ServiceNow Reviews

I use ServiceNow for incident management, problem management, change management, and request management.

I have found that sorting and grouping functions are particularly useful.

I find some features are difficult to use. For example, the creation of service catalog forms. Creating service catalog forms could be made easier.

In the next release, I would like to see some of the features and processes made to be simpler to use. For example, creating the service catalog forms, doing the CMDB, and integration with other systems have to be made easier to use.

I have been using this solution for almost two years.

It's a stable product.

This solution is scalable.

In our company, we have approximately 1,000 users. For me, I use it every day.

I rarely engage with technical support. I had a good experience with the one or two tickets that were submitted. They were able to resolve the issues and it was a positive experience.

Previously, I was using Jira. 

Jira is meant for small enterprises and it is much cheaper than ServiceNow. 

ServiceNow is meant for a much larger user base.

I was not a part of the initial setup. By the time I arrived, it had already been set up by someone else.

We have five to eight people with various tasks to maintain this solution.

I believe that they had an integrator to help them set up. That was in 2018. before I joined the company.

The licenses are expensive.

They pay a license fee per user. Jira is much cheaper than ServiceNow.

If I was in a small company with 500 users or less, I would use Jira. If I am in a company with 500 or more users then I would use ServiceNow.

For anyone who wants to start using ServiceNow, they need to ensure that they have the funds to finance it. The licenses are not cheap and they need to have a consultant that can help them to customize the functions or the features they need.

I would rate this solution an eight out of ten.

Our primary use cases are for service management, incident, change, problem, asset, and lifecycle. The system was build and integrated to SAP as a backend ERP?CRM system. This made integrations and choices in functionality complicated. However, by replacing Symphony as a rather internal orientated system, ServiceNow gave us the benefit of tight customer integrations by means of the web-based portal, which is a user-friendly interface to use and actually helps speeding up incident handling by improved communication and information sharing.

It gave us professionalized, faster incident turn around times. Improved quality of information shared with our customers. Over time we build an extensive knowledge base that assists in both self-service as in services provided by the servicedesk when handling incidents.

Because we first redesigned our internal and external processes we were able to effectively roll out and implement ServiceNow, sequentially per workflow, and put the lessons learned in earlier implementations to work for us. Overall is has improved service management on CSM.

There is one platform and many solutions. Workflows are well designed and robust. All user screens have the same look and feel, helping to understand the logic of the supported workflows. Integrations to third parties are strong and build on on off the shelve API integrations which makes them quite easy to build. ServiceNow is built on the best practice framework ITIL and helps customers organize their organizations accordingly. Although many trainings need to be completed, this assures a proper knowledge level at the users.

There should be fewer clicks and faster integrations between solutions. Too much information needs to be entered when transferring between solutions. Obvious logic does not always seem to apply when transferring tasks between workflows. Having said this, the availability of these many workflows and solutions on one platform is the strength of ServiceNow. 

New development of new features is not as flexible as one would expect, global adherence to rules and regelations seem to bog down the development and release process.

I have been using ServiceNow for six years. 

It is very stable.

We haven't met the limitations.

Their support is not experienced. 

We did use Symphony which was very internal oriented and needed a step towards our customers. Servicenow provided us the possibility to interface with numerous different customers in different countries as well as third parties. 

The setup was complex due to country dependencies and integrations.

We deployed in-house.

Licensing model ServiceNow is expensive, so monitor actual use.

Yes, TOPdesk and BMC

make sure you prepare your processes and workflow before implementation, choices made at the implementation stage are carried over into your actual work. The tool basically support all imaginable workflows, although this requires a high level of knowledge, customisation and  coding.

We mostly use ServiceNow for incident management. There is a team which interacts with the customers and logs customer issues as incidents. Then those incidents are taken care of by my team. I work on the escalation side of that team.

That is one aspect of ServiceNow. The second thing we use it for are any economic, long-term or repetitive problems. We log problem tickets which are resolved in ServiceNow.

The third use is for changes in the system. All the changes to the system are logged in ServiceNow with their associated tasks. Those are the three major use cases for ServiceNow.

The feature that I have found most valuable from ServiceNow is the ability to assign sub-tasks to different teams, including problem tickets and the regular and chain tasks. For example, if there is a chain which requires different steps of execution validation or execution steps, those task divisions, as well as the assignment and ownership of the tasks, is something that is really useful in ServiceNow.

The major area for improvement for our needs would be monitoring the metrics of the times to acknowledge and resolve issues and escalations. For example, if there is an incident which is not acknowledged within a certain period of time, or the resolution of the incident exceeds a certain period of time, it can be escalated to the next levels. That is one of the things you're looking for which is not available with ServiceNow.

The second feature I would be looking for is integration with different tools, like Bugzilla, Microsoft Informer, and Jira. Jira has integration, in fact. Teams in different organizations use different tools, so integrating those tools would be really helpful.

I have been using ServiceNow for two years.

It is quite a stable solution. In the last couple of years we probably had around one or two outages and only one major outage. So it's very stable.

ServiceNow is quite scalable. 

I would say there are about 400 people using ServiceNow in the organization. That includes administrators, users and those who maintain ServiceNow. Currently, ServiceNow gets daily usage.

I don't usually get in touch with support directly because I am not an end user.

In my previous company we used a custom-built tool which was not available on the market. It was called My Article Support and was built internally specifically for big biotic collection. It was highly customized and it catered to a lot of our needs.

One of the features in that tool was based on the customer engagement level and not on the revenue impact that customer had on the organization or the number of users impacted, etc... It would generate the incident prioritization score, which determined how quickly we were supposed to work on the incident. So the prioritization of incidents was automated, which I do not find in ServiceNow. But that tool was very customized and it was internally built so the development was done in-house. The second thing was the ability to track and close escalations because it was a custom-built tool and there was a process for it. The process was defined and was in the documentation.

I was actually not there when the setup was done so I can't answer that.

You need to find a tool that suits your needs. For example, the ServiceNow tool has certain advantages but at this point, one of the major things I'm looking for is tracking an escalation based on acknowledging the resolution. Meaning, I'm looking for something which is different compared to ServiceNow. It probably depends on your needs but for certain use cases, it does work very well, and maybe you need to do a deep dive or evaluate it before you buy anything.

On a scale of one to ten I would rate ServiceNow a seven.

We use this solution for Service Management in banking branches.

The main improvement is the integration of several business processes.

The most valuable feature is that this is a Cloud solution.

The MGM version is easier to use.

Transparency in the pricing model needs to be improved.

This solution is our help desk system.

This solution is a single-storage for our user community to submit help desk tickets.

I do not like the user interface.

I would like to see a more streamlined process to assign tickets to support people.

This solution seems stable.

I think that it is scalable, although I think that there is room for improvement.

I thought that the initial setup was complex.

I didn't like the design that was given to us and we had very little say on how we could customize it.

We implemented the solution in-house.

My overall impression is that this solution is slightly above-average. My advice is to make sure that this product meets your needs before you buy it.

I would rate this solution a six out of ten.

One stop shop: All requests for support, new items, changes and anything else can be done in the portal, flexibility of service. Requests can be done directly from the portal.

• Your selected platform, for managing and consolidate ITIL Processes, HR, PPM, CSM, and any new enterprise app you want to build on the platform.
• Set of pre-built ITIL processes as well as a platform that can be used to build a variety of custom business applications.
• The process flexibility - it's very easy to customize and build off of.
• Easy to integrate with third-party applications.
• Customized Dashboard as per user requirement.

It's missing monitoring capabilities.

Stability is assured by the vendor. No issues found so far.

Easily scalable as the vendor assumes availability at all times.

Quick, friendly, and efficiently responsive customer support.

Compared to other ITSM platforms, ServiceNow is by far the most agile, robust, and scalable platform.

It was very straightforward and to the point, since it's very intuitive and easy to deploy.

The license model is based on a number of fulfillers (active users who play some role within the ServiceNow functionality). Therefore, you can serve as many end-users as you want, without additional costs.

Integrations: ServiceNow is an open platform that come with out of the box integrations API, but if you really want a deep business process integrations of ServiceNow with JIRA, Salesforce, Microfocus, BMC and others, we recommend https://www.zigiwave.com  read more in the blog post here: https://zigiwave.com/how-to-integrate-jira-servicenow-in-less-than-2-minutes/

We use it for ITSM and ITBM.

The area where we have benefited a lot is that, initially, it was very difficult to have end-to-end visibility into what was happening. We didn't have any kind of top-down or bottom-up approach to CMDB and ITSM processes across it. We were able to establish that with ServiceNow. Our other ITSM models are pretty dependent on CMDB elements, so that gives an overall picture of what is happening and where it is happening.

• Request module
• Orchestration
• The PPM Module is pretty important in our organization

The workflow is something we use on a day-to-day basis. It's pretty handy the way it is in ServiceNow. 

As our ServiceNow implementation focuses on Healthcare domain which is highly regulated , Hence we are unable to follow the full agile way to develop/implement application enhancement or new requirements , Hence we follow a hybrid delivery model where  we have integrated following servicenow modules Demand-Requirement-agile Developement- Test Management -Defect Management- Change Managementto bring our releases/changes in a regular basis , enables us to practice CIP & also helps us in having an end to end tracebility.

Also, in the Service Portal, use of Angular JS gives a very good look & feel & a lot can be done with OOB widgets - By modifying existing widget which is pretty simple, We can leverage a lot on top of it. 

Finally, I also like the architecture for collaborating between business logic and client interaction on our client interfaces.

For healthcare, which is a pretty audited environment, there are no concrete solutions for digital signatures, apart from our license with Adobe, so it requires orchestration. That is one area for improvement.

Apart from that, initially, we struggled with financial forecasting and financial management in the PPM module. That needs improvement along with the IntegrationHub which came out in a recent release. It's still in its initial stages. That could grow into a more solid solution that could be more helpful.

It's pretty much a stable product.

It has good scalability.

There is a version upgrade every year, which ServiceNnow pushes, so it remains pretty scalable if you remain pretty close to out-of-the-box. It becomes less scalable if you go in a direction where you want to use ServiceNow as the platform and build your own solution with complex logic behind it. Then, that's an issue.

I would rate the support they provide us, at above three out of five. If they do not come up with a solution or our request is out of the scope of their support, they do help us with a direction for how to get it done.

To start with, we wanted a global planning platform for all our ITSM activity, throughout the business, for internal IT. That's the reason we started migrating ITSM from different groups to ServiceNow. We did some homework on that, such as what was the market position of ServiceNow and how we could integrate with other third-party applications. After doing that analysis we came up with the ServiceNow as our option.

The setup, on a technical basis, was not that difficult. But if I want to involve different businesses into using change management, it becomes a challenge to understand the process and implement it on a platform which is standard for everyone. So it's not really the technical aspect, it's more the procedural aspect.

It took us about eight months to roll out ITSM. But after that, we have had other instances where we use a custom solution, out-of-scope applications for our customer service area, and we were able to implement it within three months.

Initially, the deployment was done by a solution partner and, to be honest, they came up with some functions that activated a lot of things which were not needed. But at that moment, it was very necessary for us to quickly jump into the ITSM module and make it available for everyone.

Later on, we realized that there were many things implemented which were not needed. Many approaches were customized but were not required. For example, Incidents is the table where we are currently doing requests, and that was introduced by the solution partner. But when we involved request-management with Incidents, we somehow missed out on a lot of process automation. There is a powerful workflow with this solution and you can do a lot of process automation, depending on different services. 

We looked at 

• BMC Remedy vs ServiceNow
• Micro Focus Service Manager vs ServiceNow
• JIRA vs ServiceNow
• and Cherwell vs ServiceNow.

You can get the most out of ServiceNow if you align your processes more towards the out-of-the-box solution, and not over-customize it to create a solution.

We have 3,000 users hosted on it but not everyone has write-access to the system. There are users who are end users who get Portal access to manage their tasks. Apart from that, there are a few fulfillers who are using the write-access: the support staff, such as the change manager or change coordinator. And then we have admins.

In terms of extent of use, currently, we have more than one instance of ServiceNow. We have three different instances for three different areas, and they have their own sets of uses.

Maintenance is mostly outsourced to a vendor who provides elemental and entry support. We are keeping more of the architectural and solution-designing work in-house.

I would rate ServiceNow at eight out of ten. It could be a ten if we had a more central way of connecting ServiceNow with different systems. They have taken initiative with the IntegrationHub and I'm really looking forward to that. Also, virtual assistance is something that has started, but we have so many requirements regarding intelligent agents being integrated with it. I'm looking forward to that. If ServiceNow rolled those solutions into it, it would enhance our end-user experience and I could probably rate it a ten.

We are consultants. We use ServiceNow to develop ideas and solutions for our customers.

It has definitely improved operations at the customer end. There are some key metrics which users have wanted and they are able to achieve them through ServiceNow solutions.

The main feature would be ITSM, as ServiceNow initially started with ITSM software. That is something which is important for all our customers. HR Case Management and Customer Service Management are two of the key areas which clients are also using.

HR Service Management is one module that needs a lot of improvement because it's a pretty new module. It was introduced in the last two years. It's becoming more mature day by day, but there is a lot of scope for improvement in that module.

The stability is really good. As I mentioned earlier, the HR area has a lot of room for improvement in terms of stability. We are trying to customize a lot of things. But overall, in terms of being a stable solution, that is what comes from ServiceNow.

I would rate scalability very high, compared to competitive tools. It is highly scalable.

If we implement it for large enterprises they could have 10,000-plus end users. We have implemented it for small organizations as well, where they have just 1,000 end users.

Out of ten, I would rate technical support at seven. Sometimes, it seems to me that even though we are looking for a simple solution, if something has to be customized, ServiceNow technical support doesn't look at it and they simply say that we have to go with Professional Services. They won't look at any custom script or any custom implementation. Where we have done a small customization to something out-of-the-box, even in those cases there are times when ServiceNow is not able to support us.

Before ServiceNow, I had worked with BMC Remedy and worked with and compared Micro Focus Service Manager vs ServiceNow. We switched our services because ServiceNow is really easy to configure and it's a cloud tool. In terms of the performance and the implementation, it is really easy to configure.

From an initial setup perspective, it is very simple. That is why ServiceNow is the market trend, compared to Remedy or compared to HPE tools. It has already captured close to 60 or 70 percent of the market. The initial setup is really very user-friendly and very easy to set up in customer environments. Just drag and drop. You really don't need any technical skillset to deploy ServiceNow at customer sites.

Deployment time depends on what a customer is trying to implement, for example, the number of modules. If a customer is going with the basic ITSM module, it does not take more than two to three months to implement that complete ITSM suite.

In terms of implementation strategy, first we try to go with the out-of-the-box features and try to follow ServiceNow guided setups, which are available on the ServiceNow Wiki. A lot of information is there. We can blindly follow that for the initial setup and for the configuration.

The staff required for deployment and maintenance depend on the customer's requirements. If the requirements are really complex and they want a custom solution, then the timelines and the staff increase, based on that. There's no standard staffing, as such, in terms of implementation. It completely depends on the complexity of the requirements and, obviously, the size of the requirements.

Initially, the licensing model ServiceNow came up with was very good. But now, from a licensing perspective, they are changing their model day by day. It is becoming a bit expensive for customers.

The licensing is changing drastically. Especially for the Orchestration piece and the HR piece, the pricing is pretty high. Initially, when ServiceNow started, the licensing was very nominal and that's why customers adopted the tool. But now, in terms of replacing other tools with ServiceNow, they could probably work on the licensing part. Doing so will obviously increase the ServiceNow market and customers will start using it for that.

We directly migrated from Remedy to ServiceNow because of the growing market for ServiceNow vs Remedy. We got quite good feedback from some of our competitors and customers that ServiceNow is really good in terms of its integrations. In 2011 we called ServiceNow to demo the product. They came to our organization and we had the demo and we really liked the tool. Then we switched over to ServiceNow.

The configuration is very simple. I would definitely recommend it from a maintenance perspective and from a scalability perspective. It is a really good tool. You can replace your existing Remedy or HPSM with ServiceNow.

Regarding how extensively the solution is being used, it's no longer just an ITSM product. It's a platform, as such. Customers have started moving all their custom applications - in addition to ITSM, their non-ITSM - to the product. They've started building everything on ServiceNow. Slowly, customers are liking the tool and they are very happy to move everything onto ServiceNow.

I rate ServiceNow at eight out of ten. For the two missing points, as I mentioned, there are some new modules which need a lot of improvement. The HR Service Management is not very straightforward right now, in terms of the security rules. We have to spend a lot of time implementing the HR module. It is not really simple the way it is with the ITSM modules.