We performed a comparison between JIRA Service Management and Salesforce Service Cloud based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Help Desk Software solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."This is the most complete and versatile enterprise task management product and issue tracker."
"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."
"I like the precise ticket management capabilities. JIRA Service Management is easy to use as well."
"The solution offers lots of information on the website to assist with technical queries. There are also many community sites to help you troubleshoot any problems."
"We can track, monitor, and get all the details we need from the end-user's point of view for any service request."
"Transparency of the system helps both internal and external persons involved."
"It scales well."
"Jira Service Management is flexible. It is easy to navigate without requiring extra learning. The user experience has been good."
"We use Salesforce Service Cloud for lead management and opportunity management."
"The most valuable feature of the solution is the traceability of actions."
"It's a cloud tool, so it is easy to set up."
"I don't have the specific details, but I'm aware that Salesforce is used for campaigns, decision-making processes, and order submissions. I'm currently in the learning phase and not familiar with all the details."
"It’s feasible to configure the platform according to the specific processes utilised. Customization of the platform could be carried out based on the techniques we employ."
"The plug-ins that work with other standard systems have made the product industry-ready."
"The interface is quite user-friendly."
"The most valuable feature of Salesforce Service Cloud is its ease of use."
"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 initial setup of JIRA Service Management can be complex for new users. There is a lot of configuration."
"The deployment can be a bit complex, especially for those who are not technical."
"There should be better connections with access management. They should improve the connectivity."
"I would like to see the user interface changed, it is not very user-friendly, and it transitions workflows."
"In general, JIRA has no relation to customers or financials. Therefore, marketplace add-ons are needed to make it work for customer-facing systems."
"Initially, as a completely new user, the interface was not very user-friendly, with many cluttered options."
"Jira Service Management should be more user-friendly."
"The pricing of the solution can be made cheaper."
"One minor drawback is that its implementation requires some preparation. It's not something you can implement instantly; it takes time. The only issue I've encountered is that you need to ensure the implementation is done properly, which can be time-consuming. So, it requires some time and attention."
"The integrations with other solutions can be improved."
"I'm not deeply engaged with this team, so I don't have extensive experience with it. As you mentioned, I haven't used it much yet, so my experience is limited."
"Knowledge Management platform could use some intelligence improvements. Data mining techniques for recommending the most relevant knowledge articles would be beneficial. Currently, that selection process is more administrative. AI could be used here."
"The solution’s user interface could be improved."
"The product should be capable of delivering complex reports as per company requirements without the need for a Tableau license."
"The main concern for me revolves around the speed of certain integrations."
JIRA Service Management is ranked 2nd in Help Desk Software with 73 reviews while Salesforce Service Cloud is ranked 8th in Help Desk Software with 42 reviews. JIRA Service Management is rated 8.2, while Salesforce Service Cloud is rated 8.6. The top reviewer of JIRA Service Management writes "Customizable, stable, and integrates well". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Salesforce Service Cloud writes "High scalability with good plugins and excellent customer visibility". JIRA Service Management is most compared with ServiceNow, ManageEngine ServiceDesk Plus, Freshdesk, BMC Helix ITSM and HaloITSM, whereas Salesforce Service Cloud is most compared with ServiceNow, Microsoft Dynamics CRM, Vlocity, BSI and Oracle Fusion Service. See our JIRA Service Management vs. Salesforce Service Cloud report.
See our list of best Help Desk Software vendors.
We monitor all Help Desk Software 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.
