Reviews (1-25 of 53)
- Keeps everyone organized, each employee can keep track of their tickets.
- Running reports to ensure that everyone doesn't miss the SLA.
- Attaching files can be difficult, as it's hit and miss with employees.
- External users cannot log in to choose a specific issue.
- Used across the whole organization.
- Project Requirements repository - agile/waterfall.
- QA tracking during test case resolution.
- Process improvement.
- Keeps track of all activities related to the project in question.
- Documentation of Requirements - serves as the go-to source for all requirements created as a result of the SDS (System Design Specifications) review and sign-off.
- Process improvement - We used to revamp failing processes and centrally locate all BAU (business as usual) developments tickets through JIRA.
- Bug tracking - Great source for defect tracking and resolution.
- Historical repository - we use as a historical reference and document location for all projects.
- Add-ons - Some things I think should be easier to find and possibly more documentation.
- Traceability linkage - JIRA has a hierarchy - EPIC/Story/Bugs etc. - They should automatically be linked one to the other once users attach for example a bug to a story - I.E. Cannot close the story until the bug has been resolved.
- Better linkage to MS office tools - I.E> MS Project/Excel - I find it tricky to drop excel file into JIRA.
- Best for traceability for large company/projects.
- Best for historical documentation of requirements.
- Best for QA bug tracking.
- Better integration with QA testing tools such as HLM/IBM Rational - used quite a bit in many organizations.
- Not suited for small businesses as it may be overkill.
- Manageable workflow to ensure all users follow the same process.
- Can ban boards for easy visual of ticket status.
- Very flexible tool that can adapt to lots of different uses outside of the traditional service desk model.
- Added communication tools help you get out of e-mail jail.
- Navigating through issues outside of a kan ban board can be confusing and task heavy.
- It's easy to clutter up the tool. It could use some easy clean up capabilities.
- User interface is decent, but could use work to make it more intuitive.
- Enables you to know who needs to work on the task by allowing you to reassign it to people.
- Notifies you about updates that happen on a task.
- You can build templates for certain task that occur often.
- Allow you to estimate work time on a task and then input how much time the task really took and then evaluate the difference to get a better idea for future tasks.
- Doesn't allow the ability to close multiple tickets at a time.
- The way they name parts of the project (i.e. epic, story, sprint). Sometimes it can get confusing to how they work together. There is definitely a learning curve.
Another great way to use it is for expense reports like for an on-call stipend. JIRA allows you to create a template and add your upstream managers and the amount and you then can submit it and as each manager approves it the ticket move to the next person. You can use JIRA to integrate into HR systems where when an employee is marked as disabled then it kicks off multiple JIRA tasks to various teams to complete some sort of operation to complete the disable.
- Linking of tickets - Keep related tickets tied together to review later.
- Tracking of projects - In addition to linked tickets, they can also be associated with an overall larger project.
- General service requests - Easy to use system for day-to-day work tasks.
- Administration can be tedious.
- "Overly" customizable which can lead to problems with too many issue types.
- Pulling data into dashboards can be difficult due to how unforgiving the specified parameters can be.
- It has all your requests/ tickets organized well.
- its very easy to setup or change the workflow of each request.
- it takes minimal training for users to learn how to use the program.
- Dashboards can be easily created and updated when needed.
- The ability to searches and see old requests is every easy.
- The ability to easily modify the email notifications per user, a user can get a ton of notifications for a single request
- They need to figure out a way when requests are opened by email that need to go to multiple departments
- There needs to be an easier way to transfer and notify other departments when a request is being transferred over
- A lot of of the backend setup for filters and dashboards take some time to learn how to do it properly
- Plenty of use cases within one organization.
- Most engineers are familiar with it.
- Tough to figure out and navigate for non-engineers.
- Difficulty changing the language in certain fields.
- Not intuitive.
- It does a great job of tracking our assets
- Users are able to submit IT tickets easily
- We manage all our IT related contracts in it
- It is tricky to configure custom fields
- Getting the workflows working right in the beginning was a little challenging
- It is a little expensive
- Polished user experience
- Unlimited Custom Fields
- Bugs and defect Management
- I spend most of my working day in the agile boards! So easy to use and endlessly configurable. I can't fault it
- It provides all of the collaborative tools we need to manage our work and maintain documentation for future reference
- Hard to setup
- Too many features
- Difficult to use
- Highly configurable Notification Scheme, allowing free customization on who receives notifications and when
- Ability to add extra features through the highly diverse Atlassian Marketplace.
- Simple and highly customizable ticket interface. The Software can be almost completely branded in every aspect to represent your organization.
- Integration with JIRA Software allows support tickets to be moved into other Log Term projects as necessary.
- Ability to control the number of email notifications received (Note: this is a new feature in the Latest release but I personally haven not extensively looked at it and how well it solves the existing problem).
- No way to reply to multiple tickets at once, say you got 4 tickets in for the same issue, there is no way you can reply to them in one stroke. Other Ticketing systems do have this ability.
- Using a large number of add-ons to customize and add additional features adds up quickly and can become rather expensive.
- Request forms are very basic and there is no native dynamic field ability available.
- Easy to use for users.
- It's a little difficult in terms configuration- you should have someone dedicated to administration.
- For as customizable as it is, there are some things you can't change. These small issues that don't really effect an individual ticket too much, but when you are dealing with dozens and dozens of tickets a day, small granular things add up.
- A suggestion for improvement would be to allow a hotkey entry for quickly submitting a comment. You can do that for an internal comment (not seen by the user), but not for a public comment.
- When typing up a summary for an issue, the suggestions from Confluence are excellent!
- Setting up ticket queues for agents is easy and can be filtered based on rules written in JQL (or using the basic rule picker). I am able to set up queues specifically for whatever rules I want -- for instance, critical tickets that are 30 minutes away from the "time to resolution."
- Search and filter features are nice because you can build and save a filter, grant access to that filter to any users/groups you want, and even subscribe yourself or others to that filter to be notified via email on a schedule.
- Some of the built-in functions and workflows are surprisingly limited given the fact that you can customize a lot with JQL. These limited areas do not allow you to use JQL. For instance, the built-in notifications are lacking. They have one that is great-- "notify on critical ticket creation"-- EXCEPT that it does not allow you to notify a group or anything, only individual users.
- The ticket interface is a little odd for agents. Changing the status is not a simple drop down from unassigned to open to in progress to pending, etc. There are a couple of tabs ("investigate", "pending", "workflow") where you can change the status in different ways. Maybe I am just not used to this way of doing it, but I feel like it could be simplified.
- It can get complicated deleting/changing some of the out-of-the-box fields and rules, because you never know what will break workflows or other automated/built-in features.
- Great use of knowledge base.
- Interactive with the customers to create tickets and shows better suggestions with the existing KEBD.
- Helped automate a lot of tasks which were similar or repetitive.
- Would throw out errors a lot and needed support to come in and fix the infrastructure.
- Knowledge base handling was poor at times and queries would get lost in translation.
- User's complaints with Jira increased for having the ability to navigate a few times which became frustrating.
- Service Desk can be integrated with JIRA, which helps you to involve software development teams easily and trace the development progress.
- Service Desk can be integrated with Confluence. Thus you can provide a good knowledge base to your customers.
- Third party Plugins from the community provide absent features. Thus you don’t need to wait for Atlassian to implement long-awaited features.
- JIRA Service Desk gives you the ability to use different workflows for different types of issues. You may create your own workflows.
- It gives you the ability to create conditional actions.
- Their customer portal is very clean. To open a new case or monitor open cases is simple. It would be great if more of it were like the portal. It would be great if we could share some reports.
- Putting customers’ employees in a team is possible, but doesn’t fix some problems from a flexibility point of view. It needs some improvement.
- Conditional notifications to third parties are limited.
- Eg. We are an integrator company, and our projects require us to route some issues to our partner companies’ service desk systems automatically due to SLA agreements, which is not easily possible.
- allows multiple users to collaborate on the same project with ease.
- offers multiple reporting options to track tickets.
- automated emails relating to updates - users are always notified when they need to take action on a particular task.
- Jira does not seem to like IE. It is much quicker on Chrome.
- Can be overwhelming for a new user. Training resources are somewhat limited.
- I wish there was a way to set rules behind automated emails. Example: only send emails when status or assignee has changed.
Jira is a great tool for organizations who already have a well-defined process for tickets/projects.
If your organization does not have multiple stakeholders who take part in tickets/projects this tool may not be the best fit.
It makes QA much easier since all communication between QA team and developers are in once place (with screenshots, short videos, etc).
- Issue Tracking is easily the most important feature of Jira Service Desk
- Views and Dashboard can be customized
- We can track the progress of other projects that are on the Jira Service Desk
- UI can be improved
- Though it is a very robust tool there are certain features which are not very useful
- It is compatible for Agile methodology where it lends a platform of sufficient communication, accountability of tasks and provided a space for a group email. This prevented replication of tasks that were already completed or decisions already made without having to pester the project lead on what was discussed if you missed a casual meeting or scrum.
- Search results in Confluence does not work well if you begin with a spacename at the beginning. For example, if I were to list something as "abc def" and search under "def", results are not found.
- Issue tracking can be cumbersome when colleagues overload or customize it.
- Jira tends to force premature convergence of a process, then making it inconvenient to change it.
- Documentation is reduced, because we do not need to maintain Excel sheets to keep track of all the tasks. The service desk allows us to do that with minimal documentation.
- Taking an example of a defect that comes up during testing, this defect can also be raised here and its progress can be monitored by the developer, the tester, as well as all the participants involved. This makes it the single point where everything in the project is tracked.
- All the updates in the task assigned to a person are received via mail and there is no need to check the portal again and again, which surely saves time.
- The portal can be a bit difficult to understand at the start. Because there are too many features. So there is a chance that if the UI were improved, this would be made a bit simpler. The user could understand better and more quickly, improving the efficiency of the tool.
- Although the tool is really powerful right now, it could be made a bit more automatic. That is, it could help the user in some basic tasks like creating categories of tasks and automatically, adding some sub tasks, and logging some work which would be editable by user. But giving the user something to start with would save a lot of time.
- Also there should be a weekly alert showing the hours logged into the portal, which can help the user track his work, how much he has logged in. So that one can log accordingly.
- Real-time collaboration
- Customized views/dashboards
- Deadline management
- File sharing
- Issue tracking
- From my experience, JIRA is much better suited for IT/development than it is for marketers or project management teams. Some of the functionality is irrelevant for teams outside of IT, which can be off-putting for team members who aren't comfortable using new technology
- The email notifications from JIRA can get a little busy/cluttered. For example, if someone replies to an email from JIRA, the comments appear in JIRA and include their email signature, along with any images from their email signature. Then, those images appear in the attachments for that particular job. This sometimes causes projects to get a little disorganized.
- Easy to track and keep a record of issues and requests
- Great customized ticketing portal for users to submit their issues and requests
- Gives ticket tracking to the submitter to follow if they like
- Easy to move tickets over to other boards with Jira if needing to escalate issues to Development or other teams.
- Sometimes the UI is a bit buggy
- Sometimes it locks up users and won't let people submit tickets
- I love the fact that it is web-based so all you need is a browser
- It is extremely flexible and customizable to fit anyone's needs
- Very fast, and you can build reports and filter in seconds
- The way you give user permission can be improved, maybe that needs to be broken down a little more
- I love the filters, but I think the way they display can be improved
- It is really hard to find issues, JIRA is amazing, but maybe the notification can be done little better. There is really nothing wrong with it but I still think there is a small room for improvement there
It is great for service tickets for your IT or any team that works tickets
It is not for sharing information or knowledge articles. It might work, but I do not recommend it
- The tracking of tickets by the component is incredibly useful. I can quickly see all the tickets that relate to my team's work and see the status, priority, who it is assigned to, etc.
- The filtering and reporting are very nice as well. You are able to quickly create a board of any combination of information you would like to see and reference it at any time.
- The tagging feature works very well too. You can tag a developer or analyst with a question or comment and they will immediately see this and be able to respond. It keeps issues from getting lost.
- I wish there was a better view of the current sprint. There are views available for this, but they do not seem to be very customizable.
- It would be nice if when I run into something that I don't have access to, I could send a request to our system administrator from within JIRA. Sometimes it is hard to communicate exactly what I need access to and sending the request from a specific screen in JIRA could simplify this.
- I wish that clicking a link in a ticket would open in a new tab. I do not want a link to a document or website to replace the ticket tab that I currently have open.
- Task management - There are many options when creating a task that should fit a variety of use cases. It works well to keep everyone accountable.
- BigPicture - Gantt has been useful for the breakdown of very large projects. We can track multiple phases and see where most of our time was spent.
- Jira allows you to track hours worked on projects, this has been helpful to determine how long similar tasks/projects will take.
- The number of options can be overwhelming for the average user. A simple task creation becomes surprisingly complex. Proper training is important.
- My Task Dashboard could be displayed in a way that is more useful to myself. An interface with more information and displayed tasks all on one screen would be nice.
Jira Service Desk Scorecard Summary
Feature Scorecard Summary
About Jira Service Desk
Jira Service Desk Screenshots
Jira Service Desk Competitors
|Small Teams||$10||per agent for up to 3 agents|
|Growing teams||$20||per agent per month for 4-15 agents|
|Large teams||Discount||per agent for 16+ agents|
View the pricing calculator for 16+ agents here: https://www.atlassian.com/software/jira/service-desk/pricing/upcoming#pricing-calculator
Jira Service Desk Support Options
|Free Version||Paid Version|
|Video Tutorials / Webinar|
Jira Service Desk Technical Details
|Deployment Types:||On-premise, SaaS|
|Operating Systems:||Windows, Linux, Mac|
|Mobile Application:||Apple iOS, Android|
|Supported Languages:||English, French, Spanish, German, Portuguese (Brazil), Portuguese (Portugal), Russian, Korean, Japanese, Norwegian, Polish, Chinese, Czech, Danish, Dutch, Estonian, Finnish, Hungarian, Icelandic, Romanian, Slovak, Swedish, Vietnamese|