BMC Helix ITSM Reviews

I used this solution as part of my previous role where I was a solution architect designing comprehensive solutions for customers in the APAC region, including India. The customers predominantly have challenges with respect to the ITSM area.

The primary use cases could be particular incident problems and change management modules. There are of course requirements on your cellphone catalog front. Along with other BMC products, it could be discovery or it could be your monitoring solution.

Every fourth or fifth client I have worked with has had the BMC solution.

It's a cloud solution and deployed on-prem.

The most valuable features are the simplicity and the in-duty features. Most of the time people don't use the tool because they either find it clumsy or very difficult to understand. The biggest challenge is that I don't know where I need to raise the request. BMC addresses all these solutions, so that is something I like.

The second thing is the scalability, which isn't a problem at all. You go and buy any product in the market and of course to a certain limit they can work, but the scalability that BMC offers is really great. 

Thirdly, it provides tons of integration options. We haven't faced any issues with integration.

It's expensive, particularly in the emerging market where you see a lot of customers that have a budget crunch over issues. They like the products a lot, but when it comes to the costing part of it, sometimes they say it's not in their budget.

They go and they compromise, instead of compromising on the budget front. Sometimes they go with an open source or a cheaper tool. They have scalability issues, and they don't get quality support.

Sometimes on the pricing front, we lose some deals, particularly in the emerging market.

I have been using this solution for 10 years.

It's stable.

The scalability is very good.

Whenever we are stuck or whenever we need support, the technical support is very much appreciated. They have helped me a lot in these areas.

Implementation is easy and simple most of the time. The knowledge base is pretty good. The community pages are very good.

The amount of time it takes to deploy depends on the use cases. Typically, we take around two to three months for implementation, which covers at least six to seven processes of implementation, any incident problem, change, or configuration.

It's a yearly subscription but there are a couple of customers who go for the monthly subscription.

I would rate this solution 8 out of 10.

I would recommend this solution for those who want to start using it.

If we consider major players like Ford or BMW, their core focus is manufacturing products like cars. To ensure smooth operations, any arising issues, be it security concerns or issues within departments like HR or finance, require a swift resolution. This is where the product comes into play. It provides a platform for raising tickets and obtaining quick solutions.

For instance, if you require a virtual machine from a specific data center group, you no longer need to endure traditional processes. Automation kicks in, and you have all the necessary details within moments. This efficiency level isn't confined to just IT; it also permeates management levels. Beyond that, the tool offers scalability and flexibility, facilitating the maintenance of knowledge repositories and standard release processes. Additionally, it has features where users can make service requests based on their specific needs, thanks to tailored questionnaires. This ensures that only the exact resources that can support us will be allocated. 

The tool needs greater customization flexibility, particularly concerning notifications and the progressive view web page. This is significant because it encompasses various aspects like incident management, problem management, change management, work orders, and tasks. Aligning the GUI interface with these functionalities requires more flexibility. 

It also needs improvement in product categorization and information organization based on feedback and surveys. Currently, there are limitations in terms of user-friendliness and customization options. For instance, the inability to adjust certain categories or banners hampers usability, especially compared to other platforms like AngularJS or NodeJS. 

The tool needs improvement in monitoring. Every asset has a plethora of monitoring tools available in the market. Requirements may vary from customer to customer, but from what I've observed in large-scale industries, it falls short.

From my experience, it typically takes around six to seven months for BMC Helix ITSM to go through the discovery phase, provide releases, test them repeatedly, and so on. Over the past four or five years, I've raised various cases with different companies, and it consistently took a minimum of three to six months to resolve them. Sometimes, I had to close the cases because I had to move to a newer version to overcome those bugs. Apart from that, it's been quite challenging when it comes to performance because we haven't received that level of support. So, there's a need for improvement or better resources to be allocated at the initial stage. I wouldn't say that we don't receive support, but if the right resources are aligned at the right time, it would make things easier for the end customer.

I have been using the product for more than seven years. 

When evaluating the tool's overall stability, I would rate it around a six out of ten upon fresh installation. However, as the system adapts to its environment and smoothens out, the stability significantly improves, reaching around a nine out of ten. So, shortly after installation, it may start at six out of ten, but within six months to a year, it typically stabilizes and earns a rating of nine out of ten for its stability.

The expanding nature of the environment may be unfamiliar. The requirements BMC Helix ITSM suggests for installation are also uncertain, as they haven't been tested in the live environment. Real repercussions become apparent once you proceed with infrastructure installation, including real-time unexpected issues.

My company has more than 1000 product users. 

The ease of installation largely depends on your specific requirements when it comes to the initial installation of BMC Helix ITSM. If you're opting for a containerized deployment, it's not necessarily straightforward; I'd rate it around a six out of ten on a scale of difficulty. However, if you're leveraging cloud-based deployment, the tool manages everything, including instances and scalability. 

I have experienced all the phases of BMC Helix ITSM: standalone, on-premises, containerized, and cloud-based. I have worked in all these environments. ITSM deployment depends on various factors. Currently, we are transitioning to containers instead of the cloud. Specific dependencies influence this choice. Many large companies opt for containerization, while some move to the cloud. The primary reason is the reluctance to expose their data publicly.

I rate the overall product an eight out of ten. 

The main use case for Helix ITSM is managing break/fix tickets and all other issues with the product. It tracks customer issues using an incident model. 

We have problem management for recurring issues and do a deep dive if we need some change to fix the root cause. We can also identify if a change caused the issue with a holistic analysis. 

BMC Smart IT is somewhat rigid, but they have a powerful backend that supports our complex need for extension versus customization. Between extension and customization, you can achieve complex business processes. That's one of the main advantages of BMC.

There's some confusion with the BMC roadmap. The BMC Remedy Mid Tier architecture didn't have a good-looking frontend, but you could build any functionality, so it had a lot of flexibility. The frontend of BMC Smart IT is relatively limited in its ability to change, hide, and show fields and those kinds of things that pop up.

With Helix, they're trying to build things and add a little more capabilities, but they still have a  long way to go. It's not a complete solution. For example, they are phasing out Smart Reporting because it doesn't fit well in an ITSM solution.

It needs a more organic workflow, so every field you create is labeled throughout the stack. BMC has a few products that they try to bundle together. Generally, that solution works. BMC should take a step back and think about the overall solution—not only ITSM but also CTI Integration along with chat. They have all that, but it's not an end-to-end holistic solution with the added reporting analytics.

I have been working with BMC for nearly 15 years.

BMC is more stable than the average product. I'm not certain, but I've heard Salesforce has some performance issues with similar infrastructure. BMC has a robust backend, so we've never had issues. It's a highly stable environment, so I don't need to invest a lot of time dealing with support.

The pricing depends on the contract.  If you ask three different people, you get very three different answers, but I don't deal with it. The people in charge of procurement handle that. 

We're currently trying out Salesforce Service Cloud, and in a few months, I should be able to compare Helix and Salesforce better. Salesforce is a little more open than Helix ITSM. For example, you can integrate HR Case Management with ITSM. One kind of application can talk to another application. That's the biggest advantage of Salesforce. The Service Cloud and Sales Cloud can talk to each other. 

BMC should think about the future and redesign the whole solution. More companies are moving to low and no-code solutions, but BMC still requires a great deal of development skill to use. Businesses don't have time for that.

I rate BMC Helix six out of 10. BMC is changing, but they're still behind in 2022. 

In general, for incident management, it's okay. It can fit tasks based on user management or change management. These kinds of modules are okay. 

We've had some small problems using the solution. It doesn't work perfectly.

There are some limitations or restrictions to using BMC Helix. For example, when we do some reporting, the reporting interface should be more user-friendly from my point of view. When compared to ServiceNow, it is lacking.

Also, there are so many restrictions when I am using the reporting. For example, there's a limitation on the number of records that can be returned. Maybe it is a performance issue? Therefore, the reporting aspect definitely is one of the things that need to improve for BMC Helix.

One of the things it can improve is the mobile app for support. When we submit a ticket on the incident and assign it to someone, we must use the computer instead of the mobile app. We'd like it to be mobile based as well.

My organization has used the solution for two or three years. I myself have only used the solution for one year.

When we do reports, I'm not sure if we have issues related to the performance or not.

It would be nice if they offered mobile support. Right now, we have to go to a desktop in order to get assistance and make a ticket.

The price is very high. It's an expensive product.

I pay for the solution yearly.

I have compared BMC against ServiceNow.

I'm a customer and end-user.

I'd rate the solution seven out of ten since I would like a mobile app for support, and the reporting needs to be better. 

We have a different project in which we implement BMC Helix ITSM, including a built-in ERP solution that has different supply chain management, such as finance, and other projects. Each team assigns the tickets, and if any client is facing an issue in a particular model, they will create the ticket and it will go through this particular use case.

If it relates to supply the chain, it goes to a particular administrator or developers. In this use case, we use approximately 500 users in BMC Helix ITSM.

This solution provides complete incident management to our organization which has improved the organization. We have different projects and different models for handling incidents and resolving the client's issues. The solution has helped to manage all the tracking and has enabled us to manage. Additionally, it has helped us with cybersecurity incidents, it's very helpful to visualize and track the exact moment of a particular incident, which is crucial.

The most valuable features of BMC Helix ITSM are the collaboration, integrated with the help of another solution called Entity. We can do all the integration and receive an automatic ticket with the help of email. We are able to receive SMS alerts to clients and end users. Every step of the ticket is generated and we are able to resolve and close them. It's very helpful to have the ability to inform the user with detailed information.

I have been using BMC Helix ITSM for approximately seven years.

BMC Helix ITSM is a stable solution.

The scalability of BMC Helix ITSM is based on the license. If you need to scale you can purchase licenses.

We have approximately 500 users of this solution. We do not have plans to increase the usage of the solution in the future.

I rate the support from BMC Helix ITSM a five out of five.

Positive

I did not use other similar solutions to BMC Helix ITSM.

The initial setup of BMC Helix ITSM is complex because it has different integrations with other tools. Additionally, it needs to be integrated with the active directory and have different databases. The environment will dictate how difficult the process is.

We did receive an ROI using the solution. It is a requirement for any organization for handling incidents, without it, it is not possible to do it in an automated or systematic way.

We evaluated Snow before choosing BMC Helix ITSM.

For the maintenance of the solution, we require one system administrator because sometimes it creates issues on the server level. One system administrator does not need to be dedicated, but then have other tasks such as the creation of groups and user for the applications, such as the ARM server.

This is a good tool and I would recommend it to others.

I rate BMC Helix ITSM a nine out of ten.

We use BMC Helix ITSM only for managing internal tickets. I only use it for checking my tickets because I'm just an end-user. I phone the service desk or I use their self-service interface to log my tickets. I have access to the interface, which I use to receive feedback on my tickets. If there's any work that I do for internal support, I use the same interface. The interface is what I use to receive information into the system and let the service desk know how far I am. There's very little that I do on that side of things. It's less than 5 percent of the work I do on BMC Helix ITSM, and 95 percent of the work I do is with CA Service Desk.

BMC Helix ITSM gives us email and SMS notifications, we can check the tickets, and give feedback. All the basic features that we need are available.

As people progress in the life cycle of the ticket, you need to know what's happening, and the notifications BMC Helix ITSM provides are helping us a lot to know exactly what's happening.

The notifications that the solution is providing are very helpful, they should keep improving them for the future.

I have been using BMC Helix ITSM for approximately two years.

BMC Helix ITSM is stable, it has high availability.

I am not sure how scalable the solution is but it has always been working well.

I have not contacted the support from BMC Helix ITSM.

I used to work for another company in 2004 and they were using a solution called Remedy, but the interface was a lot different. There are a lot of similarities to BMC Helix ITSM. The company has been using Remedy for approximately 10 years.

There are licenses to use this solution.

I would recommend this solution to others. From what I've read BMC Helix ITSM has a lot of features and far more than the CA Service Desk. I haven't been part of the team to experience the other solutions but from what I've read, it's very rich in its features.

I rate BMC Helix ITSM a nine out of ten.

We are currently using BMC Helix ITSM in our organization. We are in the process of implementing new modules like CMDB and discovery.

The most valuable features of BMC Helix ITSM for us are CMDB and discovery. These features are crucial as we complete the implementation and maintain data accuracy in the CMDB. They help us analyze investigation time and improve IT service SLA efficiency.

BMC Helix ITSM is difficult for us to customize, and most customizations require vendor support, which leads to extra costs. The interface should be more user-friendly, and the customization should be easier.

We have been using BMC Helix ITSM for around six years.

We have not encountered any issues that make the stability of BMC Helix ITSM a concern.

The product's scalability is adequate for us, yet its complex customization sometimes restricts extensive adaptability.

Customer service is handled by a local vendor support team. If they cannot resolve an issue, they contact BMC support for us. We have not had any problems with technical support.

Neutral

Before BMC Helix ITSM, we used Clientele and Jira.

It took us around one year to implement the incident, problem, and change modules. We recently upgraded to BMC Helix.

The implementation generally requires a Systems Integrator (SI) due to the complexity involved.

Over five to six years of usage, I have not been able to clearly demonstrate savings in operation costs to my management.

The pricing of BMC Helix ITSM and its implementation costs are quite high, including subscription and maintenance costs per year. It might be comparable to ServiceNow but is still considered expensive.

We considered other tools like ServiceNow and initially used products like Clientele and Jira.

The features of BMC Helix ITSM are comprehensive and comply with ITIL, however, improvements are needed in customization and user interface design. 

I rate BMC Helix ITSM a seven out of ten.

I was responsible for three implementations with BMC. All of these implementations are related to ITSM, with the IT Service Management implementation, where we manage all the processes like incident management, request fulfillment, problem management, change management, and configuration management. All three projects were of the same scope, with only ITSM managing all these processes in each one.

The most important feature in the BMC is the users' and technical teams' front end. They are good for the front end, simple front end. For the first line of support and for the end users, it's a good front end. It's very simple to register, to follow the cases or incidents. 

It is a stable product if set up correctly.

The solution can scale. 

In the back office, for the expertise technicians, it's more complex to manage the layout. The back office for the expertise needs work. It's too specialized for technicians. Sorry, they need to simplify this background and back office more. For this level of support, it's very complex, and for the customers, it's an issue. The biggest issue for our customers is the back office for the specializations through the second and third lines of support.

The management of the solution, the maintenance of the solution is based on this back office, so it's very complex for the teams to manage the solution.

It's very difficult to implement.

Support could be better.

I'd like to see the globalization of the solution. The solution has varied models needed to make a simple implementation. BMC needs to look to a centralized solution, an all-in-one solution. To implement ITSM, I need to have a model for change management, I need to have a model for orchestration, I need to have a model for workflow design, and all suites of BMC have this problem. With ServiceNow, all are included in the ITSM solution. For example, however, for BMC, we need varied models to implement. 

The customers also need to maintain the solution after the implementation. It is very difficult for them to give that support.

I've used the solution for about five years. 

If the configuration was well performed, yes, it's a stable solution. However, this is the same problem for all the other solutions in the market. If we don't have a good implementation, we don't have a good illustration of the solution. That said, if we follow the best practice to implementation, it's very stable.

The solution scales well. 

Technical support can be improved. They are fast in response, yet they pass the buck to other people. It is not easy to follow the register of support. It's not the worst support in the world. However, it could be better.

Neutral

I also have knowledge of ServiceNow. 

It's very difficult to set up the product. It's one of the most difficult solutions in the market to implement. It's time-consuming. It will take more than two months compared to something like ServiceNow, which is faster and easier. 

The number of people you need for deployment and maintenance is minimal, maybe four or five people. We can separate that into one project management, one architect, and three developers or analysts to implement the solution.

I was a partner of BMC in my last job function. 

The best support is defending the requirements of the company. This is the same advice I would give in ServiceNow. It's very important for any solution to define the requirements very well. Based on that, it's easier to implement the solution. 

I'd rate the solution eight out of ten. Compared with other solutions in the market, for example, Manage Engine, which has technical limitations, BMC is robust. We can do everything with BMC. We can do a lot with ServiceNow too. BMC does have complexity in the implementation, however.