Embedded Files
Remote.Team as an Alternative to Wrike: Should a Manager Make the Switch?
Remote.Team as an Alternative to Wrike: Should a Manager Make the Switch?
Wrike has long been the standard for complex project management. However, the market is changing, and so are the demands of teams. If you are a manager and feel that your current tool is slowing down processes rather than speeding them up, it may be time to look at alternatives.
Remote.Team is a unified space for remote work that positions itself as a lighter and more specialized replacement for cumbersome systems. Let’s break it down, based on facts and real user feedback, to help you decide what’s right for you.
Brief Overview: Two Different Approaches to Management
Wrike is a powerful tool for project management. Founded in 2006 (headquartered in San Diego, USA), it is designed for large departments and corporations. Its feature is deep customization: you can set up almost everything, from Gantt charts to automating complex business processes. Wrike is ideal for complex, process-driven, and multi-step projects.
Remote.Team is a digital office. This product was created specifically for distributed teams. It’s not just a task tracker; it’s a habitat: a secure chat, tasks, documents, and analytics all in one place. The main goal is to make remote team work transparent and structured, but without the complexities of corporate portals. The platform is aimed at companies with 10 to 500 employees operating in an international environment.
Comparison by Key Parameters for Managers
Deeper Than Just Features: What Users Are Saying
Pain Point #1: "We’re Drowning in Complexity"
Wrike is often criticized for its complexity. One user on Gartner writes: "I’m an end user and find Wrike very difficult to use intuitively... my task list does not accurately reflect what I’m being asked to do."
How does Remote.Team address this? The platform is built around the concept of "threads" and "chat forums." This lowers the entry barrier. A newcomer doesn’t get lost in the maze of settings and immediately sees what’s happening in the team. Feedback: "Everything is brilliantly simple. Communicating and assigning multiple tasks in one thread is commendable!".
Pain Point #2: "Support Has Disappeared"
This is a critical point for Wrike. On the official forum, a user has been complaining since 2019: "You used to be able to call for help, then they removed that... I just tried to send an email to support and was told that this email is no longer supported."
How does Remote.Team address this? Support here is part of the product. It is available 24/7 through an integrated chat. Users note: "Awesome support that quickly resolves any issue," "prompt technical support work."
Pain Point #3: "Too Expensive for Small Businesses"
Wrike requires moving to paid plans for small businesses (from 2 people). For startups and micro-teams, this can be costly.
How does Remote.Team address this? Unlike Wrike, Remote.Team offers a full free plan for teams of up to 10 people. One user writes: "My team has 7 people, and we all work remotely. We use the service for free, it’s amazing!".
Pricing Transparency: What Managers Need to Know
For a manager, the cost of the tool is not just a number in the price list; it’s the total cost of ownership and scaling. Here’s what Remote.Team offers:
Free entry for small teams. Up to 10 users — €0 forever. This is a full Free plan with no feature limitations. Perfect for startups or small businesses.
A single business plan. As your team grows, you switch to the Business plan for 10+ users. No complicated tiers — just one simple rate per user per month with annual payment.
Everything included. Unlimited tasks, unlimited storage, guest access, online consultant widget, and personal support — all these features are available immediately, without needing to purchase "premium" packages.
Thus, the financial argument for the switch becomes even stronger: you get a specialized tool for remote work that can be tested and implemented for free for teams of up to 10 people, and when scaling, you have clear and predictable costs. Meanwhile, Wrike often requires immediate and constantly increasing investments with a less transparent structure.
When is Remote.Team Your Alternative to Wrike?
Remote.Team is your choice if:
You manage a remote or hybrid team (from 10 to 500 people). This is the platform's main specialization.
You’re tired of complexity. You need a tool that doesn’t require weeks of training. The situation where "it just works."
You care about communication security. End-to-end encryption is a significant argument if you discuss sensitive data.
You’re looking for a cost-effective solution. A free plan for a small team or straightforward monthly payments without hidden costs.
Wrike remains the best choice if:
You have complex, multi-step projects with a huge number of interrelated tasks.
Deep integrations with corporate stacks (Jira, Salesforce, etc.) and a powerful API are critically important to you.
You are willing to deal with interface complexity for total control and customization.
How to Make a Decision?
The best way is a test drive. Both platforms offer trial versions (Remote.Team has a full free plan).
Write down the 3 main pain points your team faces in current processes.
Ask a regular employee (not just the admin) to try working in Remote.Team. Ask them the next day: "Is it clear to you?".
Evaluate support. Write to Remote.Team support right now (it’s built into the workspaces) and time the response. Compare it with your experience communicating with Wrike support.
Switching from Wrike to Remote.Team is not just a change of program. It’s a paradigm shift: from managing complex processes to managing a lively and productive team.
Page updated
Google Sites
Report abuse