ServiceNow Reviews

I'd say auditing, asset tracking, following tickets, and making sure what our employees are doing. The ticketing system though is what we rely on most. I'm able to follow what my co-workers are doing so we're not stepping on each other's toes. This enables us to be as productive as possible.

Compared to HPE Service Manager, ServiceNow offers a lot more customizations and a lot more plug-ins that you can throw in there. I'd just say it has a better ability to customize, and developers can get in and get dirty.

It has a good document repository which translates into a good knowledge base with good articles. Looking at tickets, charts, and the dashboard. Seeing what everyone's working on - it's cool.

To have this external facing site, we can pretty much face talk any customer we need to. They can log into a single portal using single sign on, which means they can use the same account to log into their machines and our environment. Sending tickets to a central location. Being able to track those tickets to see where their requests and incidents are in the process.

Just ease of use for people who aren't very technically savvy. Sometimes it does take a lot of customization to make it easier for the user to use but for someone who's technical, it's pretty straightforward.

I actually worked with a smaller team with Optum that does POCs and we've actually been proving out ServiceNow for about four years. Now they are up the street we call it, the greater organisation is implementing the same thing using HPE Service Manager. I think their goal live date is July this year.

They're always very functional about updates and patching.

The fact that it's tied directly into LDAP means that it's great. I don't think there's a limit.

It depends how deep you want to go. You can use it for pretty much for anything. I wasn't involved in the implementation of it, but from a management perspective, it's pretty sweet.

I would say that it's just very straightforward. You want your users to have a good experience. With ease of use, I'd say it's perfect.

For me I believe it would have to be the real time reporting capabilities that it has, as well as the knowledge management features as far as reporting. We're just getting kicked off with trying to push knowledge management out into the organization. It's important to get a read on how it's being accepted as well as what's being used and how we can improve upon it in real-time.

I believe because it has so many different pieces to it and they're all interconnected, they're all interrelated. As you know, in IT everything relies on everything else. That fact alone that the CMDBs in the middle and everything feeds into it and comes out of it. That alone is an essential piece to the strategy.

Look at the cost savings that's there for it, the capability. So many companies nowadays want to make sure that they're on an ITIL compliant platform and ServiceNow is definitely that platform. I'd have to say that's one of the big business drivers. If you merge with another company, you've got an immediate capability to include them and bring them on board.

I think within knowledge management the editor could be greatly improved. To me it's very archaic looking. One of the issues is when you go to pull a document in there - we're talking about knowledge, we're talking about how to do something in many cases. It doesn't do numbered lists very well. As soon as you put a picture in it starts your numbering over. I don't know if there's something wrong with our implementation or it's just out of the box. We have it set up out of the box. That's one of the downsides. In general I hear a lot of people say that the interface from a back end. From the folks that have the IT role, it's not a pretty picture.

Myself here with this organization I've used it for about two years, and with other organizations on and off for about two years plus. Currently, we're on Geneva.

We've had a little bit of slowness at times. We're looking into the heart of that and I think that maybe some of that is maybe our implementation. The way we've gone about setting up database calls and things like that. It's hard to say. I can't really speak to that because I'm not working so much with that group. Occasionally, depending on the implementation I've seen it always run smooth and fast.

Other times we have to deal with the internet is right in the middle because it's cloud based. You never know if that's the reason for the lateness. Overall it's a great product.

Well from what I understand I can't speak to that really well. It seems quite scalable. I know other companies that are much larger than ours that have had an excellent implementation. I was in a talk where the gentleman was from a large company that had a huge investment in it, and they were using it across four hundred and fifty thousand employees or something huge.

In my past lives they have used Remedy as well as HP Service Desk at the time. At a previous company, I helped to implement HP Service Desk.

I don't know how it has been here, but in other places it's been a very straightforward and simple implementation. What it really requires is all the pre-work. If you're going to implement it you want to have an understanding of what you're stakes are. For example, in incident management. What the teams are going to do. What the processes are going to be worked out within the tool. That's an important aspect. A lot of people may think that you implement a tool and you have it. It's not that simple. You have to do a lot of work before you implement to make sure you have your processes in place.

One of the things important, if you're going to put new processes in it, have them written down and have them well understood and well documented before you implement it in the tool. Once you implement in a tool, that's when you can really start to improve on it. If you just go forward and put it in a tool and you don't have any documented process then you're back to square one. You don't know what you're improving and you're making changes and it's not a pretty picture.

We have a young lady who's very adept and she's moving forward with that. Making great things happen.

Make sure you have your processes well defined before you go to implement a tool because that's where you're going to get your real payoff. It's going to really help you improve things if you have all that well documented, well understood before you have it implemented. I think that's the biggest thing.

I think that they could do a lot better on thr interface. Especially for the back end because we can build all kinds of- there's all kinds of companies out there that create all these things. At some point you would think that they want to improve these certain aspects of it that- like knowledge management.

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. 

We use this solution for many things, such as ITFM, incident problem change, configuration, and vulnerability response.

There are a lot of features within ServiceNow. There are plenty of add-ons that go beyond the typical core helpdesk operations, such as HR facilities, BRM functionality, and various compliance and governance capabilities. Additionally, they provide a strong security suite with vulnerability, no-code integration, self-service options, and a virtual assistant. 

In an upcoming release, there should be more administration tools.

I have been using this solution for six years.

The solution is very stable. However, we did have an outage once because their data center was potentially down.

We have not had any issue with the scalability, it is very good. 

We have 17,000 users and out of those we currently have approximately 1200 active users using this solution.

When we had an outage the technical support contacted us to let us know what was happening. They have an engineering level of support that is very good. 

They could do more follow-ups in relation to issues being resolved.

I would rate the technical support of ServiceNow an eight out of ten.

I am working for a large company and we were using another service provider before that was expensive and complex. I am not sure how many people are still using the old service we were using before because it is outdated compared to other solutions. ServiceNow has a lot more people supporting it, it is a lot easier to find developers, and it is a much more modern platform.

The setup starts out easy but it can get complex quickly.

It is important to be prepared for yearly system updates. Normally your subscription will come with access to those new updates but you need to be ready to quickly update to the latest versions.

I have found the solution very expensive.

My advice to others is to make sure they understanding what they are going to use ServiceNow for which is important. There are a lot of cheaper solutions that can do many tasks, such as tracking and work management, that might satisfy their needs better. With this solution, as your company scales up, you are going to need more people to support it. It is a very popular platform and requires a lot of configuration and development to make it useful to an organization. 

Everybody wants to customize the solution to make it fit their business model, which is what it is meant for. Even though they have no-code development tools within the platform, having well-skilled developers in your organization will help you move along smoothly. 

Having a team that can support the solution is important for success. Unless you have it outsourced, However, you will still have the governance aspect of it to oversee what the roadmap is.

I rate ServiceNow a nine out of ten.

We use it for a combination of things. I would say that the two big use cases that I'm aware of are for logging general acute IT issues. Then they also use it for actual security-specific issues. These are the two main use cases that I'm aware of. 

In terms of the most valuable features, it's nice to have everything in one place. Things are easy to follow up on. ServiceNow provides that workflow. I know at some level it is in the pipeline and then if I need to follow up, everything's there. Those are the key benefits of ServiceNow. 

I find ServiceNow to be a little bit clunky. If I need to report an issue they have a number of different options. I can report an issue, I can ask a question, I can make a request and it has varying levels of importance or levels of attention required. I find that what's required to submit is not always clear. 

For example, I was once trying to import an issue and it required that I submit a screenshot. I kept clicking to try and get through and there were some paper clips in the rear upper corner that I didn't notice and I didn't know were required. That kind of issue bugs me about it. The guidelines are not as easy to use. I think it's a little bit clunky. It's not user-friendly.

We have had ServiceNow installed for at least the last three years.

I've never had an issue with it in terms of stability. It's always available when I need it.

As far as the scalability of this solution, my guess is it is probably good.

The setup was pretty straightforward. They rolled this thing out and nobody has been swapped over from the road system is pretty seamless.

This solution is fine, and I would certainly tell others to give it a look.

I don't know if there are more features available. It needs a more intuitive interface. They need to make it easier to understand what's required and probably make it a little nicer looking because it looks industrial.

I would rate it a seven out of ten.

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.

The primary use case is IT service management. It encompasses quite a few things, such as incident records, change records, etc.

It uses a common base of data and allows different types of records to pull from that same base of data.

The ability to link different types of records with each other.

• The ability to embed help information onto the screens.
• The scalability needs improvement.

On a scale of one to 10, I would rate stability as a seven.

On a scale of one to 10, I would rate scalability as a four.

On a scale of one to 10, I would rate technical support as a seven.

I was not involved in the initial setup.

The most important thing to have in place is the face of the configuration data.

Most important criteria when selecting a vendor:

• Scalability
• The development model: How are updates made and promoted to production.
• Ability to embed user help information directly to the interface.
  

For the most part, we have used prior ITSM solutions and they have been a bit more difficult to integrate and customize into the rest of the things that we do as they are standalone products. Something like ServiceNow ITSM, where there is such a good foundation within a relationship between items and some very good capabilities to extend into our existing automation, workflows and things of that nature, is something that we're definitely looking forward to.

We want to end up getting set up as part of Discovery with a type of automatic relationship. In addition, we have been looking at a means to provide a service catalog experience to the business as a whole and are looking forward to potentially implementing a service portal.

Actually, the biggest problem that I see for it, especially in a smaller organization, is that there are plenty of partners. We've got a fairly advanced IT organization. We do a lot of relatively advanced stuff for the size that we are, but ServiceNow itself is so big and to some extent, there is a significant amount of complexity that you have, a big learning curve I would say, in order to really get on board.

It doesn't mean that you can't attack it in pieces and things like that, but I think one of the problems I've had just in getting involved within the last couple of months, is trying to kind of weed out what I don't necessarily need to look at and focus on, just a specific area and trying to find best practice documentation of that matter is, has been a challenge.

In many cases, it really just doesn't exist. I mean, we know we've got the documentation and everything else, and they tell you all the things that you can do. I mean, again, it's one of these things where I think everybody likes to begin a little better, would like to begin with a template, or some kind of a best practice template given their situation if they can find it, and then, you know, kind of build from there. Because when you're starting just with a completely blank scratch pad, you just don't know where to go.

I think the thing that I've always been concerned with implementing a new product is being able to really spend a proper amount of time upfront with design and making sure I'm designing something that won't limit my choices or my abilities to use it, or will keep me from having to just go back and completely rewrite the whole thing in the future. I've not gotten that comfortability yet with the product and it's after a couple months. There's a huge learning curve with the product.

Also, we have not really had a good view of our different configuration items. 

I don't really think that we're running into too many stability issues.

The product scale's wonderful. We don't have to worry about the scalability and someplace else. Even within our organization, we're not finding really any major issues with scalability and things of that nature.

Most of what we have to just be concerned with is that we almost have too much information. It's like going from having nothing to taking a fire hose worth of information and trying to figure out, "Okay, what do we really maybe not have to pay attention to initially? What are we going to focus on?" I wouldn't say there are any issues with the product right now from the performance and scalability point of view; it's been performing very well.

Altiris is the product we're getting out of. I think there's a lot to be said for actually having a web-hosted solution these days. There are a lot of things you don't want to actually bother to manage yourself internally.

I think because we're starting to look at so many other areas that are potentially out in the cloud, such as we're using Workday for HR, and the potential integrations that we even have from a cloud perspective, once we've got ServiceNow and the ITSM piece of the cloud. Those are, I think, major selling points over just the overall flexibility over what we had in the previous product.

At this point in time, it's interesting because a lot of what I'm seeing, there's a lot of momentum right now towards ServiceNow. It's one of those things amongst everyone, not just in the industry; a lot, all over the place. It's in a major growth mode. I'm not entirely sure they're going to see too many of the other products being able to keep up. It's one of those things; if you're looking at future-proofing yourself, and there's a lot of this, there are a lot of strategies for going with a cloud partner. I realize there are some cloud competitors who have started up out there with ServiceNow. I've heard them infrequently, but it's kind of like, "Do you want to go with the company that's got the most resources and the most money to put toward development of their product, or in something where everybody's focusing on?" You've got a large third-party contingent supporting the product and things of that nature, and more and more development going toward it all the time. Or, "Do you want to go with something where you're not going to get the benefit of that same thing?" I think right now it would be hard to go with anybody else.