ServiceNow Reviews

The flexibility - we've been able to change it and make it look like our brand, so we have our brand logo on it, etc. We've been able to accommodate a lot of our old customization than we had done in our previous system, we've been able to roll that in, that's some of the niceties with the platform. I think that's one of the biggest advantages for us, is the flexibility to be able to do the dashboards and try to get people more involved in the application rather than running a report.

It allows us to offer a different variety of toolsets for our staff, which our last system was not very flexible in that regard. Allowing my customers to go in and do their own dashboards, write their own reports, change the color of their screens has made them feel more involved and more engaged in the tool. We're seeing more requests for newer things and different things. People are thinking outside the box instead of just thinking inside of it.

As far as the hospital industry, we have not really rolled it out or it's not as big a feature to our external customers right now (the clinicians in the hospital). What we're looking to do though is to provide our outside customers the ability to do more things through the service catalog and have one central location for doing things. We have different systems that do different things, so we can bring them and ServiceNow's platform will allow us to bring all of those items into one spot, so it's a one stop shop. That's what we're looking to do, that's what is best for the hospital.

The training, and that's not the tools, I'm very happy with the tools, it's just I have not been able to get my arms wrapped around it, to be able to do all the multiple things that I want to do. We're still learning it. I was telling someone the other day "I feel like I'm a developer," but then again I'm not really a developer, because I just need that one or two more advanced courses to push me off the edge so that I can get in and do all these great things that people are talking about doing. I just haven't seen that piece.

We did have some performance issues where some of the system areas were slow, but that was really our fault. It was a blip in the lifecycle. I mean comparatively we don't have any downtimes, we've got a hundred percent availability, so we're very happy in that regard. I'm also very happy with their support, they're very engaging and they've been very helpful when we have had problems.

There was a home grown solution as well as an external solution. We had had that solution for over twenty years and it had been through many different partners and many different hands, and it was not very customizable. I think that especially with ServiceNow, it's allowed us to start pushing forward the thought of ITIL within our authority.

That was Service Desk Express. We actually had it when it was Magic Solutions back in 1997, out of Newark, New Jersey. It actually was the lighter version of, it was the smaller offering from BMC.

Ours was very complex. We had several issues because we were not in ITIL shop, and because we were not only changing our tool but really changing the culture of the way we had done things in the past, there was a lot of push back. Having them come in and having ServiceNow's help was good since they did a great job. It wasn't easy, it was kind of a struggle. We did have some issues where we kind of hoped that the vendor that we had brought in to help us with the implementation would tell us what industry standards or best practices were. We didn't see it, we were missing some of those pieces. That made it kind of hard. We also had an executive turnover in the middle of it, so that doesn't help.That hindered our implementation. 

My suggestion to people would be to come and learn about the tool and learn about everything it can do before you make any decisions and before you start your implementation, because if I had to do my implementation over again I would change what I was trying to do. Like we implemented three pieces, or one piece, that really wasn't very helpful and I would have rather have tried something different.

I'd do it. I mean just do it. If you're looking for a flexible tool that's going to grow with you, that's going to expand your flexibility, or expand your team, or expand how you do things and streamline things, I would do it. We've only been on it three years, but we've already done one upgrade, and I was prepared for the worst. I had come into work at midnight, and brought my snacks and sat at the desk and then basically watched the upgrade, and I won't be doing that again. I mean it's just that easy, it really is.

We use ServiceNow for ITSM onboarding. We are customers and I'm a system analyst. 

The solution helps us to collaborate and it's great that it is knowledge-based. We make knowledge-based, easy-to-find information, and you can use the flows in ServiceNow. Those are the most useful features.

Performance could definitely be improved. There may be features I'd like to have that are not activated because of our licensing agreement. I would like to have the ability to access a Gantt chart.

I've been using this solution for five years. 

The solution is stable.

It's quite scalable, we have around 300 basic or IT users which is pretty much everyone in the company. 

Technical support responds very quickly and if there's an emergency, they'll give us a call. 

The initial setup was quite straightforward. We deployed internally with some assistance from ServiceNow who carry out the maintenance. 

This is a very speedy solution so I rate it nine out of 10 on that basis. 

We use it for incidents, incident management, sales management, and problem management. We are very happy with the product.

We are about to upgrade to IT Service Management edition on September.

It enables communication. The benefit is that we can keep track of all the changes and the incidences.

We can keep track of incidences. There is a bucket where we keep all our information, and it enables communication between stakeholders. It helps us collaborate with each other.

We would like to have an Asset Management and/or Project Management feature enabled in this version and in the IT Service Management edition.

The Express edition does not allow the option for scripting.

It is very stable. We have only had five minutes of downtime in three years. 

Compared to other companies, we are small (270 people). Scalability does not affect us.

If it is a high priority, they will respond very quickly. If it is a low priority issue, it might take some time, some three or four days. I would rate the technical support as a 10 out of 10.

We didn't have another solution before ServiceNow.

The initial setup was straightforward, but we did some core customizations. Therefore, we did need more time to finish setting it up.

I would recommend it as a product.

Most important criteria when selecting a solution: 

• Stability
• Reputation in the market
• Is the product well-known?
• How long has the product been offered?

It's all about the level of usefulness ServiceNow brings to IT. They all affect legacy systems, so if you compare it with other tools, the edge which ServiceNow was there from day one. Usability, application customizations and ease of building your own product within the tool was a very positive edge for ServiceNow to be leaps and bounds beyond the market tools.

We have done multiple implementations across various industry structures, industry verticals like manufacturing, automobiles, healthcare, aerospace, and federal government implementations. All these implementations are different in its each unique way based on how many users use it, the locations of those users and all that. What I'm trying to say is even if there are multiple customizations, the number of users are different, we've never seen any stability issues compared to other industry leading tools. It's pretty stable.

Definitely discovery software and management. Then talk about CMDB, how they arrange all those CMDB tables. Those are a few areas of improvement that they can make better.

I've been using ServiceNow for the past six years. From the initial days where they were on a on-premise implementation, I've been using ServiceNow products.

8/10 - because when you're talking about scalability there are a lot of factors. You're talking about user scalability, we're talking about application scalability, talking about what ServiceNow can achieve. They are very good with custom applications, building capability, and the ability to maintain them. The only thing is once you kind of get into that part, then when you do upgrades you're probably going to need to work on those custom applications to make sure everything works fine. Apart from that, they're a pretty robust and scalable platform for workload.

They're responsive. Knowledgeable - it's kind of questionable because the problem they are also facing is expanding leaps and bounds. Everybody wants to get on the ServiceNow bandwagon. They're probably also having issues with resourcing and training those people to kind of address the right questions and all that. Each and every problem is unique so there's a need to find a senior resource and assign the ticket. The whole addressing duration, issue disintegration, would definitely take longer in case of your level one is not so equipped. That's what I observed.

It's straightforward.

The ease of use is great, whether it be for someone like me who's an administrator and developer, or just the end user in general. The fact that it's cloud-based, so you can access it from anywhere as long as you have a browser, or a smartphone. The overall ease of use is great.

The whole mobile aspect seems to be the key. People are still working, they’re not at their desks, so they need an easy way to work. I think that's going well in that direction. It seems like ServiceNow as a company has a pretty good vision on where they are, where they should be and it really matches up well with what we're looking to do.

We've been using it for just about a year now.

The availability has been great. Any issues we've come up with we've been able to easily rectify with working with support, so I would say it's definitely great.

Right now we pretty much just deployed it for IT use. We're getting ready to deploy it for some of our organizations outside of IT like our broadcast operations, our repeater, even facilities, so I think the future is looking good.

Probably the best that I've ever dealt with. Really knowledgeable. Usually pretty quick on getting back with you. Their website, wiki, and community are great. Probably the best support I've ever dealt with in my twenty plus years in the industry.

I've been in this industry so long. Prior to this I'd been working with Remedy for about fifteen years or so. This takes me back to the really old Remedy days when it was a really great product, before they were bought out by a big company, where there was a great community and great conferences.

It's pretty straightforward. We worked with a partner, Logic Callus to help us get setup. We had a hard date because we were coming off of an existing cloud system, so we had to really push hard to make it in that time frame, but we were up and running incident change, problem, and service catalog in two months. Basically what we had allotted for. It was pretty seamless.

I would tell you to take a look at it. It's a great product. Get a demo and get familiar with it, because you can pretty much do anything you need to do with it.

Its integrated process data-model is a feature that's valuable for us.

It's provided a platform to provide Process as a Service.

The usability and user experience is a really big issue and needs to be improved.

We've used it for five years.

We encountered no issues with deployment.

We encountered no issues with stability.

We encountered no issues with scalability.

In our experience with technical support, we found that first-level support is pretty mediocre and second-level support is just adequate.

I used a custom solution in the past, but switched to ServiceNow.

The initial setup was straightforward. The only complexity was in the business requirements given by those trying to customize it to do something outside of the native configuration.

We used a mixed team of in-house and vendor.

Vendors tend to do what the customer wants, which is the wrong approach. Always start out understanding the native function of the tool, then you adapt your process to fit the tool, not the way around.

We are still waiting for ROI to be realized, and are unsure yet of the value due to adoption issues.

You should focus on the adoption more than configuration.

Our primary use cases are for service management, incident, change, problem, asset, and lifecycle. The system was build and integrated to SAP as a backend ERP?CRM system. This made integrations and choices in functionality complicated. However, by replacing Symphony as a rather internal orientated system, ServiceNow gave us the benefit of tight customer integrations by means of the web-based portal, which is a user-friendly interface to use and actually helps speeding up incident handling by improved communication and information sharing.

It gave us professionalized, faster incident turn around times. Improved quality of information shared with our customers. Over time we build an extensive knowledge base that assists in both self-service as in services provided by the servicedesk when handling incidents.

Because we first redesigned our internal and external processes we were able to effectively roll out and implement ServiceNow, sequentially per workflow, and put the lessons learned in earlier implementations to work for us. Overall is has improved service management on CSM.

There is one platform and many solutions. Workflows are well designed and robust. All user screens have the same look and feel, helping to understand the logic of the supported workflows. Integrations to third parties are strong and build on on off the shelve API integrations which makes them quite easy to build. ServiceNow is built on the best practice framework ITIL and helps customers organize their organizations accordingly. Although many trainings need to be completed, this assures a proper knowledge level at the users.

There should be fewer clicks and faster integrations between solutions. Too much information needs to be entered when transferring between solutions. Obvious logic does not always seem to apply when transferring tasks between workflows. Having said this, the availability of these many workflows and solutions on one platform is the strength of ServiceNow. 

New development of new features is not as flexible as one would expect, global adherence to rules and regelations seem to bog down the development and release process.

I have been using ServiceNow for six years. 

It is very stable.

We haven't met the limitations.

Their support is not experienced. 

We did use Symphony which was very internal oriented and needed a step towards our customers. Servicenow provided us the possibility to interface with numerous different customers in different countries as well as third parties. 

The setup was complex due to country dependencies and integrations.

We deployed in-house.

Licensing model ServiceNow is expensive, so monitor actual use.

Yes, TOPdesk and BMC

make sure you prepare your processes and workflow before implementation, choices made at the implementation stage are carried over into your actual work. The tool basically support all imaginable workflows, although this requires a high level of knowledge, customisation and  coding.

I find the product to be valuable because even before they started really pushing it as a platform as a service, that is the biggest reason as to why I leaned towards its purchase two years ago; it's platform as a service. We didn't really purchase it as a SAS product. It's valuable to us because we do a lot of custom development on the platform.

We could have chosen many different platforms but for lack of a better word, it was the easiest to be able to move to, taking all of our existing processes and data from different sources. It was born in the cloud so we didn't have to worry about all of the nuances of being able to ensure that it would work as a cloud application. That was a big piece and it already had a service, although rudimentary, a service portal available with it. I think in the previous versions it's referred to as an ESS portal. With Fuji on forward I think they refer to it as a service portal.

If you look at the number of support calls that we put into ServiceNow, it's absolutely minimal because we filter. We don't have our users calling into ServiceNow directly and we trained our users, etc. I don't really see the value, monetarily, from what we're spending from a support perspective. Because if we call into ServiceNow it's because we're experiencing something at a much higher level, not something that is an easy fix. It's usually we've recognized performance issues or something like that. Their up time has been satisfactory for the most part.

For the most part, the product is very stable. We host customers ourselves and we know how difficult it is. As a host provider you're not completely 100% in control of everything, you're dependent on other vendors to be up.

We've had three major upgrades since we implemented and there have been no issues. A lot of that has to do with the fact that we followed a very regimented custom development best practice so that we wouldn't interfere with any of their upgrade processes.

It does not necessarily scale from a licensed user perspective, we don't grow as much because our license users are really just our core set of resources within our company that's internal. From an external customer perspective, our customers are international/worldwide, so we have folks from Africa, Singapore, London accessing the system. We went from an initial 8,000 users to double that amount from an external customer.

We also continue to use our own application that we develop which supplements ServiceNow.

We had a lot pushing us to go very fast so we implemented ServiceNow in less than a 90-day period once we actually started progressing to actual implementation. Some portions of just deciding upon the product and all of that took much longer, but once we procured the product and actually set on our way to implement, in less than 90 days we were live.

Advice to peers: It would depend on the problems they're trying to solve. It really would depend on the problems they're trying to solve. As an ITSM solution, I would highly recommend it, first choice. For something else, it would depend.