ServiceNow Reviews

Our primary use case is comprehensive reporting for our business and our regulators.

We began by extending ServiceNow capabilities within IT, which gave us a clear understanding of what we could do with it, and then expanded from there. We had many business processes that ran on legacy systems and spreadsheets. That created unacceptable risk and cost. That means we can focus on core functionality rather than having to build all of the application scaffolding and platform capabilities by ourselves

ServiceNow is the central hub for our data services. It takes in orders from our front-end CRM system and drives end-to-end fulfillment workflows. That starts with entitlements, which is checking whether a customer has all the necessary contracts in place. For example, if we’re providing access to third-party content, does the customer have appropriate contracts with the content vendor?

Then, we use ServiceNow to orchestrate the actual technical fulfillment process. This includes ordering circuits to connect to the customer’s premises and configuring our own backend systems, which ties into our core IT processes on ServiceNow. Once the service is up and running, ServiceNow provides reporting and notifications to support billing and financial forecasting.

ServiceNow gives us a lot for free: workflows, organizational structures, service portal, forms, reporting, disaster recovery, and so on. That means we can focus on core functionality rather than having to build all the application scaffolding and platform capabilities by ourselves. That saves us at least 50% on development effort, and because we’ve got a consistent platform framework, we also get a lot of reuse. That makes it easy to consolidate and retire applications built on legacy tools.

For example, Lotus Notes; we can modernize and save costs. In fact, since we started out, we’ve built more than 20 custom ServiceNow apps and our team is still fewer than 10 people, including QA.

Integration capabilities can improve. ServiceNow has a roadmap, however, native integrations in addition to the citizen-developed scopes would be ideal.

The pricing seems confusing, with the integration hub being most confusing.

I believe our firewall rule change request form is a custom form, but it has a serious drawback. If I submit such a request and need to make a correction to it before it is approved, there isn't any way for me to do so. The request has to first be rejected with the creation of a sub-task in order to edit it before it is resubmitted for approval.

We have been using ServiceNow for two years.

Stability-wise, this product is very good.

The scalability is good.

The technical support is very good.

This is a SaaS product. The customization and development of custom apps bit time-consuming.

Our deployment was vendor assisted. It was expensive but good.

I am not in the finance department; however, incident reporting and resolution have been much better.

The setup cost is high compared to others, especially when the scope is not fixed.

We looked at several options and decided that ServiceNow was the best choice. And it was because the rollout was highly successful.

Highly Customizable, Easy to integrate with third party applications, Configurable with little knowledge, Appealing UI, Automates processes.

By automating processes it has increased efficiency and productivity. As it was easy to understand customers easily adopted it.

A global search should be present OOB which can locate anything in the system like any piece of code or any sys id or any record so that we don't have to goto to each module for searching it.

More than 4 years.

No.

No. Very stable.

No.

Very prompt and efficient customer service.

Very good.

No.

It was straightforward and quite easy to deploy.

It has resulted in increase of efficiency which is our ROI.

Highly recommended.

The single record system, that you have all the data in one platform you can use and bind a lot of applications for different topics - that's very cool. It's also easy to use for the customers. Everybody knows what to do and where to click. You can try it and it's very fast. An example is incident application and of course, the Service Catalog, if you have a problem with the service catalog or a workflow, then you can open an incident.

ServiceNow is easier than existing systems, for example, HP Service Center. It's easier to use and every user wants to have it as simple as possible. If it's simple, you can work faster with it.

You can use standard functionality like add a wall to a group and then the user gets to sign and everything's fine. You can create ACL's, that's also good. If you like to split the users or the rights, what a user can do, then there are less walls. If you want to develop very quickly with ServiceNow, then you need the admin wall. If you have a lot of users, a lot of developers on a single platform, probably not everybody knows what the other ones do and you have, of course, different quality and experience of the developers. It's very fast to develop or change something that has a large impact on another solution. ServiceNow should provide a better kind of developer wall or something similar, whereby developers have a lot of rights. You're not the admin but can do and change everything.

We've been using it for around five years.

Deployment is specific to us because we have an on-premise installation. We have different servers and different security zones. The out-of-the-box functionality to retrieve an updates ad, for example, it's very nice and easy to use. It's okay, but if you're in different security zones in your infrastructure, then it's a little bit harder. It depends on how the developer know ServiceNow and how the process is defined. It's not a problem of ServiceNow.

There have been issues because of our customer as they wanted an on-premise installation. It's different than cloud solution. Stability is not a problem now. If there was a problem, then it was an infrastructure problem, not a problem of ServiceNow.

We are also using HP Service Center. We are consultants of it, and HP Service Center is also a good product. It depends on what the customer needs and how the customer wants to customize as to which solution they are offered.

ServiceNow is faster, easier to use, and configure. Also, if you have customizations you can use a lot of out-of-the-box features of ServiceNow and it's really simple to change something.

Depends on the requirements, of course. It was easy. It was good to develop something. If you try to use out-of-the-box functionality and your customer likes it, then it's okay. We also have huge and complex customizations, but they are working.

You should take the administration training and also the implementation specialist, and bring someone in. The best thing is if you have experience, since if you change something or see and do it by yourself, then you understand the whole system and how ServiceNow works.You understand what is the big advantage of the different configuration possibilities. If someone doesn't like to write code or JavaScript it's OK as you can use the configuration, but you need to understand what ServiceNow is, and how ServiceNow works.

We use it for our service desk as well as for some asset management.

Last year, there were three steps for installing or uninstalling software when a user asked us to do so. We had to connect to a user's computer and manually install or uninstall the software. By using ServiceNow, when a user opens a ticket or incident, we can automatically run the workflows through the system. The assistant can automatically go to the user's computer and install or uninstall the software.

The Workflow feature is the most valuable.

The Software Asset Management feature can be improved. We would like to see more features for the Software Asset Management functionality. 

Its price can also be better. It is currently more expensive than other solutions.

I have been using this solution for one year.

It is really good. There is no downtime.

It has really good scalability. We have around 1,000 users using ServiceNow.

Their technical support is good. They also have a very good forum and blog through which we can share experiences with other users.

The initial setup was complex. We had to add some consulting services behind the scenes to build up the ServiceNow environment. The deployment took four months.

We used an integrator. They were not so good. They were more like a box mover. They were more interested in selling ServiceNow than providing a professional service.

I am from Brazil. For Latin American markets, ServiceNow is very expensive as compared to other vendors, such as VMware.

We evaluated Serviceaide. We found ServiceNow to be a broad and wide solution. There are more models that we can buy in the future. For example, if I want RPA or artificial intelligence, I can buy it as an upsell or cross-sell.

I would recommend this solution to others. It is a very good product. It is very stable, and there is no downtime. They also provide good services.

I would rate ServiceNow an eight out of ten.

For me, it's basically the ITSM rules of ServiceNow. You can help the companies and all that stuff with their assets as well and all their service catalogues. It's a pretty complete platform that you can basically create whatever you want.

For us, we can have all the information organized, all PIR processes. We can have, as I said before, all of our equipment, assets, and employee control all in one small place.

Some of the things which I've seen that they're improving now, it was the UI. It was a pretty basic UI which needed improvement. Now with Angular and stuff like that, making it more responsive, that is very helpful, but they need to work on the UI more.

They don't seem to have that major impact. It's not a huge difference. Maybe from Fuji to Geneva it might have changed a bit, but we didn't see it to Helsinki.

The performance also depends on if you have too many changes, depends on the script and the developer that has worked on that instance. In the out of the box service, no, I haven't had any performance issues.

For the most part it's easy. It depends on what the user wants, but most of it is all easy. They have the business rules, client script, everything is basically ready for you to develop.

The cloud is the future, so you want to have everything in the cloud, everything organized, everything in one place. Basically, that's it. The cloud is the future.

We use this solution for Service Management, iCast Management, and Software Management.

There are several use cases, you can use them in Education and in Health. We are using the latest version, which is called Paris.

I like the ease of use. I also like the flexibility.

It's not user-friendly by default, but it can be customized to be customer-friendly.

I have been using ServiceNow for three years.

It's a stable solution.

This product is scalable.

We have approximately 50 users.

We are going to continue to use this solution.

I have raised a ticket with the ServiceNow technical support.

I have used other products and switched because of the ease of use of ServiceNow, and the functionality of it.

We have to purchase a license.

The price is okay for us. It's reasonable.

Depending on what it's being used for, I would recommend it.

I would rate this solution an eight out of ten.

Used for the entire company (400K), like HR, service desk and other functions.

Easy to implement and consolidate different platforms and users with useful functionalities.

It has an excellent capability to integrate different access points. It is very user-friendly, too. 

It has a higher cost compared to local/regional solutions. 

Local solutions have lower costs.

I would recommend ServiceNow.

I would say it's that it's web based, relatively open, well integrated into different environment and OSN independent.

I would say database or data visibility. In fact, I think for me, I'm going for the physical side, most of the people like to access data without any constraints. We're in ServiceNow, it's not very easy to access the data on a very simple way. That would be a very good improvement, and you need some specific tools to access data or reporting. Sometimes it's not enough and that's the point.

I've used it for three years now. Partly as a developer and partly consulting with user groups.

I would say yes. Sometime some delay of latency but otherwise it is very stable.

We will see in the future but I think that Helsinki will be a very great improvement for us.

I have nothing to say about support. It's just nice.

We used BMC Remedy, and it was slightly different but we went for ServiceNow because it is more user oriented.

Prepare a very good Service Catalog first. Then you have a very good base to work on and then trying to adapt the interface to the user to the very basic user because it's the main problem we have to face too.