Reviews (1-24 of 24)
Cherwell addressed the void we had of not having a central tracking system for IT issues. We used to only use emails for work assignment and tracking for all faculty and student IT problems. This was meant to replace that entirely.
- After proper training on setting up the views and servers, Cherwell did a good job separating various department ownership of tickets. Our work views weren't cluttered with irrelevant information.
- There is a lot of information that can be embedded into tickets. Such as sub-task assignments that could contain almost the same information as a ticket itself. Lot of customization options.
- Custom personal dashboards were nice, once I figured out how to do it. Not everyone wants to see things the same way as other people, and being able to move touch points where you want is always a plus.
- While I understand that a lot of customization can be up to an organization, the platform was always a huge pain when going beyond the installed client. The web client and mobile app were very problematic and clunky, locked up frequently.
- My university was 50% Windows/50% Apple, and there's no Apple client.
- The built in remote control capabilities on tickets for client machines didn't play well with our active directory. We always just used a different program.
- Error handling could have been much better. Accidentally assigning ticket items to "non-existent" resources could crash the client. Such as if the resource was removed before a worker's view was refreshed.
- Tickets can go into limbo very easily, and seemed to require more development than it should to protect us from doing that. This is because there's a lot of different ways to do the same thing. Too many touch points all over the place in the UI.
- Too many ticket priority options. Clients could be assigned personal higher priorities through VIP status, tickets could be given their own priorities that conflict with client status, and SLA deadlines could assign other conflicting priorities. There were more but these were the most problematic if you're using Cherwell in a situation where you have limited developer time to nail down all the inconsistencies every day.
- There was an arbitrary time tracking feature on tickets that attempted to gather data on how long certain resources took, but because the UI was very cumbersome this was more of a pain to do and was very inaccurate of the actual work it takes to do certain things.
- Allow a ticket to be put on pending when it can't be resolved within the SLA
- Create a task for when another technician needs to assist with the ticket, for something out
- Allow you to email customers through portal without giving your personal email out
- Sometimes comments made on a ticket do not generate emails to the technician who owns it, and they will not know there is an update from the customer without checking it
- Sometimes I will see an error pop up when copying text but it can easily be closed
- Sometimes the time-out window for staying logged in does not appear on top of other applications so I will not know it's logging me out
Cherwell may not be suited for longterm projects, ones that take months or over a year to accomplish. Our team hasn't integrated the feature yet so I can't speak on how well it works.
- I really like that when repetitive requests come in we can create a problem ticket and then communicate with all requesters under one incident.
- I like the flexibility in being able to add journal notes, assign tasks and one having one place to look for all information on a project. It's simple but I like that we can attach documents.
- I would like to see more project management aspects incorporated. The ability to track progress on a timeline/graph. We've customized a template for office moves but are limited in the number of steps it will track before I need to add another incident.
- I want the contact information to be more robust so that multiple people can be added to an incident and e-mailed at once instead of having to type in names in emails over and over again.
- Resolution description is buried in the e-mail template that we send.
- Cherwell's ticketing system does a great job of following a designated workflow. Consistency is important for any organization.
- Cherwell allows for customized workspaces, so a user can see the things that are relevant to them. This cuts down on time it would take to sort through tickets in order to find what is relevant to a particular user.
- Cherwell would often crash, both on logging in or in the middle of entering a ticket. This was extremely difficult and time-consuming on my end.
- While it was possible to customize a workspace, the method for doing so was not intuitive.
- There was not a large help or training source to draw from in order to better oneself at Cherwell.
- Automated workflows are done very well. There is a broad and configurable set of automations available, which allow for effective incident routing.
- Reporting is very flexible with all the options available, dashboards and graphing in an automated manner can be an effective delivery or ITIL reports.
- Web based clients allow for some good basic functionality, which are good for customers, or end users.
- Within our deployment model of Cherwell, there are core functional pieces that have to be configured at the top level, rather than the sub levels, which make some areas difficult to manage. For example, if one agency wants to use feature x in one way, but another agency wants to configure the same feature in a different way, then consensus has to be gained first. Its not as fully flexible in the base configuration space as would be ideal.
- Automated email processes, especially in the volumes that the State of Wisconsin goes through require some tweaking to allow them to fire in an effective way. We sometimes see problems with backlogs of these.
- Licensing based on concurrency and usage is a very modern approach, however, it leads to challenges in how customers use it. For example, we have automated log-off's in place for the local clients in order to manage our own usage, to maintain reasonable costs.
- The Cherwell application has multiple processes to supply the requested information and the resolved information.
- Time Tracking is added, the cost can then be submitted to the hospital.
- Documentation can also be uploaded within the assigned ticket, to supply information to other tasked resources.
- The application is very good.
- This weekend the current version was upgraded.
- Senior management can supply full information of the time tracking with the associated ticket numbers.
The Cherwell Service Management application is installed within Citrix, this is then available for all TransForm SSO resources to resolve any requested issues or service requests. Hospital resources can connect to the Cherwell Service Management website and supply information for the incident or service request
Within the Cherwell Service Management Application, the Record Details supply the Record Type; Service Type; Priority 1 to 5 and scheduled date to be completed.
- Easy for users to create a help desk ticket for support, and receive automated progress updates.
- Easy for support staff to consolidate all open tickets, both by site as well as by issue type to identify incidents that could be related across multiple locations.
- Well integrated with Active Directory services.
- Cherwell offers more functionality than we are currently taking advantage of, which sometimes makes the support interface appear bloated.
- Offers a great ITIL framework out of the box
- Allows for a lot of customization and hooks into other software
- Sets up an out-of-the-box process for a ticket lifecycle if you don't have a process already set
- Creating and running reports is ridiculously, impossibly complex and complicated
- The product is so open-ended it's almost too broad. We have ended up creating a lot of in-house customizations to the product that would have been nice to have out of the box.
- Dashboards are great to have but they are awful in implementation. They are not dynamic and act more like a Bitmap file made in Windows 95 Microsoft Paint than a dynamic webpage. It would be nice if Dashboards were dynamic and were more like HTML or a web-based platform. It doesn't make sense why web design products like WIX exist yet the dashboards are needlessly complicated and have static image borders, sizes, etc.
- Configuration is easy and doesn't require expensive consultants to do every little thing you need to adjust. I'm able to make minor and even major enhancements by myself. I find the development UI mostly intuitive.
- The amount of things we can automate in our Support department using Cherwell is wonderful. We've not yet taken full advantage of this but are excited at the possibilities. From automatically creating and classifying tickets to responding to customers with specific attachments they need, Cherwell is going to help us eliminate wasted time.
- Designing with Blueprints is an intelligent and efficient way to add new functionality to your Cherwell instance without all of the risk. Rollback files make it easy to "undo" any mistakes. This also allows you to develop in one environment and apply your Blueprints to the Production environment once fully tested.
- During my time working on the Cherwell implementation and subsequent modifications, I've noticed some 'out of the box bugs' that I'd like to see corrected in future versions of Cherwell. Some are simple oversights. Examples include leaving the Last Name out of the default Grid for the Customer table and some issues with the SLA date fields being set correctly in some cases.
- Cherwell really needs a distributed data center model so global customers can run a single SaaS instance and whose remote teams can connect to their nearest Cherwell server. Our teams in France and the USA currently connect to one Cherwell server in the UK and the performance/latency for our folks furthest away from the server could be better.
- The documentation could certainly be expanded upon. It does a good job explaining what everything is but doesn't go into enough detail to help you understand how to use it. Examples could be included at the bottom to help readers understand the content and how to apply it.
- Ticket Handling and routing. Being a larger organization getting tickets routed to the proper internal groups to resolve is key.
- Maintaining level of service. Without any ticketing system we would be hard pressed to keep track independently of issues/calls/emails received.
- Asset management. Utilizing a web link to inventory new equipment assignments aids in troubleshooting with users as the equipment is bound to their userid. So when a ticket is generated for their ID a snapshot of what equipment they have and possibly are calling about is presented.
- The interface is somewhat clunky to navigate and at times finding where things are located takes some time.
- If you are idle too long in the application it will constantly pop up a message that you have been logged out due to inactivity but you cannot then close the application without having to end the task from the task manager in Windows.
- Blueprints and One-Steps all for maximum flexibility and endless possibilities. Password resets, account onboarding/offboarding automation, self-service portal, and many many more.
- Form building allows virtually endless possibilities for capturing data from end users or technicians alike. Publish them in the client, the web client, or the portal and help gather requirements from the beginning to ensure efficient use of resources.
- Report building is very easy and configurable. Build customer variables, charts, graphs, matrices, and more without having to know any coding languages.
- The performance of the system seems process heavy. Often takes a while to load specific screens.
- Out of the box features on upgrades seem inconsistent on when and where they are applied for fear of overwriting previous custom work done in the system.
- Organization of one-steps could use some work. Certain folders can only be accessed from particular regions of the orange or blue pills.
- One-Steps are easy to create use and save so much time!
- We used majority out-of-the-box Cherwell features, and didn't need to spend time developing it ourselves.
- Because Cherwell has so many out-of-the-box tools, some development options are limited to what is already provided
- The dashboards are amazing.
- It is easily configured to meet your needs.
- The reporting/searching capability is easy to use and available to all users.
- The Service Catalog in the Customer Portal is not very user-friendly.
- The method of making configuration changes and migrating them to production is single threaded sometimes, makes it hard to make several changes at once.
- Incident management is clear and easy to use. The business specific changes that were made, were easy to complete.
- A great web portal.
- Updates push out upon logging into the client.
- Problem management text messaging reports are not great.
- I wish Cherwell had more Mapps.
- The codeless configuration of Cherwell has been able to meet all of our demanding business needs. From data integration to complex process workflows we can respond and deliver the added value our business needs.
- Cherwell does offer a great customer experience. There has not been one occasion when I have not been impressed with their commitment to the customers experience.
- The development tools are robust and the time to develop had drastically been reduced from previous tools sets, this allows us to focus on gathering solid requirements for iterative changes rather than lengthy development cycles.
- Our solution can be managed and grow with limited number of resources available. We continue to expand and grow as out business requires while maintaining 2 FTE.
- Cherwell is in the process of balancing the speed to market of functionality and robust testing of those releases. We have come across a couple of issues in a particular release that have caused us issues that required configuration of workarounds or us having to skip the release until the function is resolved.
- The web client for technician use still is not in par with the rich client. Cherwell has made the commitment to develop web first but the client parity of the rich and web clients is still not there.
- The ability to be able to Select multiple rows from a result list and then run an action (one step) on them would be a huge win for my environment. Right now you can run a query and run an action against all returned results but it is dependent on the query results, which can be difficult to narrow enough for the general user.
Our organization uses Cherwell Service Management primarily as a request and incident tracker, but it was purchased with the intent of expansion. Since go-live we have activated the knowledge base and CMDB modules, which have solved quite a few problems with information sharing and inventory tracking. The system is young in our environment, but it is holding up well and definitely scalable.
Currently Cherwell Service Management is utilized mainly by the IT Service Desk (technical solutions team), but we have been branching out to teams in other departments as well. It has been well received by those teams who have chosen to come onboard, and is a very strong promoter of institutional collaboration.
- Scalability - We have been able to add multiple teams to our system and collaborate more effectively than ever before.
- Modularity - We are able to implement the system one module at a time, which greatly helps us grow at a rate that works best for our teams.
- Accessibility - Cherwell Support is very responsive and open to assisting with our needs.
- Admin Interface - Changing system settings is not intuitive. Blueprints also require a level of proficiency not held by most new users of the system.
- Bugs - We have noticed several bugs and glitches. Support has been very helpful in documenting and taking them to development, however many seem to be things that should have been caught before public releases.
- Stability - We have had a few instances where we have lost our VPN connection or certain other services have gone offline. Since we run a SaaS environment, we are typically not able to troubleshoot in-house. Support is again very helpful, however this can cause an impact to business.
Cherwell Service Management is extremely adaptable. It works well in environments like ours which contain decentralized IT contacts. This ITSM system is also good for multiple uses beyond tickets - CMDB, Knowledge Base, Change Management, etc.
The system is also highly customizable. We worked with the vendor to make our interface completely unique and suited to our needs. Our implementation looks absolutely nothing like the out of the box product, yet still maintains the same (and more) functionality.
- Customization is easily done and upgrades do not affect them if done within the CSM toolset.
- Our internal staff find the product very intuitive.
- The built-in knowledge base is very helpful.
- While the Reporting module is very comprehensive, it is not easily understood.
- Move to production scenarios should be more inclusive of all pieces of the product.
- The online documentation has come a long way, but still is lacking at times. I have too many "how to" questions that cannot be answered through it.
The business problem being addressed by using Incident/Request Management is to provide tracking, metrics/reporting, and accountability. Teams within the organization have been transitioning from using a team mailbox in Outlook to using Cherwell to manage requests which provides real time tracking and metrics at a glance.
Cherwell is able to provide a customized "dashboard" view that provides teams and business leaders with an easy to read, high level overview of key items which are definable on a team by team basis.
Problem Management is being utilized by the Information Technology team.
Change Management is currently under configuration and is anticipated to be implemented within the next few months.
- Providing a real time, high level overview via the Dashboard
- Friendly User Interface
- Customer Service response time
- Bugs - simple functionality that worked prior to a new release sometimes don't work after the release
Key questions to ask during the selection process are:
- What is the issue being solved for?
- What is the current process?
- What is the desired outcome?
- Excellent tracking and reporting
- Allows customers to enter in their own tickets
- Allows analysis of where our problem points are in resolving incidents
- Helps us better manage change requests
- Initial set up, if you are not familiar with service catalogs can be painful. The out of the box suggested ones are a starting point, but could have more breadth.
- Similarly, you have to know your business processes well to set up escalation and workflow; and setting them up can be a little time consuming.
- It's also helpful to set up forms to help ensure tickets are going to the right team - and you have to understand basic programming logic to set them up; you also need a bit of design experience to make them user friendly. These don't always go hand in hand within one person; it would have been helpful to have more sample forms.
- Some of the included color schemes are not ADA friendly, and they all should be.
- Single platform that is easily managed.
- Customer service and support is outstanding.
- Continuous improvement of the product - new features (which are frequently customer driven) are added regularly at no additional cost.
- Very easy to learn for users, administrators and developers.
- Licensing model is simple and flexible - can implement perpetual and subscription in one instance. Migrate from SaaS to on premises or third party cloud with little effort and at low to no cost.
- Database is not overly normalized. Very easy to understand and query.
- Documentation is improving but is still incomplete.
- "Codeless" architecture is great and easy to learn but it would be nice to have the a "power user" interface option to allow writing of things like expressions rather than click through drop downs.
- Web UI is a bit slow and still not on par with the features of the client application.
Cherwell is a great choice for all organizations looking for an IT Service Management solution. It can scale to any size organization and training and support is great for those just getting started with ITIL-focused support.
For organizations seeking a platform that provides extensive capabilities beyond IT Service Management there may be better choices.
- The flexibility is unparalleled when compared to other systems that we looked at
- The ease of administration and development
- The performance on our version has been very poor and is a constant source of complaints for our users
- The system has many limitations that can feel very disabling when trying to design new features. Some examples: a dropdown list can contain no more than 200 items, a table can only get data from tables it is directly related to (e.g., not a table that is related to that one), a pop-up can only contain one field, there is no list box or other method to multi-select from a pre-determined list etc...
- It took a lot of extra effort after professional services left to actually implement the system. We were left with numerous inconsistencies and spelling errors to track down and correct.
- I was able to store word documents and PDF documents in the tool for quick resolutions to common questions. It was a great way to quickly provide an accurate solution to questions we receive regularly while focusing on service issues that take more time to complete.
- We configured the tool to pull contact info and badge photos from our company roster. This made contacting users at various methods easy. It also made putting a face to a voice or email easy.
- Reporting from the tool allowed us to improve our response time and manage trends. We were able to find ways to make process improvements.
- The graphic user interface is a bit dated. I looks and feels like Window XP.
- Organizations that use the tool to the degree that we did usually have widescreen monitors. The tool doesn't make good use of space.
- One thing I didn't see was a way to track or watch a ticket that was assigned to a different user. This would help in cases where multiple users experienced the problem and you would need to know who and how the ticket was resolved, even if i wasn't resolved by you.