We performed a comparison between IFS Cloud Platform and JIRA Service Management based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two IT Service Management (ITSM) solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."IFS Applications' best feature is the user-friendly interface that has a .NET Framework application in the front end and an Oracle database and WebLogic middleware."
"Scalability-wise, I rate the solution a nine or ten out of ten since it is an extremely scalable solution that can be used for various use cases with thousands of users."
"All the modules are valuable in their own right, but everything has to go through the ERP. IFS has done an excellent job integrating the various modules to complete these processes. My expertise is in the finance module, but I have used the other verticals. It's an all-around good product."
"One of our favorite features is the "Info-Zone", which provides operational intelligence in flight and in context to guide both business users and support teams to productivity."
"I like the connectivity and interfaces. In V10, it's easy to modify the interfaces and layouts, but it's becoming more complicated in the cloud. IFS is excellent at asset maintenance and incident management. They have specialized modules for IFS that cover incident and asset management and everything else connected to finance. The reporting in IFS is also easy to use."
"Feature-wise, I like the way it provides inventory details...It is a stable solution."
"The most valuable feature is the distribution module."
"Some of the strengths are Enterprise Management Solutions and the series of Management solutions which is number one in Gartner's report and has been for the last five years."
"The most valuable features of JIRA Service Management are the service level agreement or management, and the ticketing system. Additionally, there are frequent updates that provide improvements."
"The initial setup is easy and straightforward."
"The initial setup is pretty easy."
"Useful for tracking issues with development."
"It has improved our work in a number of ways. First, it has made everything much faster. Before Jira Service Management, it could take weeks to resolve a ticket."
"I like the precise ticket management capabilities. JIRA Service Management is easy to use as well."
"The stability of JIRA Service Management is good."
"We can track, monitor, and get all the details we need from the end-user's point of view for any service request."
"It would be ideal if, in the future, the product could incorporate IoT and blockchain elements. We'd like to explore more of these types of features going forward."
"The support provided by IFS Applications has room for improvement. I'm based in Poland, and when my company had an issue, finding people from IFS to give my company the support it needed was difficult."
"IFS uses Crystal Report mostly, which isn't too user-friendly. Developing reports isn't easy and requires a lot of dev time. Since SAP bought it, Crystal Report has become more complicated to use on IFS. You have a dashboard for reporting that is good, but it's incomplete. Most of our clients use Power BI or some additional tooling for BI."
"I have seen that one of the areas that my company has identified for improvement might be the rental management capabilities within the solution."
"The solution needs to improve its documentation and user-friendliness."
"Aspects of HR and payroll could be better."
"There were initial difficulties when I started using the application."
"We have upgraded to the latest version right now. We have issues with the quality. We tried to enroll in their Evergreen program which was meant to help us adopt any service update or anything that the tool’s providers come up with."
"The deployment can be a bit complex, especially for those who are not technical."
"SaaS version for large organizations (more than 2000 users) is not available."
"The way it handles subtasks can be improved. We would really like the ability to have different types of subtasks. If we have a user story for a feature, we would like to have a subtask for documentation, a subtask for requirements, a subtask for development, and a subtask for testing. Right now, we just make four subtasks, but there is no way to specify their type, so we have to add a custom field to specify what type of work is this. It just means you've got to look at more data. For logging time or time tracking, we would like to have something using which we can define the work type we're doing. We would like to log whether we're working on a bug, a new development, scope change, or rework. We've got a user story for which we do the dev, and then we have to do more dev. It is the same story, but some of it could have been a scope change, and some of it could be a rework because we either screwed up the first time or missed something obvious. Currently, we have to have a custom field and track that separately. It would be nice to have some kind of work type for logging time."
"The documentation needs improving, it's difficult to find specific procedures."
"From the customer side, it's not friendly used compared to other competitors, like ServiceNow or BMC. It's also not fully ITSM management if you compare it with ServiceNow or BMC. They have a full model of ITSM. In BMC they have TrueSight, they have Discovery, which helps IT to discover IT equipment with a serial number, with the specs, capacity of the server."
"The solution needs to be integrated better with Office X5."
"The queries are weak and lack advanced functionality. You can do rudimentary queries, but you can't aggregate. You can't filter for a lot of things that would be useful, so you need to use plugins to write writing advanced queries. I run into problems when working with different organizations because they always have restrictions on what kind of plugins they allow."
"What needs to be added in Jira Service Management is the user screen. You'll find it very weird if this is your first time using the solution. The user-friendliness of its interface needs improvement."
IFS Cloud Platform is ranked 6th in IT Service Management (ITSM) with 29 reviews while JIRA Service Management is ranked 2nd in IT Service Management (ITSM) with 73 reviews. IFS Cloud Platform is rated 7.8, while JIRA Service Management is rated 8.2. The top reviewer of IFS Cloud Platform writes "Robust, customizable, and modern". On the other hand, the top reviewer of JIRA Service Management writes "Customizable, stable, and integrates well". IFS Cloud Platform is most compared with SAP ERP, SAP S/4HANA, Oracle E-Business Suite, Microsoft Dynamics 365 Business Central and IBM Maximo, whereas JIRA Service Management is most compared with ServiceNow, ManageEngine ServiceDesk Plus, BMC Helix ITSM, Freshdesk and PagerDuty Operations Cloud. See our IFS Cloud Platform vs. JIRA Service Management report.
See our list of best IT Service Management (ITSM) vendors and best Help Desk Software vendors.
We monitor all IT Service Management (ITSM) reviews to prevent fraudulent reviews and keep review quality high. We do not post reviews by company employees or direct competitors. We validate each review for authenticity via cross-reference with LinkedIn, and personal follow-up with the reviewer when necessary.