in the company.
According to my experience Mhelpdesk offers more robust inventory tracking, integration, automation and streamlined workflow than any of its competitor.
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.
We are 6 months into it with a 50% rollout completed. We need more time to pass and full rollout to be completed before making a hard statement as to the ROI.
We have already seen greater efficiency in dispatching techs in regards to how many projects per day may be handled (we know of their downtime) and travel time mangement (by being able to map the locations and track them easier).
No negative impacts on ROI have yet to be seen nor are they projected.
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.
