ServiceNow Reviews

We primarily use the solution to support Airbus Helicopters.

It's great for handling support tickets and onboarding employees.

We have other facilities in the United States with teams in Herndon, Virginia, and Grand Prairie, Texas, and for networking, in Mobile, Alabama. By having our different specialists in different areas, we're able to leverage their expertise over a large geographical area.

They have these items called resolver groups that are quite useful, however, it's basically to assign tickets to various teams.

The onboarding of employees is very good.

It's great for handling new hardware requests or new user requests.

They offer standard templates. The more that you customize it, or add additional software requests, the more it becomes usable and powerful. 

The solution is stable.

The scalability is there if you need it.

My understanding is that the pricing is reasonable. 

ServiceNow is great. You can download the data into Excel and you can basically create reports. It's very flexible.

That features are already there, however, maybe they could have some tutorials or give more power to the users versus having specialist administrators doing things. There's a big knowledge base. There's a lot of know-how that's saved in there, however, actually allowing people to do their own thing is lacking a bit.

I know there are functionalities for using it on other platforms. However, specifically for iPhone or Android, if there's something where I'm walking around and working in different offices, if I'm able to look up information directly, instead of going back to my laptop, that would be ideal. Making a mobile version would be helpful.

It's pretty customized already. I don't think there's anything that would be an area to fix.

I know that I actually have the special panel for all the features that I use, like creating tickets, managing hardware. Anything that can be integrated into especially our other types of features, such as SCCM, Microsoft SCCM, being able to update hardware, instead of manually going inside there would be good.

I've used the solution for the last year.

The solution is pretty stable. The only thing is that it's a cloud version, and therefore, if your network is slow or non-responsive, then ServiceNow becomes slow and unresponsive. That's a network issue. That is not an application issue.

The solution is easy to scale. If we wanted to add other facilities, it would be fairly easy to do. Something that we're going to be taking on in the next year or so is integrating with another facility in Mirabel, Quebec. They do commercial aircraft. We do civilian helicopters. Integrating with that team more will be beneficial. We have around 60 people using it right now.

I personally have never had any issues where I had to raise it directly to ServiceNow. I cannot speak on the topic of support.

The company did use a different solution. It was not as integrated with the other parts of the company, which is why they switched.

The company was using another product before. They implemented this, I would say, within six months. It's been in place for two years now and it's matured.

I was not there for the deployment.

We have one SRM, senior relationship manager, that basically maintains the digital workspace. He's in charge of updating the versions or deploying new features. There's one person that does that.

There are built-in surveys and we track those metrics, and the metrics have been positive for the last two years. There's been a great improvement.

Due to the fact that we're dealing with different subcontractors, we have a company that does the networking and we have a company that does the desktop hardware. If it's more application support or accounting specific, then it goes somewhere else. Being able to bridge between those different subcontractors is a major selling point.

The pricing is reasonable. In terms of extra costs, likely if a company was going to do integrations, they might have to buy the different modules, however, I'm not involved in that.

I'm just a customer and an end-user.

I am currently up to date with the latest version.

I'd advise potential new seers that they'll get good asset management and be able to manage tickets. It's all straightforward and usable. In the past, I've used other products, and they're not that scalable. If you're working in a company that has multiple facilities, multiple countries, the best way to go is with ServiceNow.

I'd rate the solution at a nine out of ten.

I previously used the on-premise version of ServiceNow. It was a better fit for companies and banks because of their tech security protocols. But for my work with my current company, I am considering the cloud solution because we already have all the other software components in AWS.

The main features of ServiceNow that I use are incident approval management and the ability to link all the information we receive from the finance bureau service. We needed to track the different processes within the IT area and incident documentation. Then we gathered all the information and built a knowledge base. That's the central core functionality that I've been using, and I've seen immense benefits.

We are elaborating and defining the business processes, so I will believe that we will be able to avoid the older models for the second phase. But first, I wanted to have these incident and asset management models in place as a first phase of the implementation.

I've been using ServiceNow for work I've done with various clients for around eight years. I first used it with Wal-Mart International, and then we used it for one event with Brolin Management. I recently worked with Santander Bank, where we used ServiceNow for all the incident and assets management. Now, I help implement different service management tools at my current company, including ServiceNow.

I think ServiceNow is highly stable. These kinds of tools are used in a big company, and I haven't seen any issues in terms of the core platform. However, if we need to customize something, that would be the point to focus on because this would be something new, not a part of the standard flow for the tool.

I think ServiceNow is scalable in the short term. 

The solution has some built-in monitoring capabilities, so we escalate cases as they come. But sometimes the response to our requests is delayed.

Setting up ServiceNow is pretty standard because we want it to manage incidents and use it for other marketing, construction, and procurement areas. But, still, everything would be based on the different services we provide for their operations area. If you move forward with the cloud, I think the number of internal staff needed would be minor. It probably takes around two people to deploy and manage. In this case, we use some external consultants for all the development and maintenance.

For us, it's better to pay the licenses monthly, and I mean when we move ahead with the cloud deployment. I understand that the service includes hosting and licensing as a service as well as some downgoing costs probably. That will be all on the implementation side. It depends if we need some customization. We will need to consider that part as a consultancy. 

I will rate ServiceNow nine out of 10 because it's a little expensive compared to other tools, but it's a very good product from a technical standpoint.

I'm a service manager, so I'm mainly focusing on customers' CMDB, incidents, changes, and problem management tasks. We have many global customers with network solutions.

It improved the customer experience. For instance, preference management is very useful to be able to set up automated notifications based on various things, such as site priority, site size, client's importance, and incident's priority. We can configure that only a portion of a group gets P1, P2, or P3 cases. Those features have really improved the relationship with the customers and within the organization. The reporting features and the setup of the customer CMDB file are improving the customer experience, and our internal groups are also able to benefit from them because they are using it daily. If there is an incident, it is an advantage that they don't need to fill out things. The notifications are also sent out automatically. So, they are saving time, and they can focus more on taking care of the customers, communicating with them, and taking up new issues.

I really like ServiceNow and all of the features. The way incident management is built is very helpful. You have a lot of options to optimize it, customize it, and automate it. You also have a lot of options for reporting. There are plenty of possibilities to do preference management within your customer CMDB file. These are very useful features, which I missed in BMC Remedy ITSM. ServiceNow is the best ticketing tool I have used so far.

I have enjoyed all the features. There is not any feature that I have missed or didn't have.

I have been mainly using it for the past three years. I also used it previously for two years, and then I stopped for three years.

It is totally stable. I never had issues with it.

I believe it is scalable.

We were having a lot of issues. It took nine months to fix all of them. Those were mainly because of customer requirements that were not caught firsthand. There were virtual connections, and there were different bespoke elements that we needed to have. That was the reason we had to resolve some technical issues, but they were within our company. It wasn't outsourced to ServiceNow itself.

We had BMC Remedy ITSM. Our ITSM was already outdated. It had no support, and we were looking for a new solution that had all the features we needed. Our first priority was customer satisfaction, but the choice wasn't up to me. It has always been up to the organization. I didn't have the chance to choose. I have just been given a solution.

It was complex because we support network customers. They have dedicated fiber connections all around the world. It was a complex project, and we suffered afterward in terms of missing features and so on, but that wasn't because of ServiceNow. It was rather an internal issue of not allocating enough resources.

The implementation took six to nine months because we needed to prepare the cutoff. We did a pilot phase with dedicated customers, and we tested it first. After that, we rolled it out, and then based on agile, we fixed any production issues. We prioritized them, highlighted them, and we fixed them, which took another nine months. 

We had at least 20 people, but not all of them were for deployment. We have many global customers with network solutions. They are scattered around the globe with different priorities and focuses. It wasn't an easy task to gather all the information about the features that we and the customers require. We were also using two ticketing systems. So, we had to organize and then migrate.

It was deployed around the globe because there were some users in the U.K., Ireland, Germany, Hungary, India, and Egypt. So, it was deployed at several locations.

I would absolutely advise using it. I have been an advocate within our company to change different tools and move different departments to ServiceNow because it's a really useful tool. I would recommend it to others.

I would rate it a 10 out of 10. I'm totally satisfied with it.

We primarily use the solution just for our ticketing purposes to keep track of our incidents, projects, and tasks.

We use it for internal projects, circuit routers, upgrades, keeping track of vendor contracts, et cetera. Basically, it's just a repository of everything that we do and to support our internal clients that deal with maintaining bookkeeping as well as providing the tickets, keeping track of projects, and stuff like that.

It's great for keeping everyone informed in the company - not just IT. Everyone becomes aware of change requests and incidents so the entire company is on the same page.

It's great that everybody is in the loop - especially from an incident perspective for a user. If I'm waiting for somebody to get back to me, or if I'm researching something, I could update the notes and I don't have to call the user. The user will get that ticket via email. They're aware. You don't have to go and chase people and update them individually, or even on a group basis. Whatever I enter into my notes is sent out to everyone. There's no gap in information sharing.

The general incident management is very good. On a day-to-day basis, we get incidents and we need to keep records. The incident tickets are being used a lot.

The change management within ServiceNow is great. It's great due to the fact that it keeps track, of everything. Any change requests that touch a particular business or function can be used and distributed amongst whoever's involved in that project. Everyone is informed of what changes are needed or done. I don't need to go and individually create a separate distribution list. It's simple.

The solution offers very good functionality and transparency.

From my perspective, when I create any incidents or even a change request or any projects that I'm dealing with, I could upload as many documents as I want, unless people take the software and they basically structure it to the way they want it. 

It's easy to use. If somebody is in an IT business or even has a basic knowledge of any ticketing system, they could learn it very quickly.

The solution is very stable.

The product scales well.

There aren't any improvements that I could suggest off top of my head, as it's a well-informed well-structured solution. From a business perspective or an individual, IT perspective, there isn't much to change at all. 

Some companies may find that adding as many documents as they like to an incident makes the solution problematic. 

Once a change request has been created once it's been approved and been submitted, there is no way to go in on that particular change request and submit an additional task. You would have to revert the change, then submit an additional task for a group to act on. I'd like it if we had the ability to, once the task had been approved and created, go in and create an additional task for a particular group to action. That's definitely one thing I would want to make a change to.

I've used the solution for a very long time. With my current company, I've used it for five years. However, I also used it at my previous company for around 20 years. It's been a few decades at this point.

The stability is very good. We haven't had any problems. It hasn't gone down and it hasn't crashed. There are no bugs or anything like that. I don't see it any now and I haven't in the past - even after 20 or more years. This is flawless software. 

It's scalable. You could easily modify it and you could create reports or you could do whatever you want to do with it based on the privileges. There's no downside to it. You could create your individual report or you could use a template and create your own individual report and you can use search criteria for your own searches for incidents, change, tasks, anything. It's very flexible.

We have about 100 users on the solution right now.

We may increase usage in the future. Right now, it's being used quite extensively.

I can't speak to how technical support is in terms of helpfulness. We'll go to our backend developers and they basically deal or interact with them. I haven't had any interaction with the ServiceNow technicians or anybody else from ServiceNow.

I've been in the industry for almost 20 or 25 years. With the previous ticketing system that I used to use, which was Remedy, there's a big difference. ServiceNow is just so much easier.

I didn't handle the initial setup.

That's a different group that does altogether. It's a packaging portion. We basically tell them if there are certain things or floor processes that we need to create. We'll create it on a front end, we'll create the diagram, the workflow, and everything else. We give it to the backend office and they'll basically make the changes as they go. They'll give us a test case scenario before it goes live, and any modification or any changes that are required. We reply back to them with the information and they basically make the changes according to what we want. From a packaging or modification perspective, it's not something that my team or I do. 

I'm not sure how many users are currently maintaining the product.

We're just a customer and an end-user.

We are using the most recent version of the solution at this time.

The product is well-versed, and it's simple to use - which is why I would recommend it. You've just got to know how you're going to organize or structure everything. Whoever's basically managing or deploying the software needs to map it out. They should be able to modify or scale it to the way they want it, however. 

I'd rate the solution at a nine out of ten. We've been very happy with its capabilities. The flexibility and the ability to modify what you want are great - and, on top of that, it's pretty simple. If you know how to do a simple query, you should be able to pull up anything that you want. That's what I like about this software

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.

ServiceNow enables us to transform IT as it's a business driver. In my mind, we can shift the way IT works to make it more business aligned, business focused, and business oriented. Having a tool that kind of helps IT think differently about how we deliver services is important to me.

We're rolling out service level management this year and part of that is because we had this foundation of our CMDB. Our business services are in there. Being able to report on things based on how our business service is impacted, it's going to be the first time technology's been able to do that at this company. That's exciting.

Speed of delivery is really at the forefront. Being able to do things faster removes those IT obstacles out of the way for our business users and lets them do what they need to do quicker. We're enabling our business to be more nimble without bogging them down with technology.

I feel like there should be perhaps more unit testing before patches are rolled out because every patch has broken our entire catalog. That's kind of the most time consuming areas to test because of volume. There's so many catalog items. Each one has to get looked at, the workflows, each step has to be done. Every patch has broken our entire catalog, and I'd love for that to go away.

From a user perspective, we noticed a slowdown when we moved from Eureka to Geneva, so I've got a lot business customers that are saying, "Man, your tool got slower." I don't have any stats behind it. It's running all the time.

We add users constantly. We onboard people and they are automatically added. We have a portal that's internal for our users that don't need to do changer class but they do need to request things in the catalog so those people are able to log in and request stuff.

I think the only thing where there was anything negative was now you have two tools in the interim so people still used Remedy for some of the ITIL processes and now they have ServiceNow for change. Then as we increased our capabilities in ServiceNow, more and more people were happier.

Just really for me, it's all about the business case. What's a success story to tell? What are you able to do now that you couldn't do before? Some of the things that I would showcase are the wild set that we used to be in as far as requests goes and now we have the catalog and we're growing that everyday. Also, having a business portal is a huge selling point. Anything where you can spin up a portal as easily as you can with ServiceNow and make IT approachable for a business user is important. Every time they patch, they break the entire catalog. They need to fix that.

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'm a ServiceNow consultant and my company is a service provider where we are deploying ServiceNow ourselves on-premises. Here it is primarily used as a service catalog and in BIZBOK-developed services and knowledge management.

As a ServiceNow partner, we also offer it in a ServiceNow-like cloud to end customers and we do consulting and projects with it as a third party. Our current customer sees especially heavy usage of ServiceNow, with between 100-150K accesses per month, and up to a million users who access it in total. We are one of many third parties who are involved in this project.

ServiceNow has helped us with lots of paper saving. It has unified everything in terms of non-IT service requests, with everything in one place.

I find almost all the features valuable. It can do nearly everything except make your coffee, as my colleagues always say. It's got pros and cons, like every software, but the good thing about it is that it has a very structured approach.

Data access is a bit difficult, where you sometimes wish you had a relational database for some queries. The flexibility of data access in general is a bit on the low end. Of course, there is flexibility in some ways, but when I need a certain combination of data for some report, it can become a challenge.

Other than that, there are a lot of minor improvements that could be made such as the debugging functionality in JavaScript, and in terms of use more generally, like joining tables and so on. I think it boils down to an extension of the right knowledge and user criteria.

I have been using ServiceNow for about four to five years. 

The stability is much improved. It's good.

It's difficult to say much about the scalability of ServiceNow because we're on-prem. Our impressions are good, but I don't know how it is in the ServiceNow cloud. Everybody says, "Yes, it's good." But with bad development, you can't maximize the performance of every system.

On the whole, it's good, and there are no real issues. We had lots of performance issues in the beginning, but that hasn't been the case for a long time now. I would say it's definitely had heavy usage, with about between 100-150K accesses per month.

We rarely need the tech support, but if you need help, there is help available.

There's no real alternative on the market currently, from my point of view.

Setup is not my forte, but because we are on-prem you can imagine that the setup is very special because we are not on a standard database nor is it a typical setup such as with ServiceNow in the cloud.

As one of the third parties, we implemented and run ServiceNow in an on-premises setup. For maintenance, it's difficult to say how many people are required. It's typically a handful for deployment and upgrades and so on - basically the IT operations staff. Of course, as a data center and everything behind it, on-prem is always a bit special.

I have seen ROI. I have not calculated it exactly, but we did some estimations and we do have a positive ROI from using ServiceNow.

Some time ago it was expensive, but large companies have special contracts. It's enterprise prices, and we're talking about millions per year.

Stay within the standard. This is the same advice as with SAP: try to stay in the standard and avoid customizing too heavily. I don't mean to say anything about additional development, but instead I would caution against trying to change the standard itself. And keep things simple. In large companies, this is not always emphasized as they tend to think complicated.

I would rate ServiceNow an eight out of ten.