Clarity SM Reviews

Incident/Request/Problem/Change Management, CMDB, and Business Intelligence.

From the user’s perspective: One of the most criticised aspects by the clients is the web interface, which is not too user friendly and hasn’t been changed in the last years. CA is trying now to promote an additional new interface which is more user friendly, but in this new interface, they removed some key functionalities. So, it brings value on the design, but with the price of losing some features.

I’ve been using it for the last eight years.

They usually have three levels of support: 1st, 2nd and 3rd, which are the developers. The 1st level of support is not always too experienced, but you can get real help from the 2nd and 3rd level.

I am part of a reseller team. The initial deployment of the application with the default configuration is not very useful for the client. The post-installation and configuration of the solution requires more advanced knowledge of the tool, as it allows a high level of customisation through scripting. If you have an experienced implementation team, you can get very good results and value from the solution.

For the first step, before deciding on a product, first make a detailed analysis of your internal processes and establish a list of key functionalities and requirements.

Present your requirements to the reseller/vendor and get details about how they can be implemented in the solution. A big advantage of this solution is that with a proper definition of the processes, almost anything can be configured & scripted.

Ease of integration with CA Service Desk Manager Account setup

New usage approach for end users

Access to services

I have used it for two years.

Low customer maturity in ITIL processes

We have not encountered any stability issues.

We have not encountered any scalability issues.

Customer service is excellent.

Technical support is excellent.

We did not previously use a different solution.

Initial setup was complex, but normal. We use test and homologation environments.

A provider team implemented it, the CA Technologies team itself. They were expert in the subject.

The best ROI possible

Make the investment; return guaranteed.

Before choosing this product, we did not evaluate other options.

Make an extra investment in communication. Inform end users clearly and objectively of changes in how to request services. Demonstrate the benefits of the solution.

Change Management, Incident Management, and CMDB are the most valuable features.

• Automated our manual business processes

IT PAM Workflow could be improved.

I have used it for 10 years. We use CA Service Desk 12.9 and IT PAM 4.3.

There were some stability issues.

We did not encounter any scalability issues.

Technical support was fair.

I am not interested in sharing this information.

Pricing is good compared to other similar applications.

The Service Catalog integration for service delivery is a feature that we find very useful and we're getting great benefit from it.

User satisfaction has improved dramatically for our customers. It's really improved a lot since bringing in Service Desk. This has, therefore, improved things internally for us.

We would like to have a unified self-service tool for all the tools that Service Desk Manager integrates with. This would really improve the product.

We've had no issues with deployment whatsoever.

It’s very strong with stability, no doubt. Because of its stability, we are able to improve our user experience -- and that’s invaluable.

It's scaled just fine for us.

The technical support at CA is good at times, but it works very slowly. They are also at times not responsive, which is not good.

Set up was very, very easy, and we were happy with this. There was no problem at all on this front.

Make the most of the documentation, this is essential and would be my only advice for this product.

First, make user experience your focus. Second, get Service Configuration for this.

The most valuable features are the service catalog and process automation; in deployment, the ICT automation and self-service.

• Self-consumption of services by end-users
• Standardization
• Automation with increased effectiveness

I would like to see integration between the service management products and consolidated application of patches.

We have used this solution for five years.

I did not encounter any issues with stability.

I encountered issues with scalability. The solution is 32-bit.

I would give technical support a rating of 9 out of 10.

The initial installation was simple. The initial configuration and integration between products was complex.

Make sure you have a strong official CA support presence.

The flexible envelope provides an infinite number of ways to customize it.

I can easily say that SDM is the core of our organization. We have integrated a lot of related systems, implemented contract management logic, and some HR functions, such as vacation planning routines.

Rebuilding the visual interface in the same style using modern web technologies can extend the usability of the system for up to 10 years.

I’ve personally used CA Service Desk since 2013.

We did have some stability issues, but with some fine-tuning, supported by CA support and the CA community, we resolved them.

We did have some scalability issues, but with fine-tuning, supported by CA support and the CA community, we resolved them.

Our current version is not within the scope of technical support.

The initial setup was performed by our integrator.

The system covers all of our enterprise needs. However, in order to adapt it to your business needs, you will need to have an experienced staff. Familiarize it with your enterprise and with Service Desk's undocumented methods and routines, such as SPEL, WAND, and overall daemon logic.

For me, the best feature is the powerful tool to integrate all processes for IT to monitor. I can integrate process management, release, and change into our programs.

It’s in a language that everyone in the business can understand. It uses not only depictions but also symbolic language, as opposed to language that only IT personnel can understand.

It has some stability issues, and it can be complex to implement. The last implementation took us about two years to complete.

The main problem is the one-point failure, where if one part of the application fails, the application as a whole fails. We need a bigger solution for our tree environment with two servers on which we run 15 services and for which we need service management.

It's scalable, but we try to control the number of users with licenses, which right now stands at 900.

The initial setup and integration was very complex. At the moment, we have an upgrade that is going to take eight months.

I don't know as I wasn't involved in the decision process.

• Service Desk
• Knowledgebase
• CMDB
• Change Calendar

It established a more organized dynamic and the ability to better plan activities.

CMDB and the user interface, especially for extracting reports, could be improved.

Almost a year.

No issues encountered.

Yes, but we are using an older version that can cause this.

No issues encountered.

It's satisfactory.

It's satisfactory.

Yes, but I was working in another company.

It's straightforward.

We used a vendor team who were satisfactory.

It's difficult to control costs, and it's expensive.

I wasn’t here in this period, but I know they evaluated BMC and HP.

Keep it simple, and try to avoid customisations.