ServiceNow IT Operations Management Reviews

We use the solution for infrastructure management and managing the changes. We have multiple teams of developers thus we come across a lot of modifications occurring daily. We handle them with the help of ServiceNow.

The solution has some helpful modules and serves as a good platform. While using it, you don't need to configure the implementation. You can improve operation integrations with its help.

The user interface is better than other alternatives but not that easy. They should improve the user interface to the latest version, so the customers can use it more easily.

I have worked with ServiceNow for about five years, and with IT Operations Management for about two years now.

The solution is very stable. However, our consumer experiences are pretty diverse. We deploy the solution using XML access, and we have about 1,000,000 consumers. Each consumer has a server. Sometimes ServiceNow goes down. It is not as stable as the other solutions.

The solution takes time to scale. You need to contact the support team to analyze your needs.

The customer support is fine. It's not so good and very inconvenient. The documentation could be better too. There are a lot of things I can't comprehend.

Neutral

We have used three to four solutions before. They were not able to integrate well with the other systems. Wherein ServiceNow helps us to manage all the changes in just one place. It has a good UI as well. Also, the Director of our company thought ServiceNow would be a good solution. Our IT Operations team and the Director of the customer service department wanted to buy ServiceNow and implement it for our customers. Thus, we switched to ServiceNow IT Operations Management.

It's not so easy to understand the setup concept, but it's easy to manage the incidents and problems.

We have an in-house team for integration. But it's just that ServiceNow enables the integration of features and helps us configure the setup. We update the XML file with the help of our developer in the environment. We develop it in that instance. Later, we go through the stages and steps and deploy them to the system. We have a centric component to help us manage the production environment. So the developers follow the documents in the environment to make the centric component implement the deployment.

I advise others not to customize a lot while using ServiceNow. Just use it as it is. The maintenance is complex. In ServiceNow, we have a lot of options for customization. They can cause problems, and detecting which customization is causing them isn't easy. Usually, the customizations break in the new versions. They do not get upgraded to the following versions. Thus, it requires a lot of work for the team to test each version to ensure no customization breaks.

I rate this solution a nine out of ten.

The solution is used primarily for operations management. 

We had a lot of events and some of the things that have been done manually. Now, when an email is sent, it'll create a task, and your teams can handle it. Having Event Management, we create events and alerts, so everything is streamlined.

The suite is pretty strong. Everything is consolidated into one, which is helpful. Before that, if a switch went down, we'd get 600 tickets. Now, we get only one. Pretty much everyone is happy with how it has streamlined everything.

It helps streamline management and processes. 

It's stable.

Support can be helpful. 

The Discovery needs to become more functional.

Service mapping is pretty limited.

It has a complex initial setup.

I've been using the solution for two years. 

With Event Management and orchestration, it's stable and reliable. The immigration hub, we use it a lot. However, as far as discovery and service mapping goes, it kind of falls short.

We haven't tried to scale the solution at this point. 

We have up to ten to 12 people using the solution right now. 

At this point, we have no plans to increase usage. 

Support is okay. However, it would depend on the person we got. Sometimes we would get someone who would just say, "Oh, it's not our problem," and then close the task. Sometimes we would get someone who actually realized these were the limitations, and they would work with personal development to get us a fix. Support is hit or a miss.

Neutral

We had homegrown software that pulled in all the details. On top of that, we had some other tools for Event Management.

The initial setup was pretty complex. It was about a nine-month process to implement it.

We need four to six people to deploy the solution and about two people to maintain the solution once it is set up. 

We had a couple of contractors come and help, however, for the most part, we have our own discovery admin, and I was leading the project, so it was a mix of in-house and external resources.

We might have seen an ROI. It might allow for break-even costs. It didn't provide as much value as we thought it would.

The licensing is paid every three years. I'm not sure of the exact pricing. 

The pricing was negotiated with the senior director. Procurement takes care of the cost, and the senior directors are involved. The managers and individual contributors know what they're signing up for and what features we're getting, however, not actually the cost of the software. 

We did not evaluate other options. 

We are end-users. 

We have our own data centers, and the solution exists in them. We use Operations Management pretty heavily.

If they're going for a fresh CMDB, then ITOM is a great product. If they have a fully grown, mature CMDB, then they may want to think twice about going to ITOM.

I'd rate the solution seven out of ten. 

We primarily use the solution for our customers, which are based in Orlando, Quebec, and Paris.

The solution has six different modules: Discovery, Service Mapping, Event Management, Operational Intelligence, Cloud Service Provisioning, and Cloud Insights.

They have a very good Health Solutions Suite.

Their Event Management is very good. So are Log Analytics and Event Management.

These three valuable features - Event Management, Log Analytics, and Operational Intelligence - all within their artificial intelligence solution, AIOps. It's very effective.

Log Analytics is very new. It is released in Quebec only. We are yet to implement it, however, in theory, it looks very efficient solution. Even Management we have implemented for around 20 plus customers and it is very effective. It's one of the best solutions in the market.

We also use Discovery and Service Mapping, which are both quite good.

With Cloud Discovery, we can discover cloud assets. It is very useful. 

The solution is quite scalable.

The solution has very good stability overall.

Technical support has been helpful.

Service Mapping is a time-consuming process. The time and effort versus the benefits are very difficult to articulate to customers. That is one challenge we see.

If Discovery, for example, could be extended to other cloud areas it could be very helpful. Currently, it has popular cloud service providers like AWS, Azure, GCP, Google. If they can extend it to all cloud service providers and containers such as Kubernetes, it would be better. 

In the implementation, we have encountered problems with the Ansible integration and Kubernetes. That is one area they can definitely improve. 

Another area of improvement is ACC. They are launching something called ACC, Agent Client Collector. It is more or less their version of monitoring. That is not yet fully realized. It is not a complete solution. It is in its primitive stages. We would really love to see that improving and covering all applications in order for it to be a really comprehensive monitoring solution. 

At this moment, we are not able to use it as a standalone monitoring solution. We still have to use other monitoring tools like SolarWinds, or AppDynamics, or something like that. If ACC is improved, then it will be an end-to-end solution.

The pricing could be lower.

We've been using the solution for about two years now. It hasn't been very long.

We've found the solution to be stable. There are no bugs or glitches. It doesn't crash or freeze. It's reliable.

O one of the benefits of ServiceNow is scalability. If a company needs to scale, it can do so.

Technical support is quite good. We're satisfied with their level of service. They are knowledgeable and responsive. 

I previously worked with Remedy Orchestrator. In comparison, ServiceNow is easier to implement.

For a typical Event Management and OI, or Discovery, it will take from four to six weeks to implement. 

Service Mapping is a long project. It depends on the number of maps the customer has, so it is long-term. If they have to cover all priority applications, it will be anywhere from six to eight months. That is a long process, and are no longer doing it as an implementation. We are doing it as regular day-to-day work, due to the length of time it takes. It requires a lot of inputs from the application support teams and infrastructure support teams, and a lot of coordination is involved. That is why it takes time. However, for any other product, whether it is Cloud or Event Management or Discovery, you are looking at four to six weeks depending on the customer size and customer environment.

We assist our clients in implementing the solution. 

The cost could be lower.

For those customers who are already using ServiceNow for service management, for example, then it is just the license costs and no other cost is involved. In that way it is good. It is emerging as a holistic solution for enterprise service management. 

The upside to ServiceNow is that everything is in one tool, whereas, with other solutions, you need multiple tools. If you compare that way, then, in the long run, this price is more or less competitive. 

We are managed service providers and resellers of the licenses. On top of that, we provide implementation support and transformation solutions.

For customers considering the solution, the first thing, they need to do is be very sure before implementing ITOM. They need to have a very mature CMDB, as all these modules, whether it is Discovery or Service Mapping or Event Management, all require a very healthy CMDB, with 80% to 85% of maturity. CMDB and CSDM should be added as a prerequisite. If they are, then the implementation of ITOM and the benefit you get from implementing these modules will be quickly realized.

I'd rate the solution at an eight out of ten.

ServiceNow was one of the chosen ITSM tools in my previous organizations. So, we were leveraging CMDB and ITSM. We had the incident change, service management, and PA modules. It was primarily used for incident management and tracking the services' up-times and user requests. 

We were using ServiceNow ITOM at times for project management. It was customized to do the tracking. We had created something similar to a Kanban board to see how the processes and services were working.

When we started, it was on-prem, but then slowly, we migrated to the cloud.

It has been very useful for tracking. It has evolved a lot over time, and there is a single pane of glass where you can track and see everything.

At times, it got cumbersome from the project management perspective. It could have been because of the way we were using it. I found Microsoft Project to be more extensive and robust than ITOM.

I have been using this solution since 2012. I last used it about three months ago.

Overall, it's a stable solution.

It is highly scalable. One good thing is that ServiceNow has different plans. We can start with the basic plan and then slowly move to the higher plans.

I don't have much experience with their support. For ServiceNow, we had our own internal team. They used to first do the troubleshooting, and after that, if required, they used to further involve ServiceNow's support team.

Its initial setup is pretty straightforward and simple.

I haven't done an in-depth analysis, but I was looking at possibly alternating with Microsoft Project. ServiceNow is still evolving, whereas Microsoft has been a major player. When you compare, you look at three different quadrants. The first one is the price and operating cost. The second one is stability, and then there is scalability in terms of scaling up and down. One primary advantage that Microsoft has is that most of the organizations have already been using Microsoft 365 and other services. They get a bundled-up package with Microsoft Project. Everything is bundled up in a single package.

I would recommend this solution. ServiceNow is good from the incident management and service management perspective.

I would rate this solution a seven out of ten.

We use the product for discovery and visibility management. 

I like the tool's discovery feature. 

The solution's licensing model is a bit complicated. It should be simple and easy for people to understand. 

I have been using the product for five years. 

I would rate the solution's stability an eight out of ten. 

I would rate the product's scalability a seven out of ten. 

The product's setup is simple. 

I would rate the product's pricing a five out of ten since there are vendors who are cheaper. 

I would rate the product a seven out of ten. The solution is for most customers but enterprise customers will face some restrictions with it. 

Customers use ServiceNow IT Operations Management for IT Operations, ServiceNow Discovery, Event Management, and then service mapping for the CMDB.

What's most valuable in ServiceNow IT Operations Management is that it works with other ServiceNow solutions. For example, to do Event Management, you need to have your service maps and infrastructure properly discovered, so you need a solution that works well with others, such as ServiceNow IT Operations Management.

As a product, I also like that it's pretty strong and it can discover non-IP devices.

As a ServiceNow partner, my company also gets frequent ServiceNow IT Operations Management updates, which is another pro.

An area for improvement for ServiceNow IT Operations Management is making service mapping and discovery easier for non-IP devices.

I've been selling ServiceNow IT Operations Management for six years.

ServiceNow IT Operations Management is a very stable solution.

ServiceNow IT Operations Management is very scalable, and in terms of scalability, I'd give it a nine out of ten.

Customers call the ServiceNow IT Operations Management support team, but we also offer support for the solution to our customers.

The initial setup for ServiceNow IT Operations Management is complex for people not certified in ServiceNow. Customers won't be able to set it up because you're required to be certified and understand ServiceNow IT Operations Management, which is why my company does it for customers. It's easy for my company but difficult for non-certified people.

My customers pay for the ServiceNow IT Operations Management license annually, but it's different because it undergoes a quarterly review.

I'd rate the pricing based on value. ServiceNow IT Operations Management is a premium product as it has better features than competitors.

I work for a ServiceNow partner, so I only handle ServiceNow solutions.

My company sells ServiceNow Orchestration, ServiceNow Discovery, ServiceNow DevOps, and ServiceNow IT Operations Management.

I'd recommend the solution to others. It's my job as a seller.

My rating for ServiceNow IT Operations Management is eight out of ten.

We use ServiceNow for incident management. When an incident occurs, it is assigned to the respective team, who works on resolving the issue based on its severity level. We also define severity levels such as critical, medium, or minor.

Initially, some of our customers faced issues with the solution as they were not very familiar with it. We helped them identify and rectify the issues, such as incidents being assigned to the wrong teams due to group-related issues. Once we corrected these issues, our customers were satisfied with the solution's performance.

There is room for improvement in the stability of ServiceNow.

Overall, the performance and everything is good for the product. However, sometimes customers face issues related to misconfigurations, particularly related to respective groups. Other than that, the performance of ServiceNow IT Operations Management is good.

I have been using ServiceNow IT Operations Management for five to six years.

The stability is fine. I would rate it a seven out of ten.

The scalability of ServiceNow is good. I would rate scalability an eight out of ten. My company is a startup organization, so I have few customers. Two or three customers are using the solution.

The initial setup is straightforward, and it took around a week to deploy the solution. Initially, we need two or three members for deployment. Once we hand over the solution to the customer, it depends on how they manage it.

We need a manager, developer, and QA personnel to deploy the solution.

Licensing is chargeable. For example, earlier, it was monthly.

ServiceNow is a very good product, but it's widely used in the industry. Overall, I'll give it an eight out of ten.

I would advise customers that this is a very useful setup. We get a lot of real incidents, apart from false incidents. Also, ServiceNow has its pro application setup related to AI ops. So, as per the customer, if we need to figure out any issue, we can initially use the standard ServiceNow application. After that, if we separate ServiceNow using AI ops, we can get many features. It is machine learning and AI-based. After that, we can get a lot of features.

In normal ServiceNow, we have to search for routers and other things, but we can get these things automatically from the system in AI operations. So, there is a set of things we can advise the customer in such a way.

The auto remediation feature has been most valuable. They have also introduced an AOP feature of ServiceNow that we are keen to explore. They have also come up with a lot of anomaly detection and self healing through orchestration.

Even though they call it low code there are a lot of customizations needed, especially from an ITOM standpoint. We have the opportunity to pick elementary data but there is a lot of scope when it comes to training bots and the ML capability. I think this solution still needs to mature, especially from an ITOM perspective. It is still very difficult to train the bots to to detect anomalies.

The ML capability also needs improvement. 

I have been using this solution for three years. 

This is a stable solution. I would rate it seven out of ten for stability. 

This is a scalable solution. 

The availability of the contact center for high priority tickets is really good. If you are an ITOM user and you depend on a particular vendor to get a response, especially when it comes to new product features, there is a lag. 

Positive

For us, the initial setup was straightforward but this does depend on your organization. If you don't have a proper CMDB set up, whether it is internal or outside ServiceNow, the ITOM implementation may not be very easy. 

This solution offers good value but comes at a very high premium. Pricing could be reduced by 10 to 20%.

I would rate this solution an eight out of ten.