ServiceNow Reviews

We use the solution as it's a requirement for our standards of use in the future. I primarily use the product to look for tickets. I also check for future projects and so on.

The solution is very easy to use.

Now that I've worked with it a little bit, I can find what I need rather quickly.

It was pretty easy to implement the solution.

The solution is quite sizable. There are a lot of features.

It can scale well.

The product is stable.

The solution integrates well with other products.

We've been pretty happy with the level of support they offer their clients.

A new user does need training or time to learn the solution before jumping in. It was very hard in the beginning to understand everything. I couldn't find the models I needed at the time.

I've only been using the solution for a few months. It's only been a rather short amount of time.

The stability of the product is good. There aren't bugs or glitches to deal with. It doesn't crash or freeze. It's reliable.

The solution is scalable. If a company needs to expand it, they can do so.

At our organization, there are about 300 users on the product currently.

We'll be using the solution into the future.

The solution has fairly good technical support. We're pretty satisfied with their level of service. I'd say they are responsive and knowledgable.

We previously used HP before switching to this product.

The solution was easy to implement as it wasn't styled out. It wasn't too complex.

Normally there is staff training near the beginning. This is not the case anymore. You can use it right away, however, it is difficult in the beginning, coming at it from a new user's perspective. That's the main thing to keep in mind. Organizations should be aware of this at the outset and plan for it.

During the implementation, we did get help from outside sources. This assisted in the setup process. It helps if a company gets training before as well.

I'm not responsible for licensing and therefore don't have any information in terms of pricing or cost structure. It's not something that I need to worry about in my day to day.

I assume that we are using the most up to date version of the solution. 

I would recommend the solution.

On a scale from one to ten, overall, I would rate it at an eight.

I have two primary uses of ServiceNow:

1. As our ITSM Platform for providing Application Managed Services (AMS) to Enterprise clients who have solutions on Oracle, Workday, Coupa, and ServiceNow.  NOTE: Other groups within my firm also use ServiceNow to provide IT Service Management to clients on Microsoft, SalesForce, and other major vendors.  We have multiple production instances for delivering Service Desk support to various client install bases, including this one for my above mentioned AMS business.

2. As the ITSM platform for our internal, global support framework. This is a separate instance of the one I use for my UK clients and is 'owned' by our US member firm. Said US firm uses this instance to support not only our internal global Management Consulting business but also to provide AMS to US-based external clients.

ServiceNow has enabled us to rapidly deploy Application Managed Services for new clients, with the ability to configure, extend, and tailor our ITSM Platform to meet individual client needs. ServiceNow's multi-instance model helps enable that flexibility. For example, we recently took on a new Workday client by modifying our ServiceNow instance (configurations and workflows) within 5 months, with successful go-live afterward.

ServiceNow has also enabled our Management Consulting business to provide Digital Transformation services for our clients the world over, as we use the platform as an accelerator for doing IT Target Operating Model transformations.

ServiceNow's Customer Service Management (CSM) Pro & DevOps modules in particular - including ServiceNow's strong interface APIs (to Jira in particular in my case) - have allowed us to:

1. Automate some of the more menial tasks while accounting for our need to develop 

2. Deploy a lot of new features and functionality that get continuously and rapidly introduced by the major vendors via their regular upgrades (e.g. Oracle 4 times per year, Coupa 3 times per year, Workday 2 times per year, etc.).

There are no outstanding gaps or deficiencies that I face at the moment for my business or operational needs. That said, I am interested to see the firm's strategic plans for Artificial Intelligence (AI) and Machine Learning (ML), and how the particular areas it will expand on from its existing investments (that feature, for example, in its ITSM Pro and CSM Pro modules). Our AMS business will benefit from further automation of the more mundane tasks as we continue to develop the platform's configurations - including the streamlining / automation of our change control workflow for faster deployment (critical when tackling the very frequent upgrade cadences of Oracle, Workday, Coupa, etc.).

4 years

Very stable so far. I have yet to experience an outage of any of the ServiceNow instances my operations/teams use.

Scalability is good on the production side. It could be better performance on some of our lower environments, notably UAT for our global support estate - although I suspect that is partly down to how our Dev team manage their workloads and the access set up they have (too many users floating in/out?). I have not called for an audit however, so my view here is not qualified.

Minimal need for support - from my personal vantage point - and for the few times we have needed support, the turnaround time and quality of support has been good.  No complaints.

We used Jira initially for our internal Help Desk platform, but it fell far short of needs for the underlying service management workflows we employed.

I entered into already established estates, so was not exposed to the efforts in setting up the ServiceNow instance sets.

All has been in-house. We have full capabilities, as we do service implementations of ServiceNow for our clients and have invested in having internal development and support skills/capabilities.

We moved directly to ServiceNow for two reasons:

1. It was already the production ITSM platform for our US member firm who was given the (internal) contract to support our global management consulting business; and

2. We knew from our multi-year use of ServiceNow for (a) delivering IT Target Operating Model digital transformations to clients AND (b) delivering our Application Managed Services to external clients that this solution would easily meet our ITSM requirements.

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.

We run thousands of automations.

The reason that ServiceNow is as good as it is, and opposed to Remedy, Cherwell, and HP OpenView, is that ServiceNow was the first IT service management platform or enterprise.

ServiceNow was the first true enterprise to service management platform. They were the first to understand that a request is a request and service is service.

ServiceNow goes back internationally a long time ago when they were Fuji. ServiceNow releases are alphabetical. My experience started with Fuji, and they are on the Orlando release now. Even back then, they were able to put any process into ServiceNow, even if it wasn't and IT process, and have it managed through the platform.

Security needs some improvement. The governance, security incident management, cloud management, and the security module are getting better.

Service mapping could be less complicated. The configuration, and running it appropriately, but that's a difficult thing to do overall.

It needs to be more cost-effective because it can be pricey. 

I would love to see ServiceNow create a solid mid-market entry point for it. They tried it in the past and it failed. That was ServiceNow Express.

I have been using ServiceNow for over a decade.

ServiceNow is incredibly stable.

This solution is scalable to a point. Once you get as large as the Department of Veterans Affairs you will have some issues, but it scalable.

We have 3000 people here in our company. Anyone who is in IT is using ServiceNow.

I haven't contacted technical support. 

If you are as close to out-of-the-box as you need to be then you won't have any issues at all with ServiceNow.

ServiceNow is the least complex of all of the platforms available.

When I worked at the bank they went from zero to running it within three months. At that time when dealing with Remedy or other legacy systems, that was unheard of to go from nothing to running in three months.

With one of our customers, we had it up and running in one month.

We have seven members to maintain ServiceNow. They are developers, senior developers, and the head of service management.

The mandatory minimum is US$ 20,000 for licensing. They have a three-year cycle. I am not sure if it works out to be $60,000 for three years or if it's $20,000 for the three years. 

It's mainly for licensing. The more that you use it and the more it goes to other areas in your organization, the more licensing you will have to pay.

There may be some who look at this and use it for the HR service delivery or they could use another HR application that looks cheaper, but they will be missing the point of having all of the information on a single platform.

I manage an automation orchestration team. The focus of my team is external, not internal. The company uses ServiceNow. We are one of the largest and older consumers of ServiceNow. The members of my team have ServiceNow practice, infrastructure automation practice, could management platforms, containers practice, and DevOps. 

Our team is focused on helping other organizations adopt and adapt to ServiceNow.

ServiceNow is in the cloud, it's basically remedy in the cloud. ServiceNow doesn't get deployed unless you are a Federal Agency because they have their own data centers. ServiceNow only allows Federal Agencies to have their own instant data Center.

Make sure that you are big enough to afford it. If you have a small IT department, then ServiceNow is not for you. The problem is that you won't be able to afford it. You must be a mature enough and a large enough IT organization to start using it.

It doesn't just do IT things, it does more than that.

Make sure that you configure and not customize.

I would rate this solution an eight out of ten.

Microsoft Teams integration is available. Notifications are present within the virtual agent chatbot, integrated with third-party tools. All the portal features have been enabled, including the virtual agent installation.

There is a concern about the integration point of view, particularly the virtual agent. Currently, we are working on integration with Teams and the virtual agent. Now, the chatbot and portal are available. A pop-up message shows the redactions button if you click on anything in the chatbot conversations. This redirects to the portal. It should open, and the virtual agent should be integrated that way.

I have been using ServiceNow as a partner for two years.

There are some bugs in the solution.

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

The solution is slow in performance level.

Technical support is good.

Positive

The initial setup is simple. It takes only eight hours for each resource because of integration and conversation flow.

From a developer's perspective, understanding the pricing of ServiceNow is crucial. Currently, pricing details are mainly available for account-related matters. However, if developers also have access to this information, it would greatly benefit them.

Overall, I rate the solution a ten out of ten.

I mostly use it for change management.

Change management is most valuable.

The interface can be a bit more intuitive.

It has been in the company for quite a while. It's not new at all. 

I've been using it on and off for about eight or nine years. I work with this solution on almost a daily basis at this point, at least three times a week.

I find it to be very stable.

I'm not in a good position to give a judgment on its scalability, but in terms of its usage, because it is a ticketing system, it is used for all the incidents. Our service desk uses it primarily to issue tickets, requests, changes, and so on. There are about 15 people who use it very regularly for those types of purposes. It is being used extensively.

I never had to get in touch with their technical support.

I wasn't here when it came online.

I would rate it a seven out of 10.

I'm in the public service sector, and it is used for public services. 

In terms of deployment, you normally buy ServiceNow on the cloud. You can also have it on-prem, but they're not very keen on giving you that option. So, more often, it is on the cloud, which is very difficult for my type of clients who are not based in America because ServiceNow Cloud is all on American hyperscalers.

It is important to route a ticket or service request to the right person. It needs to adhere to various standards, and ServiceNow is a very good product in this domain.

It is a very promising product. They have a new release every six months. They're investing quite a lot, and you can do many creative things with the product. If you know how it works, you can have stricter rules in the product.

Their user interface is old-fashioned and outdated, and it can be more friendly for the eye. They can improve the user experience.

We should be able to have different UI frameworks. Currently, they only do Angular, and sometimes, you can do React, but they can be more open-minded in this regard.

They are quite good in case management, but they can work more on case management. They can also adhere more to BPMN 2.0.

You need to know how to use it. You need to do a scope application. If you have everything on the same table, it gets slow. You need to know how the product works, and you need to adhere to the rules. Otherwise, it would become slow.

They have third parties that have competencies. It is not so easy to interact directly with the vendor because they have outsourced to their service partners and integration partners who know what to do. You also have communities taking your questions, but you mostly rely on the implementation partners. Other vendors have also followed the same approach where they produce the platform, and sub-parties produce the service.

It is quite straightforward, but you need an expert. It is a specialized tool.

The product is very good. They are growing a lot, and it seems that for them, it is about what to do first. Everyone wants to talk to them, and they are good, especially in the field of service processes and case management. I like them, but they're difficult to work with because they're very busy.

I would rate this solution an eight out of 10.

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.