ServiceNow Reviews

We use ServiceNow for help desks.

ServiceNow is one of the few easiest platforms you can integrate with products like Ansible to automate your workflows.

The solution’s user interface could be improved and given a better design.

I have been using ServiceNow for more than three years.

ServiceNow is a stable solution, and I haven't experienced any downtime with it.

I rate ServiceNow ten out of ten for stability.

Around 500 to 800 users from the IT team and some of the business teams in our organization use ServiceNow.

Overall, I rate ServiceNow an eight out of ten.

Many organizations use this solution for event management. They integrate their monitoring systems with ServiceNow for events and incidents. ServiceNow is also used for the automation of tasks such as the launching of AWS or Azure.

Operations and maintenance costs have been reduced using this solution. We have been able to deliver faster solutions to our customers and track progress using live data. 

ServiceNow is a platform you can use to build an ecosystem. It will help your finances models and can be used for ITSM and ITBM.

I have been using ServiceNow since 2010.

This is a stable solution. 

This is a scalable solution. 

This solution offers good customer support. If there are any issues, their engineers will guide you on how to solve it.

Positive

I am an expert and know how to gather requirements and complete implementations. The initial setup is not complex but someone who is new to this technology, may need assistance from an expert. The time it takes to deploy the solution depends on an organization's requirements. If they want to only implement event management, the timeline would be shorter.

We required an internal architect for implementation and one project manager to maintain the solution. We needed four ServiceNow senior developers and a ServiceNow QA for testing. For a bigger organization, you would need six people. This depends on the number of completion items. If you are using between 100 to 200 completion items, it is easier and you may need fewer people for installation. If you have more than 40K completion items, you would need six to 10 people. 

We have seen a return on investment within three to six months when using this solutions. 

The licensing cost is based on your partnership with ServiceNow and what you have selected for implementation. There is an annual license cost which is calculated based on your number of devices.

You cam purchase ServiceNow for approximately $60 along with one additional day environment, one pro and one day. The ITSM license will be calculated based on the end user and is free of charge. It depends if you are purchasing the enterprise ITSM or standard ITMS. Once you connect with the ServiceNow account manager, they can explain exactly how this will work for your business. 

Before implementing this solution, you should have the ITSM model in place for chain management requests. That is a prerequisite because you cannot perform tasks without it. 

I would rate this solution a seven out of ten. 

We primarily use the solution for ITSM and a little bit of ITOM. However, we don't use it for ITBM.

Role-based access is a 'positive'.

ServiceNow has a feature called Orchestration. In that, you can utilize the tool to communicate with applications and systems to issue commands and perform actions. That's a positive, it's something that does exist in the tool. We are in our infancy in utilizing that.

There's a relatively new feature called performance analytics. It's supposed to provide a lot more information. It's got machine learning and some AI built into it. We're our infancy with that. 

For the nuts and bolts running of an IT organization, I can't really say there's anything lacking, feature-wise.

The solution is relatively easy to use.

One thing I don't care for is the reporting and the way it functions. Exporting a report, from a view,  initiates a rerun of the query in the background - highly inefficient.

In terms of the implementation, there seems to be a dearth of basic table joins, on initial install, necessitating the creation of your own database views to get seemingly related data to act like related data. In other words, it's popular to have incidents linked to changes, and linked to problems, and linked to other types of records. And vice versa, you could have an incidents caused by a change. You could have an incident that has a problem record built off of it. However, there are several modules where, if you don't create table joins - for example, for demand records and demand tasks - between those two, then the only option is pull two reports (one for Demands, one for Demand Tasks), and manually merge them outside of the tool. It's highly inefficient. That is something that is a deficiency within the tool design overall.

The initial setup is a bit complex (could have been designed to be profile-driven, as an alternative).

While I recognize that it's a popular thing to do, due to poor design, update sets have to be moved manually, from platform to platform, easily introducing errors (sequence, origin, etc.)  along the way. I've seen far better promote-to-production schemes with other tools.

I've been using ServiceNow for more than 5 years.

Scales 'up' well.  

Scales 'down' poorly.

The solution is not exactly scalable for a mom-and-pop shop (and SMBs). The costs would be too prohibitive for that.

Someone once said, a bird, no matter the size, has the same number of bones. If you're going to do incident change problem, asset config, things like that, for a mom-and-pop, technically, you have the same number of types of things you need to be concerned about. It's just the volume of how it's being applied. A mom-and-pop store might carry 50 items in its inventory. A large company is going to have thousands upon thousands. Therefore, ServiceNow would not be a good solution for a small organization with few assets. 

If you don't have a full CMDB to begin with it really makes a lot of things awkward within the tool. 

We have 4,000+ 

ServiceNow Technical support needs improvement.

One example - 

Order - (context - business rules) - ServiceNow allows you to have any number of rules with the same order number. 

ServiceNow's official answer to 'how does the database code decide which rule to execute first, when multiple business rules are assigned the same order level?': we have no answer 

(it goes without saying - use unique order levels)

We're just a customer and an end-user.

We started on-prem and then switched to cloud. We switched to the cloud about three years ago.

- fill out the CMDB before you start implementing the tool - make the time.

- plan out table joins as you implement new modules.

I'd rate the solution at an eight out of ten. I would just warn others that it's too easy to incorporate abysmally poor design.

Multi Tenant, Scalable, Flexible and Stable

It has improved out response time to the client

The reporting is very good. 

The solution has very good automation tools.

The solution has been extremely stable so far. 

The need to improve their technical support services. 

Their dashboards are very, very basic. Maybe if they could develop some sort of very good fancy-looking, visible, graphical, visible kind of appearance. 

The pricing of the solution could be better. It's a bit high.

When we are monitoring, for example, a device, an S-Switch, we can create insights. We can segregate the LAN, and create a VLAN. When we create those VLANs, we should be able to monitor those VLANs. The same with storage systems. The LANs, through the cable space level, should be able to be monitored. 

I've been working with the solution for eight or nine years so far. It's been almost a decade. I've used it for a while now. 

The stability is excellent. There are no bugs or glitches and it doesn't crash or freeze. I find it to be reliable. 

The solution works very well for large enterprises. If you have a very, very big setup, it's an ideal option.

Technical support could be better. We are not satisfied with the level of support they offer.

I've also worked with SolarWinds and ManageEngine. I prefer ServiceNow, as there's a lot of automation tools available in that and it's been a stable product. It's been in the market for a long time. It's got a good market reach also.

Very Complex, 13 companies, 9 Towers, 17,000 devices

First time we implemented it through Vendor and we took a training from the OEM and now we have a team to deploy the solution

Not calculated, but I would say 2 years we recover the cost 

Their pricing is relatively high. They are expensive.

Yes,

SolarWinds and ManageEngine

We are not a partner or reseller. I'm a consultant. Before that, I have implemented the products. I've migrated a lot of products, a lot of systems. That's how I have an association with monitoring tools and service test tools.

I differently would recommend the solution if a company is a huge enterprise. For example, if you are maybe looking at more than some 10,000 or 20,000 devices. There should be a minimum of 10,000 devices or 15,000 devices. I would recommend ServiceNow for those setups. For data centers and other things, definitely I would recommend ServiceNow. I would not recommend SolarWinds or ManageEngine for these types of setups. I don't see that much capacity in them. 

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

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.

The solution is being used for our ticketing system.

It is user-friendly and simple to use. 

The solution could be made cheaper. Machine learning and artificial intelligence should be introduced in the next release. 

I have been using ServiceNow for two years. 

The scalability of the solution is good. Presently, ten thousand users are using the solution. I rate the overall solution an eight out of ten.

The initial setup is easy. The deployment was done within a month. 

Overall, I would rate the solution an eight out of ten. 

We used ServiceNow for change management, release management, and event management. We were also making use of the solution's CSI. The modules of ServiceNow were all available to you, and you could use them.

I have a problem with the way the solution's price is calculated.

I have been using ServiceNow for 10 to 13 years.

I rate ServiceNow an eight or nine out of ten for stability.

I would recommend ServiceNow for larger organizations. We used to have an organization with over 10,000 users. In our current organization, up to 3,000 users are using ServiceNow.

The solution’s technical support is fine.

We implemented the solution through an in-house team.

For us, ServiceNow was really good for keeping everything under control. Everything was documented, logged, and on point. The setup of creating things was quite straightforward.

The use and misuse of the CMDB is something important. Since CMDB should be the heart of everything you have, transforming the CMDB into a repository of information is good enough. If you don't use the full management tool, you can have problems. In three months, you will have to review the CMBD again, or you will have to update it once again in six months.

It differs from organization to organization. It will be taken care of in organizations that have clear processes in place. It's not about the tool but about the maturity of the organization using it.

We used to have lots of integrations with our systems to create tickets automatically. We also had some security related event management activities. When we requested to change something in ServiceNow, it was done rapidly in a couple of days.

Have some consultants that have worked with ServiceNow before, help you with the process. You should try to implement ITIL in your organization. If ITIL is not understood by the organization, then you cannot have expectations that they will follow the way of working as they should.

The solution's automation is quite straightforward. You just need to know what you want to automate. There are several ways to integrate stuff and several ways to have some triggers.

Overall, I rate the solution ten out of ten.

I'm a service manager, so I'm mainly focusing on customers' CMDB, incidents, changes, and problem management tasks. We have many global customers with network solutions.

It improved the customer experience. For instance, preference management is very useful to be able to set up automated notifications based on various things, such as site priority, site size, client's importance, and incident's priority. We can configure that only a portion of a group gets P1, P2, or P3 cases. Those features have really improved the relationship with the customers and within the organization. The reporting features and the setup of the customer CMDB file are improving the customer experience, and our internal groups are also able to benefit from them because they are using it daily. If there is an incident, it is an advantage that they don't need to fill out things. The notifications are also sent out automatically. So, they are saving time, and they can focus more on taking care of the customers, communicating with them, and taking up new issues.

I really like ServiceNow and all of the features. The way incident management is built is very helpful. You have a lot of options to optimize it, customize it, and automate it. You also have a lot of options for reporting. There are plenty of possibilities to do preference management within your customer CMDB file. These are very useful features, which I missed in BMC Remedy ITSM. ServiceNow is the best ticketing tool I have used so far.

I have enjoyed all the features. There is not any feature that I have missed or didn't have.

I have been mainly using it for the past three years. I also used it previously for two years, and then I stopped for three years.

It is totally stable. I never had issues with it.

I believe it is scalable.

We were having a lot of issues. It took nine months to fix all of them. Those were mainly because of customer requirements that were not caught firsthand. There were virtual connections, and there were different bespoke elements that we needed to have. That was the reason we had to resolve some technical issues, but they were within our company. It wasn't outsourced to ServiceNow itself.

We had BMC Remedy ITSM. Our ITSM was already outdated. It had no support, and we were looking for a new solution that had all the features we needed. Our first priority was customer satisfaction, but the choice wasn't up to me. It has always been up to the organization. I didn't have the chance to choose. I have just been given a solution.

It was complex because we support network customers. They have dedicated fiber connections all around the world. It was a complex project, and we suffered afterward in terms of missing features and so on, but that wasn't because of ServiceNow. It was rather an internal issue of not allocating enough resources.

The implementation took six to nine months because we needed to prepare the cutoff. We did a pilot phase with dedicated customers, and we tested it first. After that, we rolled it out, and then based on agile, we fixed any production issues. We prioritized them, highlighted them, and we fixed them, which took another nine months. 

We had at least 20 people, but not all of them were for deployment. We have many global customers with network solutions. They are scattered around the globe with different priorities and focuses. It wasn't an easy task to gather all the information about the features that we and the customers require. We were also using two ticketing systems. So, we had to organize and then migrate.

It was deployed around the globe because there were some users in the U.K., Ireland, Germany, Hungary, India, and Egypt. So, it was deployed at several locations.

I would absolutely advise using it. I have been an advocate within our company to change different tools and move different departments to ServiceNow because it's a really useful tool. I would recommend it to others.

I would rate it a 10 out of 10. I'm totally satisfied with it.