We performed a comparison between ManageEngine ServiceDesk Plus and SCSM 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."ManageEngine provides additional modules that we can integrate in the future."
"This solution has provided a way to manage request tracking and resolution."
"It's stable."
"The ManageEngine ServiceDesk Plus SaaS model helped us because it was easy on our pockets but also easy to use, configure, and manage."
"The most valuable feature is the ticketing system which is working well."
"The strength is its pricing. It is easy to use."
"It was easy to implement. I didn't have a hard time. It was very quick, around 10 to 20 minutes."
"Service Catalog and Project Management are awesome features. Customers love them because they are easy to use and simple to install."
"It is a simple solution that is easy to configure."
"For our cloud-based deployment of SCSM, the Autopilot is the best feature."
"The call logging is the solution's most valuable feature. It's very easy to use."
"I like the reporting service. SCSM has a good reporting service and analysis service for analysis requests."
"This solution is easy to use."
"A very convenient package like an all-in-one tool but it is actually five or six products acting well together."
"The reporting is very good."
"It is one of the most stable solutions in the market."
"ManageEngine ServiceDesk Plus could improve by making asset management better. The professional version has asset management but it should be available in the free version, it would help my organization."
"ManageEngine ServiceDesk Plus moves changes to the production directly. We need a local touch in support."
"I would like to see a clearer distinction between ManageEngine Cloud, ServiceDesk Plus, and ManageEngine Enterprise. That way, choosing the best one is better informed. Initially, I struggled to understand the difference, but I figured it out later."
"Its reporting could be improved. The current list of predefined reports seems to be fine for most of the customers, but there should be some tools to allow us to create highly customized reports for measuring different KPIs. We should also be able to connect some kind of BI to it. We haven't yet implemented it, and we are currently evaluating it. We are looking for advanced integration options where we could integrate it with our SCCM and Azure environments as well as with other Office solutions. For direct communication with customers, we are looking for a chatbot or a similar feature."
"It would be better if they could just bring up interface changes because, from the past five years, I don't see any difference in the way or look and feel of the application."
"I think asset management took a hit recently."
"We should be able to monitor the performance of assets, not only documents. For example, printers. We should be able to monitor ink levels and get notifications when the ink is low. In another operation manager I use, they send me a notification when the device is off, or has something to perform."
"Its reporting can be improved. It can have better analytics reports. Even though they provide integration with another tool called Analytics Plus to get those reports, it would be quite helpful to have them on the fly and out of the box. A lot of improvement is required in change management and release management. Their change management module is quite simple, and they need to do a lot of work on the change management module. The release management is out only on the cloud. It is not available in on-premises deployments. In the next release, I would like it to have effective project management. They do provide the project management and contracts management modules, but these modules need a bit of improvement."
"Better integration with other services in Azure is needed because everything is moving from on-premises to the cloud, and as an integrator, we have to help our clients with the migration."
"We have had some issues with the SCSM on-premise deployment version in the imaging aspects."
"The user interface needs to be improved."
"We would like to see a web-based interface that works on mobile devices."
"The logs and reporting-related features of the product have certain shortcomings where improvements are required."
"One of the disadvantages in this product is that the reporting module is not very easy. It requires SQL development skills, which not all customers or IT professionals have."
"The patch management aspect of the solution should be improved. It's quite complicated and not user-friendly. If your systems are not patched properly, you are unable to pull reports."
"The price of this solution is high and it needs to be cheaper."
More ManageEngine ServiceDesk Plus Pricing and Cost Advice →
ManageEngine ServiceDesk Plus is ranked 4th in IT Service Management (ITSM) with 57 reviews while SCSM is ranked 11th in IT Service Management (ITSM) with 23 reviews. ManageEngine ServiceDesk Plus is rated 8.0, while SCSM is rated 7.0. The top reviewer of ManageEngine ServiceDesk Plus writes " Easy to configure and affordable compared to other software options". On the other hand, the top reviewer of SCSM writes "Helps us manage IT operations, including incident and service requests, but could be easier to create reports". ManageEngine ServiceDesk Plus is most compared with ServiceNow, JIRA Service Management, Freshservice, BMC Helix ITSM and Spiceworks, whereas SCSM is most compared with ServiceNow, JIRA Service Management, BMC Helix ITSM, Freshservice and BeyondTrust Remote Support. See our ManageEngine ServiceDesk Plus vs. SCSM 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.