IT Central Station is now PeerSpot: Here's why

ServiceNow CMDB Room for Improvement

RD
Principal Consultant at a tech services company with 10,001+ employees

There are costly changes here and there. For example, it becomes difficult for us to identify the volume of patents. What we do is we fundamentally de-market and compare against the best and to another product that we were using before, which had some features that we didn't. For example, we use BMC Discovery. BMC Discovery has heaps of patents written using the TPL. BMC Discovery is a primitive tool and it's been in the market for a while. You would expect a lot more packages to be there. In ServiceNow, we are not there yet. It's less mature. 

There should be a few more classes here and there. For example, there are people who keep talking about Apple devices. They need to be taken into account, and they are not. Sometimes, we have certain rules and regulations of CIs and how we can pick up only those CIs which are operational to a change and describe non-operational ones. When you work with load balancers, when they're off, they obviously go into a non-operational mode.

We, from a process side, need to understand certain areas where we need to blend in. I would think that, for example, Network Gear would be a separate class under the config item parent. However, now, it's come under the hardware. That makes sense. 

I see the table called serial number that should be a lot more efficient and maybe that's the way we have configured it. That's where we are doing a shabby job - our duplication rules were on the serial number and the serial number table. The serial number table itself is a volatile table that keeps fluctuating from time to time. Things like that have to be eventually delivered. They keep coming, they keep coming. 

I don't think there are any pain points. It's just that we love to understand from a process perspective where we need to rectify ourselves. The tool is made a little differently and we need to figure it out. Our process cannot be stubborn and say the tool has to blend with the process. As an organization, we are very strong in our process. We expect the tool to cater to us whenever we tweak things and mess them up. However, when you tweak something, you need to be able to go in and clean it up and not think it will sort itself out. You need to put a patch. However, if you put a patch on a patch on a patch you've entirely screwed up the tool.

The tool has given you the provision to do the customization, however, you need to be strategic about what you do. You need to be careful in terms of writing. When you say SCCM is a secondary source of truth, for example, you need to be sure what activities you want from there. If you have multiple tools that are going to ingest data into the CMDB, you need to be careful of what rules we write to ensure that they fall in place. 

View full review »
KD
ServiceNow Developer / Analyst / Administrator

They can improve the mobile application and the TGO tool, which is a built-in tool for development and implementation. As a developer, it is very frustrating to configure or customize the mobile app. In my opinion, this part of the application needs full rework and re-engineering.

View full review »
MZ
ITSM Consultant

There's room for improvement in terms of integration. When we integrate a customer's foundational data, we get the core of their business from the integration. Because the process is not done through scripting, getting elected in the administrative solution can have value.  But with ServiceNow, there is sometimes an added risk for the workflow in the activity.

View full review »
Buyer's Guide
ServiceNow CMDB
July 2022
Learn what your peers think about ServiceNow CMDB. Get advice and tips from experienced pros sharing their opinions. Updated: July 2022.
620,987 professionals have used our research since 2012.
Ian Hill - PeerSpot reviewer
Service Architect at IDH Consulting Limited

Within the CMDB and managing the assets, ServiceNow works really well. However, it needs to integrate with other toolsets, such as scanning tools. That way, you can bulk upload and bulk transfer assets between sort location and sort location. The E2E solution has a huge dependency on scanning tools and ServiceNow lacks integration with scanning tools. That is actually one of the biggest challenges.

I would like to see them partner with some key scanning technology companies to give them a real end-to-end offering.

View full review »
MH
Solution Sales Consultant at a tech services company with 51-200 employees

There are some gaps in the technologies that can be solved. Operational technology isn't quite 100% there yet, but I hear it is on the roadmap.

I would also like it to be cheaper.

View full review »
Tapan Kumar - PeerSpot reviewer
Solution consultant at smithen nephew

There is some customization we need from the customer side. 

In some cases, we are having issues. 

I can say one experience I had on the VMware side when we are using the change management we had to select from the VMware CI in the change management configuration items. A while back, we were having some issues with modifications and we tried to reach out to support and ServiceNow. They have some limitations on helping us. Apart from that, everything was allowed in terms of us modifying based on the requirements from the customers.

View full review »
Massimo Boano - PeerSpot reviewer
Chief Operating Officer at Solve.It

An area for improvement in ServiceNow is the reporting because there are reporting features that would be better when done within the platform, rather than having to buy the performance analytics model. There is a greater difference between the dashboarding that you can do from the platform versus what's on the performance analytics model. Some of the features currently available within performance analytics would be good to have within the platform because sometimes, customers will say that the tool is okay, but it's not enough, so you'll need to go with the performance analytics model, and that's costly.

The problem is that paying extra for performance analytics costs too much for what it can give back. Customers don't need the entire functionality delivered by performance analytics, but the default functionalities within the platform are not enough. There is always a trade-off. Customers are not getting value for money paid for the performance analytics model because they don't use the whole set of functionalities, and that is the problem.

For the time being, there isn't an additional feature I'd like to see in the next release of the tool.

View full review »
RO
COO at a renewables & environment company with 1-10 employees

You need to perform additional planning because their recommendation is not to add columns to the core tables. Their recommendation is always to add related lists, which is the best route to go. From an improvement standpoint, I like it because it can even maintain your upgrade pattern, but in some cases that may not be applicable. From a processing standpoint, a development standpoint, their processes of building the related lists is okay. It can be done right now; you just have to kind of think forward and you should make sure that people do it that way.

Every interface goes through updates and modifications. So right now, ServiceNow overall, in regards to having multiple screens open at the same time, you can do it, but if you try to go back, it loses its reference point as it uses a browser-based model as opposed to a tab-based model — it's window-based in other words.

View full review »
Gretchen Niehaus - PeerSpot reviewer
Manager-Server Support at First Bank

We do some of the programming for the queries and tables, and maybe some of that could be out of the box.

I wish we didn't have to pay for additional modules. For example, the vulnerability module is at an additional cost so that we can pull the Qualys scans and actually have automated tickets involved. If that workflow can also be part of that, it would be nice.

It would be good if there's a logic that we've already closed or for which we've mitigated the vulnerability that it would automatically close an incident ticket. We still have to put logic to and build some programming or code for this at present.

View full review »
Tarun Arora - PeerSpot reviewer
Consultant at HCL Technologies.

Right now, it's a one-sided integration, which means that whatever information is available in SLCN, for example, the mixer will capture the information. Therefore, there are scenarios where some of the CIs get retired. It does not really update their status. For example, We have 10 servers. Two were retired, so they were not updating anything. For the rest of the eight, they updated information. However, for the two which were retired, there needs to be a modern option for modifying the state as well in mid-server. 

The need to work on how the Virtual Machine Centers are being discovered, and how the Cloud's CI is being discovered and flagged.

The initial setup is a bit complex. 

The scalability capability could be improved. 

The pricing could be more competitive. 

View full review »
JonathanBarmettler - PeerSpot reviewer
Senior Consultant | Technical Infrastructure Project Manager

There are areas that could be improved, but that's a longer discussion. It all depends on what you are looking to do with it and then it becomes an issue of how do you configure the CMDB accordingly.  If I were to make one set of suggestions it would be how we defined deployments which would link back to instantiations.  Deployments would need to handle varying degrees of customization and granularity that integrate with Application Services and Business Applications.

View full review »
ES
Configuration Manager at a educational organization with 10,001+ employees

In general, the pain points are related to ServiceNow. There is a lack of development. ServiceNow is not a true configuration management tool. So, a lot of development is needed to get it to be the kind of tool that you would like it to be. It serves as a platform, and you only get out of it what you invest in terms of development. So, CMDB on its own isn't quite robust until you actually have a CMD project to make it robust. The same thing is there with asset management and all other parts of it. Out of the box, it's not competitive with a like-for-like application. 

It's pretty robust, but there is the limitation of implementing the ITSM functions in the tool.

View full review »
DB
Principal Service Managment Consultant at a tech services company with 10,001+ employees

When running large queries within the system, it does have a tendency to bog down the system. This is something that should be improved. I would also like to see the HAM Pro module beefed up a little bit and integrated better into the SAM Pro module, which seems to be pretty much on the roadmap.

Its pricing is pretty complicated and always fluctuating. Its pricing should be improved.

View full review »
Sunil Satyanathan - PeerSpot reviewer
Technical solution leader at Kyndryl

Definitely, the price needs to be lower because there are clients that I work with who cannot afford ServiceNow. I have to end up proposing alternate solutions to fit their budget.

View full review »
LE
uCMDB SME at NOVA

All areas of the solution have room for improvement. I mean, it's a never-ending thing, everything's being improved all the time. Because I'm an SME, the most important thing is the technical help that I can get, so better, more useful technical support would be good.

I also think the solution would be better if it was more intuitive.

View full review »
NJ
ServiceNow ITSM/ITOM/SAM/CMDB Technical and Implementation Consultant at Doublelight Technology Limited

The initial setup can be very bad if the roadmap is not set up properly. You need a specialist to help you set up the roadmap.

View full review »
Buyer's Guide
ServiceNow CMDB
July 2022
Learn what your peers think about ServiceNow CMDB. Get advice and tips from experienced pros sharing their opinions. Updated: July 2022.
620,987 professionals have used our research since 2012.