ServiceNow Reviews

We use this solution for managing IT assets and business operations.

We are also using it to help make better business decisions.

Using ServiceNow has forced conversations around the whole IT domain, on how we can manage the IT assets through their life cycles. This starts with identifying the need and introducing it, developing it, and deploying it, to then eventually making decisions to remove the asset from the operation.

I can use it to see the whole life cycle.

As a company, it's about how you get your data in there and manage it.

I like all of the operations and features that I have seen.

I like that it's running on a unified platform and that there is no data integration.

I can get a real-time view of how our assets are performing.

I also like that with the operations running on a unified platform, I can then get a better picture of ITHealth through the application platform management tool.

I really like what they've done with their common service data model because now I can make a connection between the business process and technology. I can start showing the role some of the technologies are playing and talk about the health of the technology and even connecting it up to the business strategies. You can do that with the APM component.

I like having one platform to get that view.

The marketing needs improvement. This platform can really do a lot and I don't think they do it justice for what it can do. 

I have to go out there and market things. Whereas I think if their teams were a little more in tune with what they could actually deliver, they would do a better job selling it.

I still haven't seen a holistic picture of the whole platform and what they can really do. I don't know if that's intentional or if they're not selling it.

The visuals are the one area where there is opportunity for improvement. 

The reporting can be difficult, but they are making it a little easier to create reports or introduce a wizard to help you walk through them.

You have to know the entity-relationship diagram to get the right data and make the right connections. 

The visual representation of the data is an area where they fall short of, but they do have a partner who is native to their product. It does a much better job visualizing the data. I don't know if that is there, the way they're closing the gap.

I would like to see, from a business process automation perspective, where an engineer or architect could implement the automation. You don't have to write the spec and hand it off to a ServiceNow developer.

For some of the things that are happening with the other BPM tools, I'd like to see ServiceNow be a little more user-friendly. Another thing I'd like to see is that they have a representation and their service taxonomy of a more modern application for events business logic, as well as APIs. As it is now, it's still in the application and infrastructure perspective, but that's not totally a modern construction of an application.

I have been using ServiceNow for 12 years.

We are running the current version. 

From a SaaS perspective, it's very stable. I think in the 12 years that I've been running it, I have seen maybe one or two outages. For the most part, it's pretty stable.

I haven't really experienced any performance problems. I am assuming that they are monitoring and extending it when they need to.

I don't know how many users they have at my current company. In my last company, we had more than 1,000 users. They were primarily IT except for the work request part of it that came in from the entire enterprise.

It is being used extensively. There are definitely plans it increase the usage. I am working on the plans to extend it. It was just introduced in March, more for the kind of IT service side of it. Problems, incidents, change, and work requests for example. 

Now I am looking to bring in governance, risk, and compliance. 

Also, having conversations with other areas like business continuity, disaster recovery, and security about how they could leverage the same platform for some of their operations.

I think whoever purchased it had this in their vision, they're just not communicating who's vision right now. I have been having those conversations to get people to understand what we will be able to do in the future so that they buy into making the move and investing in learning how to use ServiceNow.

I wasn't on the support team. I am on the architecture team, but as far as technical insights go, and to help make decisions, they have been very good at sharing knowledge. 

I have a couple of connections right now who, as I'm trying to push things out a little bit more, I'm pinging. I am getting help with enterprise ERDs and different things, and they're very responsive to them.

I was not involved in the setup of this solution. It was already in place when I started with the company.

To others who are interested in implementing ServiceNow, I would say, consider it for running your IT operations, but implement it capability by capability. This will allow you to see the big picture of what you're going to get at the end of it. You can't do a big bang approach on this. Rather, you have to be very deliberate in how you implement it.

They have thought through it, and not just the whole domain in the platform but now they have connected it to the business side, the business needs and the processes, the work that people do down to the technology. I think that was missing a few years ago, probably more than a few years ago. Because I think they met with them in 2016 around it. But they have got that now, and it is really powerful. 

I've been working through the taxonomy with different parts of the organization and the fact that they can start making some of these connections in a system I think is phenomenal.

Also, they have the assets included. When you do an assessment to see, how healthy it is, you can not only see who has impacted the business applications that are impacted, which drives you to the people and the processes and all those things. You can also see what the root cause of the cross problem is, and manage the root cause in a more holistic manner.

For its space and what it is capable of doing, I would rate ServiceNow a nine out of ten.

The solution is used primarily to report incidents and then to follow up. It's mainly used for ticketing and incident resolution and tasks of that nature. I look at incidents and see the resolutions and report on that.

The solution is reasonably straightforward to use. The only thing I can say about it is, it presents me with the incidents that I've reported, so that's good. I don't have to look through a whole bunch of other incidents that aren't relevant to me. It's very useful in that sense.

The solution is very stable.

I find the way you need to attach things like screenshots and stuff is a bit gimmicky. I'm a casual user. I'll use it once every two months and only when I have an incident that I need to report. You don't get a lot of experience with it when you're just using it once in a while like that. Therefore, it needs to be more intuitive so that you don't have to re-learn how to do simple tasks as the way to do certain things just isn't obvious.

We've been using the solution for around two years now. It hasn't been that long.

The product is extremely stable. There are no bugs or glitches. It doesn't crash or freeze. It's reliable. It has not been problematic at all.

I can't comment with authority, however, I would say we're a big company and there are probably lots of incidents and lots of demand for it across the company. I'm assuming it's pretty scalable.

We have around 5,000 employees in Canada. However, we're a multi-national. It may not be the case that all countries are on the same platform, however, internationally we have up to 100,000 employees.

it's used quite extensively in our company. On top of that, we are resellers, and we have many clients that we have implemented this for as well.

I've never dealt directly with technical support. I can't speak to how helpful or responsive they are.

I've talked a lot with our groups that implement ServiceNow, and I haven't talked to them specifically about what it's like, or what kind of support they get from ServiceNow when they're implementing. However, I would guess that it's reasonably good, as I suspect it would be a pain point for them if people complain more about things when they're not working due to the fact that it wasn't set up right.

Before the company implemented ServiceNow it was more of a conventional help desk where you as a customer would call in. They might've had a tracking system that they used, however, they didn't give it to us. The thing about ServiceNow is that you get the users to self-serve. We report our own incidents. They never used to do that before ServiceNow.

We have a team in-house that can handle implementation for clients.

I've looked into HEAT. I'm looking to evaluate it with Service Now.

I'm in consulting. I'm not in the group that does the ServiceNow implementation, however, we have people on staff who do it. We've implemented it in our company and I use it as a user, however, I'm not a guy who configures it.

I'd advise new users to get someone, such as a consultant, to help them implement the solution. I don't actually have enough knowledge about it to really give advice. My understanding is it's a good, solid system. In our company, people are quite bullish about it. The best general advice I could give is, if you're getting someone to help you implement it, make sure they're people who know their stuff. If people go for cheap and cheerful support in implementation, they can have problems.

I'd rate the product at a six out of ten. As a self-serve product, it's kind of the middle of the road compared to other online experiences you get as a consumer. It's pretty bare-bones.

Our primary use case of this product is for incident and change management. We are customers of ServiceNow and I work as a senior software development engineer. 

The reporting details and easy access of the data has improved addressing the customers issues.

I think the incident management, change management and problem management features are the best. They are very good and I like all three of them. If most of our customers could learn the benefits of these three features, that would be great. 

Another advantage of this solution is that we can get a detailed analysis on each incident; how long it took for resolution, how long it was on the client side, a detailed time base. Detailed reporting is another valuable feature and our customers comment on it too. 

This is an expensive solution and I think that could be reduced. What I've noticed from talking to some of our clients is that most are not renewing their licenses because it's so expensive. Pricing is one of the main factors customers check when comparing tools and solutions on the market. 

I think an additional feature that they could include would be a defect management system that ServiceNow doesn't currently have. It would be the best product in the market if they included that. It would make it a one-stop solution. They already have the incident management, problem and change management. Everything is there. So if they include this defect management, then it would definitely be the best in its category.  I would recommend Servicenow should include the defect management feature like JIRA.

I've been using this solution for five years. 

Servicenow is a stable product which is an advantage for the business.  As per the current business trends and requirements the expected availability of the products are around 99.9% availability.  hence, we cannot afford the frequent outages 

Because it's a cloud-based technology, it's scalable and convenient.  

Service now is a cloud based technology and its easy to increase or decrease the compute based on the load factors like no of users and based on the no of users increase, we can scale up the infrastructure of the servers. Apart from that any patch upgrades of OS or bug fixes can be done without any outage. Otherwise, in the legacy systems we need to take outages for any upgrades or patch deployments and which impacts the business.

We have a local vendor who assists us with technical support. They provide good assistance. 

Earlier we were using the HP Service desk

The initial setup can be a little on the technical side so we are lucky we have the tech staff. Without that, we'd need to take a service provider or third party vendor to help with deployment which generally takes one to two weeks. It's important to have technical people involved in the implementation, otherwise it's quite difficult.

through vendor team

The pricing is little bit high.  However, i would like to give some more recommendations like if servicenow can include other modules like Defect management and server monitoring and automatic inventory update then it can be a "Value for Money" and users will not feel overpriced for what other products are providing in the market with lesser price.

I believe the cost is around $1200 per user for year and which is quite expensive.  If Servicenow comes up with the appropriate cost then definitely it will be the best product in the category of cost wise as well.

I was not part of the evaluation team.  

I would recommend this solution, it's really an excellent tool in comparison to the current market tools like SCP and a lot of other tools out there. I can rank it as number one. The price is the only factor which is an issue. Because of Covid, companies are thinking about  how to reduce licensing costs. I've made a comparison between ServiceNow and other tools, and I'm not satisfied with the others. But licensing costs are so high that we sometimes have to go for other products for our customers. 

I would rate this solution a nine out of 10. If they would lover the price, I'd rate it a 10 out of 10. 

We are consultants. We use ServiceNow to develop ideas and solutions for our customers.

It has definitely improved operations at the customer end. There are some key metrics which users have wanted and they are able to achieve them through ServiceNow solutions.

The main feature would be ITSM, as ServiceNow initially started with ITSM software. That is something which is important for all our customers. HR Case Management and Customer Service Management are two of the key areas which clients are also using.

HR Service Management is one module that needs a lot of improvement because it's a pretty new module. It was introduced in the last two years. It's becoming more mature day by day, but there is a lot of scope for improvement in that module.

The stability is really good. As I mentioned earlier, the HR area has a lot of room for improvement in terms of stability. We are trying to customize a lot of things. But overall, in terms of being a stable solution, that is what comes from ServiceNow.

I would rate scalability very high, compared to competitive tools. It is highly scalable.

If we implement it for large enterprises they could have 10,000-plus end users. We have implemented it for small organizations as well, where they have just 1,000 end users.

Out of ten, I would rate technical support at seven. Sometimes, it seems to me that even though we are looking for a simple solution, if something has to be customized, ServiceNow technical support doesn't look at it and they simply say that we have to go with Professional Services. They won't look at any custom script or any custom implementation. Where we have done a small customization to something out-of-the-box, even in those cases there are times when ServiceNow is not able to support us.

Before ServiceNow, I had worked with BMC Remedy and worked with and compared Micro Focus Service Manager vs ServiceNow. We switched our services because ServiceNow is really easy to configure and it's a cloud tool. In terms of the performance and the implementation, it is really easy to configure.

From an initial setup perspective, it is very simple. That is why ServiceNow is the market trend, compared to Remedy or compared to HPE tools. It has already captured close to 60 or 70 percent of the market. The initial setup is really very user-friendly and very easy to set up in customer environments. Just drag and drop. You really don't need any technical skillset to deploy ServiceNow at customer sites.

Deployment time depends on what a customer is trying to implement, for example, the number of modules. If a customer is going with the basic ITSM module, it does not take more than two to three months to implement that complete ITSM suite.

In terms of implementation strategy, first we try to go with the out-of-the-box features and try to follow ServiceNow guided setups, which are available on the ServiceNow Wiki. A lot of information is there. We can blindly follow that for the initial setup and for the configuration.

The staff required for deployment and maintenance depend on the customer's requirements. If the requirements are really complex and they want a custom solution, then the timelines and the staff increase, based on that. There's no standard staffing, as such, in terms of implementation. It completely depends on the complexity of the requirements and, obviously, the size of the requirements.

Initially, the licensing model ServiceNow came up with was very good. But now, from a licensing perspective, they are changing their model day by day. It is becoming a bit expensive for customers.

The licensing is changing drastically. Especially for the Orchestration piece and the HR piece, the pricing is pretty high. Initially, when ServiceNow started, the licensing was very nominal and that's why customers adopted the tool. But now, in terms of replacing other tools with ServiceNow, they could probably work on the licensing part. Doing so will obviously increase the ServiceNow market and customers will start using it for that.

We directly migrated from Remedy to ServiceNow because of the growing market for ServiceNow vs Remedy. We got quite good feedback from some of our competitors and customers that ServiceNow is really good in terms of its integrations. In 2011 we called ServiceNow to demo the product. They came to our organization and we had the demo and we really liked the tool. Then we switched over to ServiceNow.

The configuration is very simple. I would definitely recommend it from a maintenance perspective and from a scalability perspective. It is a really good tool. You can replace your existing Remedy or HPSM with ServiceNow.

Regarding how extensively the solution is being used, it's no longer just an ITSM product. It's a platform, as such. Customers have started moving all their custom applications - in addition to ITSM, their non-ITSM - to the product. They've started building everything on ServiceNow. Slowly, customers are liking the tool and they are very happy to move everything onto ServiceNow.

I rate ServiceNow at eight out of ten. For the two missing points, as I mentioned, there are some new modules which need a lot of improvement. The HR Service Management is not very straightforward right now, in terms of the security rules. We have to spend a lot of time implementing the HR module. It is not really simple the way it is with the ITSM modules.

For me it's the development, and in the background it's very easy to manipulate forms, to write simple scripts and to do things. The developer side is very very easy. Because I stress velocity and therefore I can get a lot more work in, because it's so simple, I can maintain my high velocity.

We have 65,000 process users, and it's great. We've used it for ten years or so. We're actually one of the very first adopters of ServiceNow, so we've got a long history with it. The fact that they can do everything that we need to do. For us it's just the amount of stuff that we can put in there and direct people to a single place instead of multiple places.

I always say that I have never been asked to do something in ServiceNow that I couldn't do. They've just released mobile which is an update for the new release, which is a great step in the right direction. The push notification is the way of future, things like system emails and those sort of things are sort of an antiquated way of dealing with the notifications.

I would like to say less of an emphasis on those sort of things and more of emphasis on using ServiceNow as the notifier itself, so as you're logging in, you see the notifications of the things that you need to address then, not to getting spam in your email box. Because what happens invariably, this is the second company that I work for, what people do is they get tired of the ServiceNow emails and they just shove them into a folder and never pay attention to them, and at that point you've completely lost your audience. If there was a better way to get notifications out than email spam, that would be great.

This is my fifth year using it. I'll be entering my sixth in August.

My first instance was a June 2011 instance, and upgrading was a nightmare from that point. It got progressively better. Right now it is flawless, and it takes very little effort to do an upgrade, but getting to that point has been very very difficult. That's probably one of the other things that would be nice for ServiceNow to give us the ability to sort of see all the things that we have changed. Not in the middle of the upgrade, but just ahead of it, so you can try to knock those things out.

We used to have BMC Remedy and we've moved from that. We've consolidated in a single unified place for people to go and do anything IT related that they need to do.

It was easy and straightforward. It's a web-based app essentially, so you get loaded onto a server, and we have twenty-four node cluster in one node. We're on primus and have 65,000 process users going to it. It's relatively easy, as far as getting it up and going and just turning the monitors on and letting people enter.

First, I'd tell you to do it. I've been on four or five separate ITSM systems and ServiceNow has been the best. I've used Remedy, Vantive, and Autotask, and none of them come close to the ease of use and development that ServiceNow has.

I would tell you to step away sort of like as an architecture, because you can do a lot of things on servers now that wind up being dirty data or just technical death. Just be very true, with whatever you're doing, think about it, write it down, then implement it, that sort of thing.

I love it, I love the platform. In fact, I view my job as sort of not trying to put people out of the job. We need to consolidate, we have thousands of tools all over the place, we need to consolidate all those things and I'm very strong at let's consolidate it in ServiceNow, and get rid of all of the sort of money that we are throwing at things.

We primarily use the solution for change management and program management. Let's say, for example, if someone across our state needs a license. My team will send the request to me and I would approve it. For other tasks, they might send me a ticket and I would either approve it or add additional comments, however, that's it. 

The workflow and the general effectiveness of the processes have helped improve how our organization functions.

The workflow makes things extremely efficient and it improves effectiveness.

The product integrates well with other solutions. 

The stability has been very good so far.

We have found that the product can scale. 

Technical support has been helpful.

One of the areas that need improvement is when the product was implemented, they did not do a very good job of explaining all these features and functions, and capabilities of the tool. That could have been an implementation issue on our organization's side. This could have happened by not including end-users in order to get their input or to understand what this tool offers. It was kind of just pushed out. For example, while the tool could potentially do a hundred things, only 20 of the capabilities were explained. The other 80 we have to figure out on our own. It could have been explained and rolled out better, however, that could have been just an implementation issue on our side as well.

It became kind of complex to set it up without a general lack of knowledge of the particular feature-function capabilities. Features and capabilities could have been explained better to the end-users.

I have used the solution for about a year.

The stability is good. There are no bugs or glitches. It doesn't crash or freeze. It's reliable. 

The product definitely can be scaled. We're working now to integrate it with other workflow products, so it's definitely scalable.

We've dealt with technical support in the past. We have a service desk. Since it's on-prem, it's been pretty good. Tech support has been helpful and we have no complaints. 

We did previously use a different solution, however, with ServiceNow, we find that it offers better scalability, ease of use, features, and functions.

My team did not implement ServiceNow, we do not maintain it and we do not service it. We just use the product.

I don't know what they had on the setup and the implementation part in terms of setting up servers and configuring servers and things like that. I don't know what that entails. We just know when we got it, we got a product. So what difficulties they might've had setting in up with, I don't know. I can't speak to that.

I don't handle any aspect of the payments or licensing process. I can't speak to it from personal experience. 

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

I go in and approve service tickets, however, I am not a hardcore user of that platform. My team sends me a request, I open it up and I review the ticket and I approve it, and then it moves on. I don't follow the workflow or anything like that.

Our team uses the most recent version of the solution.

I would advise potential new users to make sure that in that user community, end-users are involved in the implementation from beginning to end and make sure that the end-users fully understand the features and capabilities of the tool before it is implemented across an organization. Their involvement is key to a successful implementation and very important.

I'd rate the solution at an eight out of ten.

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

Immediate insight into reporting. For us it's about trying to wrap our heads around the volume of tickets that are coming in the door. How quickly we're getting our turn time done? Those were things that were missing from our incident management platform. We could basically do a data dump once a week, dump that into an Excel spreadsheet, then do some computation on the side, and get those numbers out.

With ServiceNow, we're able to generate those reports daily. We can get that feedback almost immediately. We just started turning on performance analytics as well. That's one of the reasons I'm here [at Knowledge16], is to take the courses to learn more about performance analytics. We're really looking forward to that, to get it in more real time, and provide dashboards.

It was all on Fuji. Some of the things I'm going to say might already be in Geneva and Helsinki. We use a zipper product for our project management portfolio, demand management and resource planning. From what I have heard, and what I've seen thus far, resource management needs to be a little tighter. We're running performance models around capacity planning. We need to know: How many resources are in play? How many hours are they actually working? What's the requirement for all those resources on those different pieces? How does that lay against what we're allocating?

I can't have resources available for 45 hours a week, and then deploy them against 60 hours, and they only turn in 37 hours. The resource planner we have today actually calls out those discrepancies. I'm hoping that with performance analytics this will too. I haven't seen a lot of that in play yet because I think it's still fairly new for them. I think if you're going to run your IT shop like a business, you really need that kind of insight.

The other thing we do is we report out against three different modalities in our IT shop. 1. You got to run the shop. 2. You've got to maintain the business to keep the doors open. 3. You got to grow the business. There's some fancy math that you have to do against what people are doing, and how they're deploying their time to roll that back into one of those three categories. With the current system we have, there's a way of doing data masking and manipulating it so that way you can form these common buckets. I don't know that this will do that, I hope it will.

With ServiceNow, you have to do a lot of manipulation ahead of time to get to what that end state is. That said, coming to the conference and playing with Geneva, and playing with Helsinki, I've got a slightly different opinion. I'm pushing my guys to move from Fuji directly to Helsinki. Just because it does allow me to set those records up the way I want to quickly, as opposed to playing with the report to get that structure right. The only way I can describe it is, if you really enjoy building formulas, and data drops, and pivot tables, and having all that, and then analyzing the data, Fuji is great. Excel is also great for that, but it's not what I want to do. I want to actually analyze the data.

I've been using it about six months.

It's one of the few systems we have in our house that hasn't gone down. It's very stable. As a matter of fact, we don't even put it on our availability list because it's up.

We're currently on the Fuji release. There's some other things that we want to do like Demand Management and PMO they're coming out with in Geneva and Helsinki. It's one of the reasons we're here at the conference is to see if it will be scalable to those processes as well. From what I've seen thus far, it's pretty scalable.

To be honest, we have mostly in-house support. Anytime I've had a call or a question, it's been answered usually within a few days. Most of what we're looking for is just how do we get the right data. Our guys are able to go back to the system analysts, and get that information out, and then tell me which field to put in the report. It's a fairly quick turnaround.

We were using a competitor product at the time. It was from our corporate office. We brought a real sharp guy in from NetApp. He had used the ServiceNow platform for about half a decade. He's been to just about every conference. He was bragging about the fact that he was at the Knowledge 2011. He's a pretty sharp guy. He brought it to our attention, and then helped implement it. We tease him and say that maybe he's brought a lot of his bad habits from the other companies into this one too. Along with some of our bad habits from CA, which is us poking fun at the customization. He really does know the product inside and out, and we're lucky to have him.

To be honest, I wasn't involved a whole lot with the initial setup. At that point, I was in the PMO. I was watching it get executed as a project. It was a fairly quick project. I think we implemented six or seven of the modules that are out there reporting incident management etc. We were up and running in about two to three months.

Now that said, there's always the PMO side of the house where I got to look at it and go, "Did we get all the requirements?" I think we did it more agile. We're still finding things that we'd like to do different. Things we'd like to change now that it's up and running. Getting it up and out of the box is really quick. We did some customization which was really quick too.

Go ahead and get it. You'll have a cleaner insight into your organization, and how it's really working. You're going to do a little fighting with your groups if they're not already doing careful time tracking. ServiceNow is based at the task level. They assume that they are going to give you a task. That task has some time collateral associated with it. That tells you how long you're spending on certain things.

You have better insight into those tasks, better insight into how that time is being deployed. If your organization isn't already doing that, you're going to have a little bit of a culture shift. If that's where you want to go, if you want to transfer your business from "Trust us, we'll just get it done," to "I can actually demonstrate how we're doing it." ServiceNow is the right product for you.

I would say Fuji is about a 7, and what I was playing with the other day in the labs is probably about an 8 or a 9. It's a great product. I like where they're road mapping it. They have a very clear plan, and where they're going next. That's pretty exciting. We'll keep the product in-house for a couple of years.