ServiceNow Reviews

I have used this solution to create forms for employees to fill out. 

The main use is for incident management.

They are configuring the asset management in CMDB, and they are installing at this time.

It has the ability to consolidate different areas of the service desk into one solution.

I like that it's always up and running.

I am not a fan of ServiceNow.

The menus and the interface need improvement. It feels like a shopping cart and like I am shopping on the internet. The graphics of the menu could be better.

The interface is not user-friendly.

To me, ServiceNow is a money pit. It takes a lot of money to manage it.

With this company, I have been using ServiceNow for one year, and another two years before that in other companies.

I am using the latest version.

ServiceNow is a stable product.

It's a scalable solution. We have not had any issues with the scalability of this solution.

We have 5,000 users in our organization who use it.

This solution is used quite a bit and the company plans to increase its usage.

I have not contacted technical support.

This solution was already in place, but in a different organization, I used a solution called SysAid. I thought it was much easier to manage.

This was already in place when I arrived, but they are installing the CMDB and we need the help of a partner.

It seems to be very complex.

We have one person who is dedicated to the maintenance of this solution. He is a Service Desk Supervisor.

My experience with the integrator has been positive.

My advice to others is to be prepared to spend money.

While this product works, I feel that the UI is terrible, it's horrendous.

I would rate ServiceNow a four out of ten.

Some of the valuable features I have found the solution to have are it can serve many different types of businesses, it has strong platform capabilities, provides application development, built-in predictive intelligence, and performance analytics reports.

I have been using the solution for six years.

The stability of the solution is very good.

We have customers using the solution in medium to enterprise-sized businesses. The solution is not meant for small-sized businesses.

The technical support we have experienced was excellent.

The initial setup is really easy. Having a complex environment could add to the installation time but typically the solution can be up and fully operational in six to eight weeks' time.

The solution is priced for medium to enterprises sized businesses. However, it is expensive compared to competitors. Small businesses would have a hard to justify the price, it would not be cost-effective for them.

Those wanting to automate all of your internal functional departments under one system platform I would advise before implementing this solution to train and educate your teams on the use of these types of solutions first. This will allow for an easier transition.

I rate ServiceNow an eight out of ten.

IT Service Management

Agile framework is in place

It is very easy to integrate with other legacy systems. It's really easy to replace obligations. Each employee can develop their own workflow. 

With ServiceNow, you can create your own APIs. It's very easy. This was something that I didn't expect from the tool. It's better than I expected. 

It's easy to integrate. For instance, yesterday we closed the integration with SAP for the IP business management module to manage the forecast of projects. We created an interface between ServiceNow and SAP to control projects for accounting and on the forecast of the project. It was really easy. We don't have any problems with ServiceNow at the moment. As a company, they are improving constantly.

All the screens are similar. It's the same platform for everything and you need to familiarize yourself with it. In the past, you used to have one screen per application. Now, you have everything integrated into one. Everybody can manage the same screen and they need to navigate into the same screen as the Internet Explorer with a toolbar with the categories and look for the things you want to see or the models you want to use. 

This is something that is a little different from a traditional way of work in Argentina when you have different applications, and now, in this case, you have it all in one. It's on the same screen with all the models in a toolbar which does impact me. 

It's a new way of seeing things. In the past, you used to have a lot of publications. Now, in this case, you have the ability to have all in one. It's something new for a lot of people, and it's a change. That means we need to adapt to this change. For some people, it will not be easy. 

I have been using ServiceNow for a year. 

It is very stable.

SN has several releases by year. Each release has innovate features, and suitable components for solving previous issues detected or needs from a particular company that can be used for all...

They already have a plan for innovations that are adopting into the application constantly . It's really scalable  is mandatory to change the way or work for the company....The custumer must transform their way of work....they must change it...they need to convert firt their people to adopt Agile framework...SAFe....IT4IT   etc...., not only for tool perspective if not becasuse they need to convert and transform to a digital company. (ART's...Tribes, matrix structures...etc)

I am a consultant with a focus on guiding my clients through those transformation processes. I advise clients on how to use the product in the best way for them. In Argentina, I worked with medium-sized businesses. 

There is first level support that is supposed to be managed by yourself. It is very easy. With the second level support, in some cases we need to talk directly with ServiceNow. They managed the online chat very easily, along with the ticket, the book, the chat, and so on. I would rate their support a nine out of ten.

The initial setup was easy. You can deploy all models together or model by model. You have different ways to work. You need to understand your customer's situations. The data is the most important part.

If you have a problem obtaining the data, the application will not function properly because you will not have all the functionalities at the right level.

The time it takes to deploy depends on the resources and the time you allocate to it, but if you put all the people, it can be done in seven months. 

Before you move forward with this kind of implementation, you need to make a cultural change in the organization to understand that the way you used to work is no longer a valid way to work and you need to work in an integrated way. If you do not adapt your mindset and make a real adoption of new and integrated methods, I would not recommend moving forward with the implementation of these kinds of solutions because it's totally integrated.

In the next release, I would like to see more Spanish options available. 

I would rate ServiceNow a ten out of ten. I remember when was SAP created, it was the number one of the ERPs. ServiceNow will become the new SAP. The evolution of this solution will be constant, will grow continuously, and will be a product that every company would want to have.

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 platform as a service and the capability to build our own custom apps. Also, the built in work flow engine as we're able to create our own work flows, but that the engine is already there and it speeds application development.

We are using ServiceNow to replace some applications on systems that we're hoping to be able to retire. It's helpful to be able to get new applications up and going quickly, and the work flow engine helps a lot with that.

Using it as our ITSM solution, it has helped us to move a lot of our different processes onto the same platform, which helps with reporting and tracking and that sort of thing.

We still have some issues with some of our ITIL users, like some things aren't as intuitive as they could be. Related to being able to see things, like what tasks are assigned to them. Service Catalog and request fulfilment is the main module we use right now, or effects the most people, and so the learning curve for some of our ITIL users is a little higher than we would like in some cases.

We have had some issues over time. I think at times, they've ramped us up or given us more processing power. A few times we've had outages lately here too. Sometimes it does seem slow. We've kind of learned not to bring up a list with a thousand items in it. Sometimes there's something that you run that you expect to get a response in a couple seconds and the counter counts up to 45 seconds before you get your response back, so there's certainly some issues. We've seen a few bugs, but no show stoppers.

We're on the small side of ServiceNow installations. It's just for our plant, so it's not like our whole operation. So, we haven't had any scaleability issues other than we've seen some latency sometimes. I don't know how much of that might have been related to needing to scale up a little bit.

We had a custom Lotus Notes database that we were using for request fulfilment before, but some of the other pieces that ServiceNow fills in we had various solutions for. We switched because ServiceNow gives us more capabilities as far as giving us one platform to be able to have a lot of our systems on and it has a lot of functionality there just out of the box. A lot of plug-ins you can just turn on and have some functionality, which of course, we want to customize. But, being able to roll out something like that so quickly helps.

The initial implementation did take a while. It was fairly complex. We engaged ServiceNow to help us with that. Our ServiceNow also engaged a business partner to help us with roll out initially. Going through that process did take a while, but we had the workshops and training in place to help make that easier.

It was through ServiceNow, but they were busy at the time, so we had a ServiceNow project manager. To help, ServiceNow also brought in a third party and the third party was stronger than our ServiceNow program manager or project manager was, and wasn't nearly as strong as the business partner was.

ServiceNow is not cheap, especially as we continue to pay for it year after year, but it is helping us be more efficient from the perspective of taking less time to make sure that our requests are fulfilled and to bring out new features and functionality.

It would help to know more about a specific situation to give advice, but it is nice that there's a decent sized ServiceNow community and Wiki that you can find what you need. If you see a demo or see some of what ServiceNow can do, it's certainly worth looking into. However, to give more specific advice, I'd need to know more.

I think there's some things about that that ServiceNow could have implemented better, but the software in general is good and solid.

It acts as a one-stop shop for customers to be able to go in and create instant problem tickets if the incident is severity one or two. But basically, it's a one-stop shop because beforehand we were using multiple ticketing systems, mainly by email. So now instead of having that we just have them go in, log a ticket, and then its assigned to whatever group and whatever the group it's assigned to goes ahead and takes care of it.

We were doing our user on-boarding via email, and it involved a lot of emails going back and forth. Now, it's just a ticket. Our security team gets provisioning tasks. You can log an instance, use a service catalog, we have provisioning. It's just as important for them to go to one place. On a macro level it helps us do things more efficiently.

I can't wait until we get to Helsinki and such. There are some cool things that I have seen. Portal. The drag and drops which we currently don't have with Fuji.

We've been using it for three years, and we're currently on Fuji patch 3. I'm in the process of fixing our patching problems because there were some issues. Once I get it done, I will go ahead and bump us up to Fuji, patch 12 or so. Then we have a project where we are going to simplify our system, and we have a lot of customization so we are going to kind of try to go back out of the box.

They wanted a ticket to where the customer would see a general global ticket and not have to go through and see if it was an incident or a general request or whatever. And this one particular ticket and the way they have it set up is fairly complicated. They didn't use global tables that should have been used, they customized it and now we are having issues. So we are going to try to get it back to where it is a more simple thing and this should make it more stable.

The system admin. We have another guy that's our business analyst. But we have around 20,000 people in the company. Its global, so everyone is using it well we hope everyone is using it. We've added the catalog, we've made it global within the last year. So we have North America, Australia, Northern Europe and Central Europe. And we're hoping our European people are using it as well as Australia. But there used to be a lot of emails and stuff bouncing back and forth rather than using catalog.

We were using ChangeGear which was kind of limiting. We're a global company now. I don't know, I wasn't in on the why we changed but I know that we were using ChangeGear now before Service Now and it just wasn't suited to our needs.

I think that the way they set up global ticket there was a lot of development, so fairly complex. If they had not done all the customizations, it would have been a lot better, a lot easier and more straightforward.

I would recommend it. I would recommend not doing a lot of client scripts. Not doing a lot of customization. Stick with the out of the box, it's easier to upgrade, easier to implement. The people who are behind the scenes like I am need to go and find things in the Wiki. It's much easier to find, to fix that type of thing.

I've really enjoyed working with it, and I guess it's just the way we have things set up. It's a little frustrating not being able to find things, all the stuff I have to go through to get things fixed.

• Flexibility to do what I need to do. 
• The ability to automate what processes need to be automated. 
• Makes it easier for my users to be able to do things. 
• By coding you can go in and change it to whatever you want to do. You make it yours. Whereas, I've used some systems that you get it and that's it.

It gives our users the ability to do things they weren't doing before. We can get rid of several other systems, replace it with ServiceNow. I don't know exact dollar amounts for what they replaced with ServiceNow, but it's more than what I make.

Some of the issues that my team has run into are that something one day works completely fine, the next day it does not. If we release a patch, something happens, and it was working fine now. No recollection in any documentation anywhere about changing, but it doesn't work now. It's always something ServiceNow has changed, but neglected to tell anybody of the change. There's a lot of processes that were working when ServiceNow was implemented but aren't really as beneficial now.

I've been using for four years, and are currently on Fuji Patch 10 in the process of upgrading to Patch 12. Then we're looking at two different things right now. We may go to Geneva, but there's also talk of completely redoing ServiceNow and going straight to Helsinki. We might just redo the entire instance, skip Geneva and start with Helsinki.

There were no issues with the deployment.

Every clone release has been pretty seamless. We had one issue with one patch, but that was due to IE issues. It wasn't compatible before IE9 and some of our users were still on IE8, though they weren't supposed to be.

It's been able to scale for our needs.

The last thing I used before ServiceNow was HPE Service Desk and Remedy. Those are the only two other ones I've really used. I've seen other ones demoed and stuff, but they were not as flexible. I guess I've used SAP too.

I currently go to school too, which is at NKU in northern Kentucky and they use a SAP type product. I can't remember what it's called, but it's just not very functional.

I was not part of my current company's implementation, but with a previous one and their parent company, I was part of their implementations and it was pretty seamless, other than political issues.

Try to do as much as you can out of the box. Use as much out of box parts of it as you can. Development does come in handy, makes it scalable, and makes it more usable, but use as much out of the box as you can. That's the best advice I can give you.

The best thing is that when you patch and something's working one day, you patch and it's not working the next after you've tested and tested and tested and it's not working. Also, there's the fact that there are things that are changed that people are not notified about.