ServiceNow Reviews

I'm a consultant, so I primarily work on projects implementing Service Now inside of different organizations.

The biggest improvement I see is that unstructured work, which would primarily be worked on within spreadsheets or within emails, is able to be centralized, managed end-to-end, and have that visibility and structure in ServiceNow. That provides enormous productivity gains. 

In addition, it provides the ability to meet internal IT assurance around audit trails.

Finally, the improved visibility helps in decision-making for senior leaders and executives.

One feature of ServiceNow that is important is the workflow engine. From my perspective, the power to be able to structure processes, represent workforce management for organizations, and the visibility provided by the reporting are additional top features.

ServiceNow is divided up into a lot of modules, so I'll give an example, instead of going into every single module.

For me, there's a real opportunity, especially within the IT Service Management suite, to give a much better overall view of the workflow that individuals have across the different applications. At the moment, a lot of information is quite siloed in the different tables in ServiceNow. There is a real opportunity to present, in a centralized way, some form of universal work list, to give better ideas around demand and supply of resources, and then help prioritize that work.

The only other thing that I'd say about ServiceNow, in general, is commercially related around licensing, and it's a big inhibitor for a lot of our customers, especially those who are innovators on the platform. I've got a couple of really good example clients where they are limited in what they can do with the product. If they were to do what they wanted to do, the licensing that would come about, from a platform runtime licensing perspective, would mean it wouldn't have the same value proposition.

An improvement area, to summarize, would be better licensing for when clients are trying to be innovative on the platform.

The stability of ServiceNow is excellent. I've never had any issues around its stability, scalability, availability, or any of those metrics.

ServiceNow technical support has always been excellent. They are quick to respond, they have good, strong technical capabilities, they're good at communicating and getting in touch with you.

I have used BMC Remedy previously and the primary reason for switching to ServiceNow was around the fact that ServiceNow is cloud-based, scalable, and easily configurable.

Overall, the setup is fairly simple. You have to have a point of reference to compare it to. If I think about other cloud-based tools that I've worked with, by comparison, I would say it is most definitely simple.

Myself, being a consultant and implementing ServiceNow multiple times over in different organizations, an average implementation, which would result in a minimum viable product - standing up ServiceNow to achieve some form of business value - would be 12 weeks.

I typically see a 12-week implementation of ServiceNow achieved with approximately six individuals for the deployment. Ongoing maintenance of ServiceNow will typically involve the equivalent of four FTEs.

I don't have any data points at the moment, but I know some of our clients have articulated ROI as part of the benefits they have realized. The ROI is definitely positive for clients that we've worked for.

ServiceNow pricing is an art, not a science. The deal depends on how commercially savvy you are, which does make it something that is quite difficult to get right. It is most definitely an opportunity area for ServiceNow to improve and have more visibility around pricing of the different products within the platform.

Other options would be BMC Remedy and Cherwell, from an ITSM perspective. For HRSM, alternative solutions are Workday and SuccessFactors.

My advice would be to engage with an implementation partner that has good experience and definitely not to underestimate the organizational-change activities, like training and communication, that are required. ServiceNow shouldn't be treated as purely a technology solution. People, processes, communication, and training need to be factored in when implementing.

We've implemented ServiceNow in government organizations with up to 9,000 people, in a couple of scenarios, using it for either IT service management or HR service management, predominantly. The roles of the users varied within the government.

In terms of how extensively ServiceNow is used, every client we work with has a roadmap of additional functionality that they would like to use in ServiceNow. To generalize, there are different extents of use but each definitely has a roadmap of continuous improvement and use of more features or modules of the product.

I would rate ServiceNow a nine out of ten. Some of the points that I touched on above would make it a perfect ten: more visible and consistent licensing around the cost of licensing; better ability to innovate on the platform without incurring licensing that isn't representative of the innovation that's being created.

ServiceNow is a really great platform. What I like about it is the integration capabilities. We use this a lot with our customers, integrating different systems with their suppliers, and that saves a lot of time. Besides this, the platform opens up a lot of possibilities. We mostly use the ITIL. Instant problem change is a great feature. The customer portal is also appreciated.

For example, we had one process of the customer when they had two ticketing systems. Their own, and their supplier's system, and they used to copy the tickets by hand. A person actually typed in the stuff in the other system, back and forth. That takes so much time. Now it's all integrated. There's no time delay, and they're much more efficient now.

With the ITSM solution, you kind of have chaos. You can really tackle that with the solution. You have standardized processes and you get rid of the chaos to be more organized. When you're more organized, the company gets more efficient and you get the job done. The system's more reliable, so the quality of the service increases with an IT service management solution.

I would like an IoT integration. At the hackathon there was a team working with Amazon buttons with a battery inside. You push it, and you will trigger a request. You can put it next to a coffee maker. If there's an issue, press it. Or integrate a whole different kind of sensor with ServiceNow. You can even more automate your process and your services.

Some processes could be a bit more detailed. For example, the change process. It was reworked in Helsinki, so that's a great thing. Maybe there they could bring a bit more. Also, the incident process was reworked. I really like these changes. That would be my advice. Go again over the process.

We've been using it for five years. We're currently on Geneva, but we're planning on going with the Helsinki release soon.

The point is, when you do heavy customization, it takes some time to upgrade. But that's not ServiceNow's fault, because sometimes you need a special feature, or something implemented in a special way, and they just need to keep track of that every time you upgrade. But usually it's not that complicated, just review it. The new features in Helsinki are great when you have this nice overview. You review the feature, then you call ServiceNow, and you're done. The rest works seamlessly.

There were performance issues, minor ones, with one customer. The rest is working really good.

It was quite complex, because I'm working with service providers. They have a customer site, and a company site, so there's domain separation, where you actually separate all the data. I had to put a lot of effort on the CMDB, but now they have a great solution. The correct SLAs, they just wake the technicians at night when the customer's really paying for it. It's really pre-one incident.

The time for go live is really short. You can get it up and running in a fast time compared to other solutions. That's definitely a plus.

I think you should have your processes sorted out before you start implementing, or at least make decisions. You can always improve your process afterward. But it's good, then you have a starting motion. Otherwise, it's hard. If you're not sure about your processes, then you either stick to the standard processes, or otherwise it's hard to start implementation.

I would say everything. A customer can call the service desk and the service desk can create the incident and set the incident task to whoever it has to go to and the change is a huge process in our system. In our company, we have the change process that are properly done, so going into ServiceNow it improved the process even more. The change, changed task, and under release, are in the same module. We have a ton of catalogs items we have put in and people have been using it. We do the tasks automatically through Workflow, so it works very well.

We also did the facility module when we went with the Eureka and facilities team is using it as well. They have tremendously improved their process because they have been doing handwriting before, so switching into ServiceNow they were able to make a lot of improvement.

I think that ServiceNow needs to think about implementing an enterprise solution for licensing because it's going to become too pricey and not sustainable from a corporate perspective. We are not using HR, BPM management, or DRC. I would like to have those and talk to a company at high levels so they can see better, and they can get into those modules as well.

For ServiceNow itself, they're doing more every year, even now, they're doing Android, iPhone and Watch, so they should keep doing more things every year.

I have been using ServiceNow since August 2014.

There was an outage at the ServiceNow data center servers, especially on the eastern site. I don't know about all the other data centers, but our data center recently had an outage for at least 15 minutes. Two weeks later we found out about it through some other call, not to the engineer and it was not notified anywhere on the system. I thought ServiceNow would have send out an e-mail or put something on the page saying that the ServiceNow in the data center is out.

I would say it's nicely done and we have been using it for our other processes and integrating with other companies as well.

They are doing very well. We have two process. One from the self-service page, the self service page, you can do automatically to the incident or they can call in to the service desk and they can do that manually for them.

We were using HP Service Manager before and even before that I think we had used Heat. I don't know whether there were any other competitors or not, as this was selected by the stakeholders in our company, so I don't know what they considered.

I would recommend it and I love this tool. Anything that I think of, the tool can do. The one thing that we were looking for was HR and procurement management. They were looking for the document management and red lines. You can do the documents attached to it, but they cannot do the document itself, like a template or something I believe they are doing the that in Helsinki.

The most valuable feature by far of ServiceNow is the rapid development. How quickly you can actually go out and change things, adapt things, ready to fulfill the business needs.

One of the things that we're trying to figure out is how ServiceNow can be more of a platform to be used as a backend. Because of the rapid development, it can barely oversee it for use at the back end. We're having discussions right now to actually understand what that will mean. The other piece is some of the UI's are currently being restricted from not having too much customizations. That puts us in a tough spot. Sometimes there are some corner cases where some people want something and we kind of change it. Those are mostly with new UI's. There's good reasons for actually locking those down. At the same time, it problematic for us.

I have been using personally ServiceNow for about five years.

Best in class. It has been really good; it's availability, reliability, performance. Sometimes people do dumb stuff with scripts. The performance is not the platform's problem, the problem is with peoples scripts.

It scales well.

It's great. I'm part of the ServiceNow community, so that helps for support. Their support works great - they are really helpful, they have the indicators and all the right stuff for closing tickets really quickly and they also put first resolving your issue. It's really great support.

We used to use different solutions. Some of it was kind home-grown. Nothing similar to ServiceNow from as a platform perspective.

It's already set up, you just have to work it out according to your needs. Just like in any other project, you need to understand your process, you need to understand how you need to improve your process. Don't automate the problem. Just like any other process, the recommendation is you either work with ServiceNow or you're work with a technology partner. I'm a technology partner and we help others with those types of things. It's really straightforward.

Originally when we first rolled out, it was obviously the fact that we had full IT service management in one area. We were extremely scattered and had many different tools all over the place and none of them were integrated. That was our initial sell feature for us.

As time has gone on and ServiceNow has evolved and matured, we are loving the ease of the product. Each year, each version, each release they come out with is all that much more configurable for us. One of the biggest things for us is the fact that we've had the opportunity to be a partner with them and have had the opportunity to have some input and feedback on their product to begin with and have seen some of that that have come to fruition. In fact, I just saw a demonstration and there were several things that I know were a part of suggesting and the input that they received from their customers.

I hadn't really thought much beyond the improvements that I'm seeing that they're putting out in Helsinki. My organization is currently on the Fuji release. We were going to be upgrading to the Geneva release in July. One of the things we were coming here [to Knowledge16] specifically to look at is jumping on the release and going straight from Fuji to Helsinki. Considering some of the things that I just saw that they rolled out, I'm going to be pushing pretty hard for that.

Many of the things that we felt needed a little bit more shoring up was their CMBD product and their discovery, they seem to have covered that in the Helsinki release. I'm not really thinking of what the next step is going to be at this point. I was wowed with Helsinki, so at this point I'm looking forward to rolling that in and working with it.

We implemented it back in 2011.

I like the scalability of it. We need an instance that we will have it within 24 hours. In fact, we have several instances in the Cloud. We have our production instance, we have a test instance, and we have four development instances.

I'm not necessarily involved in the day to day support that we would have to reach out to. Our architect is more involved with that. However, I do know that I have been the contributor of a few of the bugs that have been found. They seem to be very responsive, work with our developer and our architect team and work through the issues.

When we started out, we did it in phases. Our very first phase was the change management application in a very condensed version of the incident management application. Phase two rolled out in late 2014. At that point, we went to a full incident management application. We revamped our change management application, rolled out problem service catalog, discovery, our CMDB. We have quite a few, some 38, applications that are currently turned on. They were pretty basic and we've been over the years developing and expanding those.

The most valuable parts of ServiceNow for us is the flexibility that it has, that it's a platform, and that we can develop pretty much anything that we need, not only for IT, but also for HR, our finance department, our register's office, pretty much any organization around campus. ServiceNow provides us with a platform that we can develop the tools that are necessary for just about any function on campus.

It gives us one platform that we can go in and do reporting. Reporting is probably one of the key features, it's getting access to data that we have in ServiceNow and being able to report on that is a key element in how we are analyzing and making decisions. We can quickly pull up reports, graphs, charts, whatever we need to be able to make decisions, where beforehand just to pull the data was a lot harder.

We've developed a number of apps or workflows that literally have taken days or weeks to complete because of the approval process. We've taken that into a workflow where now the approvals are sent via email. A user, or an administrator just needs to simply click on that email, click on approve, send it back. We've seen in some of those cases where, like I said, it's gone from days or weeks to literally hours and minutes. Another scenario is we've taken our employee leave system from a paper base where paper had to be filled out manually, signed, given to a staff assistant to enter into our ERP system to being done on the IT systems.

We've now taken that entire process where an employee fills it out online wherever they may be. They submit it, it routes to their supervisor for an approval. That approval comes back, and then that system is fed into our ERP system. There's no manual process to it, other than entering the leave request, selecting the days, and the number of hours you're taking, and the supervisor approving it. We estimate that university-wide, that's probably saving about 2,000 hours per year just on employees having to enter that data back into our ERP system.

Probably the biggest thing that is frustrating is the changes in their price structure, their price modeling. That's been very frustrating for us. Since we came on four years ago, it's changed quite a bit over time. There's been a lot of uncertainty on what the pricing scheme is going to be. It's worked out well for us, but that uncertainty as the company has grown, not knowing where they're going with it, has been a little frustrating.

The first real latency issue we had was about a month ago. We attributed it to probably some updates that we had run. We backed those off to see if they impacted any of that performance. We were thinking it was something we had done. Come to find out that they had transferred us from their Virginia data site to their San Jose, I believe and they had some issues. Once we recognized that it wasn't on our end, we notified them and they were quick to respond to it. That's the only real latency issue that we've had. It's always a concern. That's something that we're always very aware of is because our users are like, "If ServiceNow continues to grow, what's going to be the impact to performance?"

As we grow as an organization, meaning the number of developers we have in the system, we've had a big concern with how we give access to developers, but don't allow them to hurt the whole environment once they’re in. There again, the changes that they've introduced with Helsinki, and that being able to do more sculpt applications, and narrow the access that admins have is a huge improvement. We keep growing as far as the number of developers we have in the system, but we have major concern over what they can touch, and what they should and shouldn't touch.

Scaling, as far as what we're doing in the system, we haven't have any issue with. Scaling, as far as the number of developers and how to organize that, as far as bringing more and more people into actually develop on it, that's been our concern. The time commitment to get them up and running, speed, get them trained, especially trained in how we do things. The other part is the access that we give them, so the issue is not with the solution itself, it's more organizationally.

We had a multitude of systems. When we talked about a knowledge base, Knowledge Base was a home-grown system that we had outgrown as far as IT and the university. We ran into severe limitations with our Knowledge Base. We had old content out there. ServiceNow allowed us to restructure how we're doing knowledge, and implementing a knowledge base to the entire campus. Incident, we were using Footprints, which was eventually bought out by BMC.

It was sold two or three time in Footprints. We had used Remedy. Remedy proved to be so cumbersome to manage, as far as an incident management tool. We've gone multiple directions. ServiceNow, as far as incident management, allows us to quickly escalate issues to the proper teams. Not only across IT, but we've incorporated it in so we can escalate issues to departmental IT personnel as well, and even outside of IT where necessary.

I'm a big proponent of ServiceNow. While I think it's a great system, it's not a silver bullet. I don't think there is a silver bullet system out there for IT, or for an enterprise. I would say ServiceNow is as close, in the variety of systems that I've come across, it's as close as a system has come to meeting not only an IT need, but an organizational need. That's initially where we started. We started it at with an IT need. I would say in order for it to be successful, you have to have buy-in from the top. If your administration is buying in with it, and can show their level of support for that change, that system, it makes it go a lot easier. We had a mixture of support. Some things went well. Others, we didn't have the support, and so it was an uphill battle.

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.

We use it for interim problem change configuration, regress management, and knowledge management.

I've found a lot of pros with ServiceNow. The user interface and the feasibility to modify the GUI are great features.

It is easily configurable and has a good developer society online, available for any issues from the backend.

On the front end, we have good workflow management, ease of work, and ease of business. It helps us to translate the business requirements and technical requirements in an easier manner.

One of the best things is the reporting; I like how you can manage the data and present it.

ServiceNow is also stable and scalable, and has good technical support.

Vulnerability management could be improved. Also, integration with tools such as Microsoft Defender ATP needs improvement.

The price is on the higher end.

I've been using it for four years.

In the last four years, we might have had an outage, but the stability is very good. Since it's cloud-based, we don't see many performance issues.

Scalability wise, we added one more module for the vulnerability response, and we have not faced any issues.

We are happy with where we are, but we are adding on a few things. Whenever there's a new requirement that comes up, we plan to move away from the manual work, and we try to do everything in ServiceNow.

We have two types of users: the idea user who actually works on the solution and the requester who raises the request. In total, the end users that have access to raise the tickets are around 13,000 plus, and those who actually work on the solution, designing, working on the tickets, etc., are in total around 300 plus.

The technical support is good. They're responsive, and they keep a tab on whatever issues we are facing. They have a dedicated team that handles them and even a dedicated portal where you can raise tickets and flag them.

I was using Remedy and HP Service Manager. We switched because of ServiceNow's scalability, stability, and the user interface. I believe that the business mindset of whoever created or expanded ServiceNow was to make sure that we have a good developer community with an open system for people to understand and expand their knowledge, a better UI, and better workflow management, which I did not see in Remedy. 

Remedy has a lot of constraints; the integration and referencing had issues. ServiceNow has an option of referencing many tables in one form, but that was not available in Remedy. Also, Remedy was not that scalable.

We needed a person to have good technical knowledge to consider the system, but with ServiceNow, you don't need technical knowledge; they have made everything UI. So, that's a good thing.

The cost might be on the higher side, but the services were better, so we chose ServiceNow.

The initial setup was straightforward. They have out of the box solutions readily available, so if you're just going by the out of the box configuration, it might take a few months. Maybe a 12 week period is good enough to get it up and running.

We got the ServiceNow vendor team to help us with the initial setup.

Overall, I have seen a substantial ROI when it comes to reporting: a faster response and also the assignment of tickets. If you have to talk to your leadership and tell them what the status of a particular project is, you can create your own dashboards, which will give them a glimpse of everything in one go. They won't have to talk to you every time; they can just open it up.

The second ROI is that you don't have to log into ServiceNow every time; you can integrate ServiceNow with teams, Microsoft teams, or any other tool, and you will get the notifications over there itself. It saves a lot of time from that perspective.

The licensing is on a yearly basis. The pricing is on the high side, but if you look at the stability and option to work, it's kind of justified.

When you buy the license, it also comes with the yearly tech support. So, you don't have any additional costs per se.

We moved away from HPSM to ServiceNow, and we evaluated Remedy.

They have a lot of libraries available online. If you are planning to implement ServiceNow, you should first compare your current system with the online free developer instance from ServiceNow, which has all the features that are present in the licensed versions.

I would suggest that you see if the added business is supported in ServiceNow so that when you implement the system, you can raise these special issues with the consultants.

You should go ahead and create your own instances and see whether the system is working as expected and whether it suits your requirements. When you're implementing, make sure that you implement everything and don't leave parts for your own team to handle. Get everything done by the vendor in the first go.

On a scale from one to ten, I would rate ServiceNow at ten.