ServiceNow Reviews

We primarily use the solution to support Airbus Helicopters.

It's great for handling support tickets and onboarding employees.

We have other facilities in the United States with teams in Herndon, Virginia, and Grand Prairie, Texas, and for networking, in Mobile, Alabama. By having our different specialists in different areas, we're able to leverage their expertise over a large geographical area.

They have these items called resolver groups that are quite useful, however, it's basically to assign tickets to various teams.

The onboarding of employees is very good.

It's great for handling new hardware requests or new user requests.

They offer standard templates. The more that you customize it, or add additional software requests, the more it becomes usable and powerful. 

The solution is stable.

The scalability is there if you need it.

My understanding is that the pricing is reasonable. 

ServiceNow is great. You can download the data into Excel and you can basically create reports. It's very flexible.

That features are already there, however, maybe they could have some tutorials or give more power to the users versus having specialist administrators doing things. There's a big knowledge base. There's a lot of know-how that's saved in there, however, actually allowing people to do their own thing is lacking a bit.

I know there are functionalities for using it on other platforms. However, specifically for iPhone or Android, if there's something where I'm walking around and working in different offices, if I'm able to look up information directly, instead of going back to my laptop, that would be ideal. Making a mobile version would be helpful.

It's pretty customized already. I don't think there's anything that would be an area to fix.

I know that I actually have the special panel for all the features that I use, like creating tickets, managing hardware. Anything that can be integrated into especially our other types of features, such as SCCM, Microsoft SCCM, being able to update hardware, instead of manually going inside there would be good.

I've used the solution for the last year.

The solution is pretty stable. The only thing is that it's a cloud version, and therefore, if your network is slow or non-responsive, then ServiceNow becomes slow and unresponsive. That's a network issue. That is not an application issue.

The solution is easy to scale. If we wanted to add other facilities, it would be fairly easy to do. Something that we're going to be taking on in the next year or so is integrating with another facility in Mirabel, Quebec. They do commercial aircraft. We do civilian helicopters. Integrating with that team more will be beneficial. We have around 60 people using it right now.

I personally have never had any issues where I had to raise it directly to ServiceNow. I cannot speak on the topic of support.

The company did use a different solution. It was not as integrated with the other parts of the company, which is why they switched.

The company was using another product before. They implemented this, I would say, within six months. It's been in place for two years now and it's matured.

I was not there for the deployment.

We have one SRM, senior relationship manager, that basically maintains the digital workspace. He's in charge of updating the versions or deploying new features. There's one person that does that.

There are built-in surveys and we track those metrics, and the metrics have been positive for the last two years. There's been a great improvement.

Due to the fact that we're dealing with different subcontractors, we have a company that does the networking and we have a company that does the desktop hardware. If it's more application support or accounting specific, then it goes somewhere else. Being able to bridge between those different subcontractors is a major selling point.

The pricing is reasonable. In terms of extra costs, likely if a company was going to do integrations, they might have to buy the different modules, however, I'm not involved in that.

I'm just a customer and an end-user.

I am currently up to date with the latest version.

I'd advise potential new seers that they'll get good asset management and be able to manage tickets. It's all straightforward and usable. In the past, I've used other products, and they're not that scalable. If you're working in a company that has multiple facilities, multiple countries, the best way to go is with ServiceNow.

I'd rate the solution at a nine out of ten.

We have several applications of the product, however, the main use case is to generate all the backlogs of the different squads where we assign histories and we can link this to concrete people. 

The histories and the tasks that we draft within the histories are used for creating all the burn charts in agile and to show the velocity of how well it was the last sprint in terms of shipments. This is the key purpose. 

We also use ServiceNow to log IT tickets and to trace them. Those tickets can be created directly as a ServiceNow history on the IT squads. This will go directly to their backlog. It is a quite nice interaction.

It's used to manage the sprint in agile to create all the backlogs and to activate the current sprints, to create the burnout charts of the velocity of the sprints, and also to register any IT-related support ticket requests.

When we join the task board we can have a main view that we use on the daily standups in the agile world. It is very easy to navigate across and to move histories around. 

It's great to do statuses or to review tasks. We can open them and get some details and updates. 

It is quite flexible as a system and is very visual.

It helps to keep the daily standards to 15 minutes.

Probably the backlog organization could be a little bit easier in terms of transversality between different squads. It would be nice if we could, with some specific access rights, move histories from one squad to another, as they generate dependencies or duplicate or flag them. We'd like to create dependency charts between different teams. This is something that Jira, for example, used to do very easily.

It would be ideal if there was some sort of Follow button to help users follow certain concrete task histories. That way, if you are following something, you could bet an immediate update when there is a change of status or a new comment or whatever.

In my current assignment, I've been working with ServiceNow since January. However, in the past, I used it from 2016 until 2019. This is my fourth year using ServiceNow.

The solution is stable. It always works. We haven't had any issues. In this case, no news is good news.

The solution is perfectly scalable. What they give you is the framework. In terms of functionalities, every client can customize it. It'll work well for different companies.

The product is widely used in the institution. Likely 90% of head office employees use it. 

I've never really needed technical support. I've used ServiceNow to request technical support on other applications. I was just handed over the minimum standards to use it, and then I learned by doing. It was quite easy.

With my previous client, I used Jira.

I cannot speak to the initial setup. When I started using the solution, it was already in place. I'm not an implementer of it. I'm an advanced user. Therefore, I can't speak to how simple or difficult the implementation process is.

I'm not sure which version of the solution we are currently using. We're likely using the latest as this is a big systemic bank. I'm pretty sure that they are continuously updated with the latest version.

I'm a user. I'm a consultant and scrum master, however, I use a lot of these tools also for agile management work.

This solution works if you invest a little bit of time in preparation. That said, that's the same for other vendors, like JIRA. You need to have efficient scrum cycles and organize them well. You should have efficient planning sessions and all the backlog should be already prepared, drafted, refined, organized, and prioritized. 

What is very important from inception, regardless of whether we're speaking about Jira or ServiceNow, is to have a very clear upfront plan of how you want to structure it. What is the kind of dependencies or links you want to create between different levels of access, for example?

I would advise users to prepare in advance the full strategy of configuration before they start doing anything. It is very hard to change later. You will create technical depth and will call out what you're not going to use. To roll them back once you've started is hard. It is worth it to take time, in the beginning, to try to forecast as much as possible. 

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

I worked on the CMDB configuration management setup, and then previously I worked on software asset management also and hardware asset management also. I did a little bit on the ITSM side also.

The incident management is great.

We have found change management and CMDB to be very useful. 

The knowledge management is quite good.

The AAR might require further improvements.

There are areas such as technology management that have scope for further improvement. 

Their cloud management is also not that great compared to other products.

There could be some additional capability for discovery. As it matures, it needs to showcase to users what is possible within the solution.  

I have been using it for the last seven years or so, on and off, and especially in the last three, four years, more on a more regular basis. I'm using it almost daily at my job.

The solution is stable. There aren't bugs or glitches. It doesn't crash or freeze.

Sometimes the CMDB, BK table gets slow, however, almost all of the other things are good, at least.

The scalability of the product is very good. If a company needs to expand it, it can do so.

Technical support has mostly been good. We have no complaints in terms of the level of service.

Whether the initial setup is difficult or complex depends on the implementation. We have done multiple implementations, however, it depends on the product's implementation on the consumer end. It can vary from straightforward to complex.

The deployment also is product-specific, customer-specific, et cetera. It depends, for example, on the number of customers, the particular, specific scope, and which product is required, and how many users and devices that they have. All these things come into play and change how long it would take to set everything up.

The size of the team a company might need for deployment and maintenance is product and scope-specific, however, it can vary from one or two people to even maybe five to ten people, depending on which products are in scope, and what is the scope of maintenance requirements.

If the project is for the ITSM, it'll be 18 or 19 managers playing a role, and the rest being the configuration managers with other things. However, it depends on the project.

We're an implementor. We handle the setup for clients. 

I'm a consultant. We are a managed service provider. As part of the implementation, the client usually does look for a cloud for it.

I'd rate the solution at a nine out of ten. I deducted a mark as sometimes there is a certain level of slowness, however, for the most part, we have been happy with its capabilities. 

Overall, I've been satisfied with the product.

I've found the solution to be scalable.

The stability has been good overall. The performance is reliable. 

It's mostly an intuitive product. It's actually easy to understand. 

Technical support is decent. They are helpful when we have issues. 

The pricing could be lowered. It's pretty high.

We have had a few issues with the Agent Client Collector setup, however, that's probably at our end for some network blocking reason, or something like that.

Their GUI could be updated. It's a little bit old-looking right now. 

I've been using the solution for three or so years now. 

The solution is stable and the performance is good. there aren't bugs or glitches. It doesn't crash. It's reliable. 

The product is scalable. If a company needs to expand it, it can do so. It's not a problem.

Technical support has been fine. We are happy with their level of service in general. 

The price is high. However, I don't pay for it. I'm just an employee. I can't speak to the exact costs. That said, I know it's an expensive product.

While we are working with ServiceNow, we are looking into Device42 to see if that could be used for scanning our infrastructure right now.

While I have used ServiceNow for some time, I'm not an expert. I was sort of admin in a previous company where I worked, however, now I'm only, more or less, a user of ServiceNow. I'm a consultant. 

I'd rate the solution at an eight out of ten, based on my overall experience. 

The product is primarily used for HR service delivery, traditional IT service management, and, increasingly, integrated risk management, or IRM. 

The biggest area of growth is what we call creator workflows. This is building new applications on ServiceNow, using ServiceNow as a development platform. That's the biggest area of growth for us.

The initial setup can be quite straightforward.

The stability is quite good. It's pretty reliable.

It can scale well if you are managing IT assets.

The solution has good technical support and a strong community that can help solve problems.

The RPA needs improvement. That's a new area for them that they're just entering into now. 

Their user interface, their UX design, and their portal are all in the process of being improved. 

The footprint in non-IT assets, so managing assets outside of IT. That means building new CMDB class structures. Can they manage a hospital device, a manufacturing device, an oil-rig device, not just a server or a laptop or a printer? That's where they need to massively improve their reach. Reaching beyond IT asset management is the biggest challenge to ServiceNow right now.

It would be great if there was an accelerator or a fast-track tool or method to consider net new use cases for ServiceNow. Something almost like a solution innovation workshop environment, where you can test business ideas and work out which parts of the ServiceNow workflow can support those ideas - like a modeling tool.

I've been dealing with the product for 12 years, however, as an implementer, I don't use it on a daily basis. 

In 12 years, I've rarely seen a failure of their cloud hosting, if ever. It's incredibly stable. 

There are other questions then about performance, however. Sometimes it runs slowly in the cloud due to the number of transactions you're placing on it. That said, it doesn't fall over. It isn't compromised by a security breach. I'd give it 99 out of 100 for stability.

In its traditional IT areas, for example, managing IT assets, it is very scalable. There is a question mark over its scalability in terms of managing OT assets, operational technology assets. By that, I mean a device that's not an IT device. It could be your fridge, your cooker, your car, your oil rig. Scaling to manage the Internet of Things means that, in a company, you're not managing 1,000 servers. You could be managing a million devices. That's where scalability becomes more of a problem. It's managing the OT devices where there's not much clarity.

A lot of support comes from other companies that are using ServiceNow. There's a great ServiceNow community that shares ideas and answers ServiceNow questions. If you can't get the question answered by ServiceNow, you will have it answered by the ServiceNow partners or the ServiceNow customers who are part of the ServiceNow community. Support is very, very good as long as you have a wide ecosystem of options; you don't just depend upon the vendor and you also have other clients, partners, and companies that work with ServiceNow that you can reach out to.

The implementation process is straightforward if you stick to out-of-the-box settings. If you trust ServiceNow has configured their out-of-the-box settings, then stick with them and their processes and the setup is very straightforward.

The amount of time needed for deployment depends on which part of the solution you're deploying and for what scale of the customer. If you think of ServiceNow as 100 applications, if you're just deploying one small application out of 100 for a very small customer, it could take a few days. If you're deploying 50 applications around the world for an enterprise customer, it could take 1,000 days.

It's difficult to say how long it takes as it depends upon the complexity of the number of applications and the customer requirements.

Typically, you need one person to deploy it and one person to manage it.

You need a good technical consultant, a developer, and you need somebody that has project-management skills, and you need somebody with business-analysis skills: somebody who can interpret the business requirements and translate those into the configuration. 

A project might require lots of different roles, however, one person may be very skilled. He might have some development skills and project-management skills, and he is good at asking the right business questions. In the smallest deployments, one person could do all those things. However, in the biggest deployments, you will have a dedicated project manager, dedicated technical architect, dedicated developers, consultants, dedicated business analysts. There are lots of roles that need to be covered in a deployment, depending on the size of the deployment. One person or several people might be necessary to cover all those roles.

We implement the solution for our customers.

I work for a company that resells ServiceNow, and we implement it around the world. We're a big systems integrator. For years, we've worked with ServiceNow, implementing it for other customers to utilize.

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

We use ServiceNow for asset management. I manage the IT contracts that are in ServiceNow with the metadata that we have. I'm the associate director for IT contract assets.

When we can centralize all the contract information, ServiceNow will give us better control over asset management and technical debt.

ServiceNow is not meeting our expectations. The contract module is quite rudimentary. It doesn't support contract line items, which are subdivisions of contracts in VA. The result is that we're not able to track those sorts of assets down to the product level. I'd like to see support for contract line items included in the next release.

I've been using this solution for two years. 

My understanding is that the stability is excellent. 

The initial setup is complex because it's not meeting our needs. We're having to build a scoped app to address the inability to save contract line items and data.

For now, I rate this solution five out of 10. 

I previously used the on-premise version of ServiceNow. It was a better fit for companies and banks because of their tech security protocols. But for my work with my current company, I am considering the cloud solution because we already have all the other software components in AWS.

The main features of ServiceNow that I use are incident approval management and the ability to link all the information we receive from the finance bureau service. We needed to track the different processes within the IT area and incident documentation. Then we gathered all the information and built a knowledge base. That's the central core functionality that I've been using, and I've seen immense benefits.

We are elaborating and defining the business processes, so I will believe that we will be able to avoid the older models for the second phase. But first, I wanted to have these incident and asset management models in place as a first phase of the implementation.

I've been using ServiceNow for work I've done with various clients for around eight years. I first used it with Wal-Mart International, and then we used it for one event with Brolin Management. I recently worked with Santander Bank, where we used ServiceNow for all the incident and assets management. Now, I help implement different service management tools at my current company, including ServiceNow.

I think ServiceNow is highly stable. These kinds of tools are used in a big company, and I haven't seen any issues in terms of the core platform. However, if we need to customize something, that would be the point to focus on because this would be something new, not a part of the standard flow for the tool.

I think ServiceNow is scalable in the short term. 

The solution has some built-in monitoring capabilities, so we escalate cases as they come. But sometimes the response to our requests is delayed.

Setting up ServiceNow is pretty standard because we want it to manage incidents and use it for other marketing, construction, and procurement areas. But, still, everything would be based on the different services we provide for their operations area. If you move forward with the cloud, I think the number of internal staff needed would be minor. It probably takes around two people to deploy and manage. In this case, we use some external consultants for all the development and maintenance.

For us, it's better to pay the licenses monthly, and I mean when we move ahead with the cloud deployment. I understand that the service includes hosting and licensing as a service as well as some downgoing costs probably. That will be all on the implementation side. It depends if we need some customization. We will need to consider that part as a consultancy. 

I will rate ServiceNow nine out of 10 because it's a little expensive compared to other tools, but it's a very good product from a technical standpoint.

Most of our tickets go through ServiceNow.

Any tickets that we need to open in order to interact with other teams and make things happen go through ServiceNow. 

When I need to create an AWS account, I use ServiceNow. I need to use ServiceNow to request a new machine. 

We use ServiceNow for everything that requires us to interact with other teams.

They use it for internal communication across all departments.

What I believe works well is the chain of tasks that occurs when you follow up after completing a task. The subsequent chain of tasks, I believe, is valuable.

The interface, in my opinion, is not very good. It's very unclear where the status is and what steps I need to take next. I don't think the layout is very good.

The interface requires an upgrade. I'm not sure if I'm using the most recent version, which could be the issue. However, I don't have control over which versions we use, and I do find the interface to be very cumbersome, there is a lot of information here, and it's difficult to find what you are looking for. 

I find myself occasionally looking at the request and wondering if I already approved it or not because the status is a little strange. It's not great.

It's not very intuitive.

I interact with ServiceNow quite a bit. I have been using it for eight years.

ServiceNow is relatively stable. I haven't noticed any problems with stability.

I believe it scales well, but I'm not sure. I'm not familiar with the back end or how it's set up.

It performs well, I have never had any problems with performance.

The company employs over 40,000 people. I'm going to say that the majority of people will need to use it, or maybe half of them use ServiceNow extensively.

I've never had any contact with technical support.

Black Duck, Veracode, and SonarQube are some of the tools we use.

I wasn't involved in the initial setup because it was already in place when I joined the organization.

I've heard that some of its features are difficult to implement. I've never done it myself, but from what I've heard from other teams, it takes a long time to create a full flow. It's not quite that easy.

We have a team that handles updates, patches, and fixes.

I would rate ServiceNow a seven out of ten.