We changed our name from IT Central Station: Here's why

Micro Focus Service Manager OverviewUNIXBusinessApplication

Micro Focus Service Manager is #17 ranked solution in top IT Service Management (ITSM) tools and #23 ranked solution in top Help Desk Software. PeerSpot users give Micro Focus Service Manager an average rating of 6 out of 10. Micro Focus Service Manager is most commonly compared to ServiceNow: Micro Focus Service Manager vs ServiceNow. The top industry researching this solution are professionals from a computer software company, accounting for 28% of all views.
What is Micro Focus Service Manager?

Service Manager on SaaS provides you with a cloud-based, industry leading IT Service Management solution.

Micro Focus Service Manager was previously known as HPE ITSM, HPE Service Manager.

Micro Focus Service Manager Buyer's Guide

Download the Micro Focus Service Manager Buyer's Guide including reviews and more. Updated: January 2022

Micro Focus Service Manager Customers

resultspositive, Globicon

Micro Focus Service Manager Video

Micro Focus Service Manager Pricing Advice

What users are saying about Micro Focus Service Manager pricing:
"I would say that identify your requirements and pay for the support to implement and test those requirements, and then hope that you did a good job because the cost of their service is fairly expensive."

Micro Focus Service Manager Reviews

Filter by:
Filter Reviews
Industry
Loading...
Filter Unavailable
Company Size
Loading...
Filter Unavailable
Job Level
Loading...
Filter Unavailable
Rating
Loading...
Filter Unavailable
Considered
Loading...
Filter Unavailable
Order by:
Loading...
  • Date
  • Highest Rating
  • Lowest Rating
  • Review Length
Search:
Showingreviews based on the current filters. Reset all filters
ITCS user
PPM Services Director at a tech services company with 51-200 employees
Real User
Top 5Leaderboard
Incident management with good support but the configuration and reporting could be simplified
Pros and Cons
  • "It can adapt to any process in the organization."
  • "With the new version moving toward the codeless configuration is good, but it's losing flexibility."

What is our primary use case?

We implement some modules of this solution for our clients, mostly we did the integrations with the MF PPM. They are a medium-size development that focuses on a particular functionality.

What is most valuable?

It's flexible in terms of configuration and making changes. It can adapt to any process in the organization. It can be customized.

It's a new version with a fresh interface and incident management. The SMAX is the most recent that I remember and behind that is the smart service, it's a smart search when entering the system, it automatically recognizes an incident, takes a screenshot and opens a ticket. It's nice progress made to the user interface and incident management.

The codeless configuration is more simplified. Most of the customer's requirements can be done without coding, it's simple and very quick.

It has nice charts.

What needs improvement?

The reporting is not very strong. it can be improved. Customers need to combine different data from different sources to the same report, but it's quite difficult to do. You have to do it with many different versions.

With the new version moving toward the codeless configuration is good, but it's losing flexibility. There should be a larger selection of configuration tools made available to allow some parts of coding to be codeless and others allowing you to make some coding for business rules and workflow. You need some coding ability and functionality. It is difficult to find a customer who doesn't want to make any kind of customizations. It comes with many limits making it very difficult especially with on-premises customers.

I like the support but they could improve.

In the next release, I would like to see improvements made to reporting and the dashboard. Also, I would like to see the configuration simplified without losing flexibility. The best model that I have seen was with PPM where you can provide some coding with flexibility allowing you to configure to the customer's requirements but having limitations at the same time, but they are meaningful limitations that are easy to negotiate with the customer explaining that it is to prevent it from being a completely customized tool that will be very difficult to maintain, upgrade and update the versions. I would like to see a balance between the two. Flexibility plus simplifying the configuration.

For how long have I used the solution?

I have been familiar with this solution since 2013. We work with this solution based on the customer's needs. It was periodically job and experiance until 2018.

What do I think about the stability of the solution?

There are always some amount of known issues in any tool, but I can conclude that the solution is stable, as long as all hardware and software recommendations and requirements are met. There were between one to two hundred employees in operating.

How are customer service and technical support?

I have contacted the technical support team. We had open tickets with them, especially with the last year.

The technical support is ok, we have dealt with them for many years.

I would rate them a seven out of ten.

How was the initial setup?

It's quite straightforward.

It only took one day to deploy for our testing purposes, but for customers, it can take anywhere from one to three days to ensure that all of the technical requirements are met. 

What about the implementation team?

We implemented it ourselves.

What other advice do I have?

I would recommend this solution. It's a classic with an operating system that can easily adapt and be implemented.

70 to 80% of the time with different cases the customer's requirements can be met.

The customer can start to implement the incident management with just one post. if you feel that you want to add more, you can add the change management, it can be implemented step by step.

There is always a place for improvement.

I would rate this solution a seven out of ten.

Which deployment model are you using for this solution?

On-premises
Disclosure: My company has a business relationship with this vendor other than being a customer: Partner
David Babcock
Principal at a tech services company with 51-200 employees
Real User
Top 5
Allows us to track and identify trends, but is not user-friendly for knowledge management
Pros and Cons
  • "Incident management is the most valuable because we're using it to manage tickets for an accounting system. With the reports that are available, it allows us to track and identify trends at the type and item level. It also helps us in managing the workload better than what we had in Remedy, which is what we were using before 2013."
  • "We aren't able to take emails that come in and turn them into tickets, especially when it comes to attachments. When an email has an attachment, like a screenshot, it is a very cumbersome process, and it does not work very well. I shouldn't have been paying technicians to cut and paste attachments from an email into the ticketing system. It should do that automatically. Other solutions are able to do that. This is something that needs to be improved. Test manager and knowledge management areas are probably amongst the worst parts of this solution. We try to use this solution for knowledge management, but it is not user-friendly. Therefore, it has limited ROI as you need to spend time to try and fully capitalize on the knowledge management system."

What is our primary use case?

We predominantly use it for incident management, change management, and knowledge management.

What is most valuable?

Incident management is the most valuable because we're using it to manage tickets for an accounting system.

With the reports that are available, it allows us to track and identify trends at the type and item level. It also helps us in managing the workload better than what we had in Remedy, which is what we were using before 2013.

What needs improvement?

We aren't able to take emails that come in and turn them into tickets, especially when it comes to attachments. When an email has an attachment, like a screenshot, it is a very cumbersome process, and it does not work very well. I shouldn't have been paying technicians to cut and paste attachments from an email into the ticketing system. It should do that automatically. Other solutions are able to do that. This is something that needs to be improved.

Test manager and knowledge management areas are probably amongst the worst parts of this solution. We try to use this solution for knowledge management, but it is not user-friendly. Therefore, it has limited ROI as you need to spend time to try and fully capitalize on the knowledge management system.

For how long have I used the solution?

I have been using Micro Focus Service Manager since 2013.

What do I think about the stability of the solution?

If you are talking about the performance from a software perspective, then we have had no issues with that.

What do I think about the scalability of the solution?

Scalability is probably fairly good if you are willing to pay for it. It can be very pricey.

We have a worldwide system, but only about 120 people are inputting, tracking, or managing through Micro Focus Service Manager. From an ITIL perspective, we have people from all three levels using it, that is, level one, level two, and level three. We have administrators who can go in and back out and create types, items, systems, and things like that. Everybody else is pretty much just a regular user. They don't have a whole lot of roles within Micro Focus Service Manager.

How are customer service and technical support?

When we started, the support was great because we were paying for it. Once we stopped paying for their subject matter experts, it was not stellar by any stretch. At the moment, I would probably rate them a four out of ten.

Which solution did I use previously and why did I switch?

We were using Remedy, and it wasn't robust enough in our opinion. We wanted an integrated system not only for incident management but also for change management and testing. Remedy didn't provide that at the time, and Micro Focus did.

How was the initial setup?

It was complex, but that was not all Micro Focus' fault. It was the fault of too many users trying to have their little niche specifically programmed into Micro Focus Service Manager.

What's my experience with pricing, setup cost, and licensing?

I would say that identify your requirements and pay for the support to implement and test those requirements, and then hope that you did a good job because the cost of their service is fairly expensive.

What other advice do I have?

I would rate Micro Focus Service Manager a five out of ten because it does what it needs to do. It is not bad from that perspective, but it clearly has room for improvement.

Which deployment model are you using for this solution?

On-premises
Disclosure: I am a real user, and this review is based on my own experience and opinions.