ServiceNow Reviews

I'm a ServiceNow consultant and my company is a service provider where we are deploying ServiceNow ourselves on-premises. Here it is primarily used as a service catalog and in BIZBOK-developed services and knowledge management.

As a ServiceNow partner, we also offer it in a ServiceNow-like cloud to end customers and we do consulting and projects with it as a third party. Our current customer sees especially heavy usage of ServiceNow, with between 100-150K accesses per month, and up to a million users who access it in total. We are one of many third parties who are involved in this project.

ServiceNow has helped us with lots of paper saving. It has unified everything in terms of non-IT service requests, with everything in one place.

I find almost all the features valuable. It can do nearly everything except make your coffee, as my colleagues always say. It's got pros and cons, like every software, but the good thing about it is that it has a very structured approach.

Data access is a bit difficult, where you sometimes wish you had a relational database for some queries. The flexibility of data access in general is a bit on the low end. Of course, there is flexibility in some ways, but when I need a certain combination of data for some report, it can become a challenge.

Other than that, there are a lot of minor improvements that could be made such as the debugging functionality in JavaScript, and in terms of use more generally, like joining tables and so on. I think it boils down to an extension of the right knowledge and user criteria.

I have been using ServiceNow for about four to five years. 

The stability is much improved. It's good.

It's difficult to say much about the scalability of ServiceNow because we're on-prem. Our impressions are good, but I don't know how it is in the ServiceNow cloud. Everybody says, "Yes, it's good." But with bad development, you can't maximize the performance of every system.

On the whole, it's good, and there are no real issues. We had lots of performance issues in the beginning, but that hasn't been the case for a long time now. I would say it's definitely had heavy usage, with about between 100-150K accesses per month.

We rarely need the tech support, but if you need help, there is help available.

There's no real alternative on the market currently, from my point of view.

Setup is not my forte, but because we are on-prem you can imagine that the setup is very special because we are not on a standard database nor is it a typical setup such as with ServiceNow in the cloud.

As one of the third parties, we implemented and run ServiceNow in an on-premises setup. For maintenance, it's difficult to say how many people are required. It's typically a handful for deployment and upgrades and so on - basically the IT operations staff. Of course, as a data center and everything behind it, on-prem is always a bit special.

I have seen ROI. I have not calculated it exactly, but we did some estimations and we do have a positive ROI from using ServiceNow.

Some time ago it was expensive, but large companies have special contracts. It's enterprise prices, and we're talking about millions per year.

Stay within the standard. This is the same advice as with SAP: try to stay in the standard and avoid customizing too heavily. I don't mean to say anything about additional development, but instead I would caution against trying to change the standard itself. And keep things simple. In large companies, this is not always emphasized as they tend to think complicated.

I would rate ServiceNow an eight out of ten.

We primarily use the solution to support Airbus Helicopters.

It's great for handling support tickets and onboarding employees.

We have other facilities in the United States with teams in Herndon, Virginia, and Grand Prairie, Texas, and for networking, in Mobile, Alabama. By having our different specialists in different areas, we're able to leverage their expertise over a large geographical area.

They have these items called resolver groups that are quite useful, however, it's basically to assign tickets to various teams.

The onboarding of employees is very good.

It's great for handling new hardware requests or new user requests.

They offer standard templates. The more that you customize it, or add additional software requests, the more it becomes usable and powerful. 

The solution is stable.

The scalability is there if you need it.

My understanding is that the pricing is reasonable. 

ServiceNow is great. You can download the data into Excel and you can basically create reports. It's very flexible.

That features are already there, however, maybe they could have some tutorials or give more power to the users versus having specialist administrators doing things. There's a big knowledge base. There's a lot of know-how that's saved in there, however, actually allowing people to do their own thing is lacking a bit.

I know there are functionalities for using it on other platforms. However, specifically for iPhone or Android, if there's something where I'm walking around and working in different offices, if I'm able to look up information directly, instead of going back to my laptop, that would be ideal. Making a mobile version would be helpful.

It's pretty customized already. I don't think there's anything that would be an area to fix.

I know that I actually have the special panel for all the features that I use, like creating tickets, managing hardware. Anything that can be integrated into especially our other types of features, such as SCCM, Microsoft SCCM, being able to update hardware, instead of manually going inside there would be good.

I've used the solution for the last year.

The solution is pretty stable. The only thing is that it's a cloud version, and therefore, if your network is slow or non-responsive, then ServiceNow becomes slow and unresponsive. That's a network issue. That is not an application issue.

The solution is easy to scale. If we wanted to add other facilities, it would be fairly easy to do. Something that we're going to be taking on in the next year or so is integrating with another facility in Mirabel, Quebec. They do commercial aircraft. We do civilian helicopters. Integrating with that team more will be beneficial. We have around 60 people using it right now.

I personally have never had any issues where I had to raise it directly to ServiceNow. I cannot speak on the topic of support.

The company did use a different solution. It was not as integrated with the other parts of the company, which is why they switched.

The company was using another product before. They implemented this, I would say, within six months. It's been in place for two years now and it's matured.

I was not there for the deployment.

We have one SRM, senior relationship manager, that basically maintains the digital workspace. He's in charge of updating the versions or deploying new features. There's one person that does that.

There are built-in surveys and we track those metrics, and the metrics have been positive for the last two years. There's been a great improvement.

Due to the fact that we're dealing with different subcontractors, we have a company that does the networking and we have a company that does the desktop hardware. If it's more application support or accounting specific, then it goes somewhere else. Being able to bridge between those different subcontractors is a major selling point.

The pricing is reasonable. In terms of extra costs, likely if a company was going to do integrations, they might have to buy the different modules, however, I'm not involved in that.

I'm just a customer and an end-user.

I am currently up to date with the latest version.

I'd advise potential new seers that they'll get good asset management and be able to manage tickets. It's all straightforward and usable. In the past, I've used other products, and they're not that scalable. If you're working in a company that has multiple facilities, multiple countries, the best way to go is with ServiceNow.

I'd rate the solution at a nine out of ten.

We have several applications of the product, however, the main use case is to generate all the backlogs of the different squads where we assign histories and we can link this to concrete people. 

The histories and the tasks that we draft within the histories are used for creating all the burn charts in agile and to show the velocity of how well it was the last sprint in terms of shipments. This is the key purpose. 

We also use ServiceNow to log IT tickets and to trace them. Those tickets can be created directly as a ServiceNow history on the IT squads. This will go directly to their backlog. It is a quite nice interaction.

It's used to manage the sprint in agile to create all the backlogs and to activate the current sprints, to create the burnout charts of the velocity of the sprints, and also to register any IT-related support ticket requests.

When we join the task board we can have a main view that we use on the daily standups in the agile world. It is very easy to navigate across and to move histories around. 

It's great to do statuses or to review tasks. We can open them and get some details and updates. 

It is quite flexible as a system and is very visual.

It helps to keep the daily standards to 15 minutes.

Probably the backlog organization could be a little bit easier in terms of transversality between different squads. It would be nice if we could, with some specific access rights, move histories from one squad to another, as they generate dependencies or duplicate or flag them. We'd like to create dependency charts between different teams. This is something that Jira, for example, used to do very easily.

It would be ideal if there was some sort of Follow button to help users follow certain concrete task histories. That way, if you are following something, you could bet an immediate update when there is a change of status or a new comment or whatever.

In my current assignment, I've been working with ServiceNow since January. However, in the past, I used it from 2016 until 2019. This is my fourth year using ServiceNow.

The solution is stable. It always works. We haven't had any issues. In this case, no news is good news.

The solution is perfectly scalable. What they give you is the framework. In terms of functionalities, every client can customize it. It'll work well for different companies.

The product is widely used in the institution. Likely 90% of head office employees use it. 

I've never really needed technical support. I've used ServiceNow to request technical support on other applications. I was just handed over the minimum standards to use it, and then I learned by doing. It was quite easy.

With my previous client, I used Jira.

I cannot speak to the initial setup. When I started using the solution, it was already in place. I'm not an implementer of it. I'm an advanced user. Therefore, I can't speak to how simple or difficult the implementation process is.

I'm not sure which version of the solution we are currently using. We're likely using the latest as this is a big systemic bank. I'm pretty sure that they are continuously updated with the latest version.

I'm a user. I'm a consultant and scrum master, however, I use a lot of these tools also for agile management work.

This solution works if you invest a little bit of time in preparation. That said, that's the same for other vendors, like JIRA. You need to have efficient scrum cycles and organize them well. You should have efficient planning sessions and all the backlog should be already prepared, drafted, refined, organized, and prioritized. 

What is very important from inception, regardless of whether we're speaking about Jira or ServiceNow, is to have a very clear upfront plan of how you want to structure it. What is the kind of dependencies or links you want to create between different levels of access, for example?

I would advise users to prepare in advance the full strategy of configuration before they start doing anything. It is very hard to change later. You will create technical depth and will call out what you're not going to use. To roll them back once you've started is hard. It is worth it to take time, in the beginning, to try to forecast as much as possible. 

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

Overall, I've been satisfied with the product.

I've found the solution to be scalable.

The stability has been good overall. The performance is reliable. 

It's mostly an intuitive product. It's actually easy to understand. 

Technical support is decent. They are helpful when we have issues. 

The pricing could be lowered. It's pretty high.

We have had a few issues with the Agent Client Collector setup, however, that's probably at our end for some network blocking reason, or something like that.

Their GUI could be updated. It's a little bit old-looking right now. 

I've been using the solution for three or so years now. 

The solution is stable and the performance is good. there aren't bugs or glitches. It doesn't crash. It's reliable. 

The product is scalable. If a company needs to expand it, it can do so. It's not a problem.

Technical support has been fine. We are happy with their level of service in general. 

The price is high. However, I don't pay for it. I'm just an employee. I can't speak to the exact costs. That said, I know it's an expensive product.

While we are working with ServiceNow, we are looking into Device42 to see if that could be used for scanning our infrastructure right now.

While I have used ServiceNow for some time, I'm not an expert. I was sort of admin in a previous company where I worked, however, now I'm only, more or less, a user of ServiceNow. I'm a consultant. 

I'd rate the solution at an eight out of ten, based on my overall experience. 

I previously used the on-premise version of ServiceNow. It was a better fit for companies and banks because of their tech security protocols. But for my work with my current company, I am considering the cloud solution because we already have all the other software components in AWS.

The main features of ServiceNow that I use are incident approval management and the ability to link all the information we receive from the finance bureau service. We needed to track the different processes within the IT area and incident documentation. Then we gathered all the information and built a knowledge base. That's the central core functionality that I've been using, and I've seen immense benefits.

We are elaborating and defining the business processes, so I will believe that we will be able to avoid the older models for the second phase. But first, I wanted to have these incident and asset management models in place as a first phase of the implementation.

I've been using ServiceNow for work I've done with various clients for around eight years. I first used it with Wal-Mart International, and then we used it for one event with Brolin Management. I recently worked with Santander Bank, where we used ServiceNow for all the incident and assets management. Now, I help implement different service management tools at my current company, including ServiceNow.

I think ServiceNow is highly stable. These kinds of tools are used in a big company, and I haven't seen any issues in terms of the core platform. However, if we need to customize something, that would be the point to focus on because this would be something new, not a part of the standard flow for the tool.

I think ServiceNow is scalable in the short term. 

The solution has some built-in monitoring capabilities, so we escalate cases as they come. But sometimes the response to our requests is delayed.

Setting up ServiceNow is pretty standard because we want it to manage incidents and use it for other marketing, construction, and procurement areas. But, still, everything would be based on the different services we provide for their operations area. If you move forward with the cloud, I think the number of internal staff needed would be minor. It probably takes around two people to deploy and manage. In this case, we use some external consultants for all the development and maintenance.

For us, it's better to pay the licenses monthly, and I mean when we move ahead with the cloud deployment. I understand that the service includes hosting and licensing as a service as well as some downgoing costs probably. That will be all on the implementation side. It depends if we need some customization. We will need to consider that part as a consultancy. 

I will rate ServiceNow nine out of 10 because it's a little expensive compared to other tools, but it's a very good product from a technical standpoint.

We use this solution for incident management, change request management, and service request catalog. These are our three primary use cases.

Within our organization, there are roughly 15,000 to 20,000 employees using this solution. We have two staff members that handle all maintenance-related issues. 

As our mission over the next couple of years is acquisition, we definitely plan to increase our usage of this solution. 

We aligned several different service desks onto one platform. There is a cost savings in not maintaining multiple systems. 

I find the incident management part to be the most valuable. That's how the service desk tracks tickets.

They could be more competitive with their licensing. We went to roll out asset management discovery and at the time they charge per network device only and you didn't get a price break until you were at 5k devices. To me, I would change the licensing to discovery of all devices. We made do with SCCM instead, but the limitation with using that is that we can only discovery over one domain. 

CreatorCon is an event for Servicenow customers to show off what they've done with the tool. Servicenow benefits because they can partner with the customer to make a solution a permanent solution in the tool. 

I have been using ServiceNow for 11 years. 

In the 11 years that we've been using it, it's not gone down more than once; and we started with just one help desk on it — we now have five.

If you get the right person, the technical support is pretty good. 

We used to use E-Service — it was horrible. 

Deployment took four weeks. 

A vendor helped us with the implementation. That made things pretty easy. 

Our licensing is on a yearly basis. We normally end up doing a true-up payment because we tend to acquire more people and use more licenses.

Yes, Remedy (Salesforce), SysAid, Cherwell, TopDesk. Cherwell came in a close second. 

My advice is to use a third-party vendor to help with the installation. Keep in mind, some are good, some aren't. You would have to send your staff away for training for about six months before they could even attempt to implement this solution. 

Overall, on a scale from one to ten, I would give ServiceNow a rating of nine. There's always room for improvement, but it's the Cadillac of ticketing systems.

Everything that I've done over the last six years with ServiceNow has been for hospital systems. It was used at different levels for different clients. Many times, it was being used by the whole organization, but my involvement has always been for the department projects. There was significant effort into reporting and dashboards and some automation for approvals. I am currently using its latest version.

Visibility and resource management are the two areas that are improved by the ServiceNow Project Management implementation. The Project Management module provides visibility to leadership. We are able to get accurate dashboards and, more importantly, proper resource management. A lot of this isn't necessarily ServiceNow functionality. It is also a matter of implementation and adoption process.

Before ServiceNow, in the environments I've been worked with, there were a bunch of files, such as Microsoft Project plans or Excel spreadsheets, all over the place, and very rarely anybody had a clear understanding of where we were in the project. By the time they had an understanding, the document used to become dated. 

Being able to have the required information for project management is valuable. I've got multiple people accessing it, and I'm tracking tasks with percentages done. It allows me to have detailed notes and provides the ability to attach documents. I have used a lot of project management solutions, and there were gaps in terms of what was available. ServiceNow has got all the features and functionalities.

It is a solid solution. It is also easy to get into and use. It is certainly highly scalable. 

The reporting, which also includes dashboards, needs to be improved. Both dashboards and reporting require subject matter experts. A lot of end-user configuration and functionality comes with ServiceNow and it is not bad, but when I want to do something slightly more sophisticated, I've got to get a ServiceNow subject matter expert to get those dashboards all set up. One of the big reasons why that's so difficult is that ServiceNow is effectively a whole bunch of databases, and almost every module is fundamentally a database, so pulling information from multiple modules is painful. The key thing here is the Time Tracking piece, which is rather important because that's what helps you automate the percentage done inline. Getting a report that shows combined information from Time Tracking and Project Management into a single view is difficult.

There should be the ability to turn on and off portions of Project Management. I'm not asking them to do a finance portion of Project Management through the interface. Currently, there are hundreds of fields that project managers are looking at and trying to decide whether they should fill them out or not. Being able to configure the user interface without a subject matter expert would be really great. 

When you want to get a little more value out of the product and pull data from multiple modules and do something that isn't built-in and is a user-configurable thing, it gets ugly. Currently, as soon as you install the new version, you've got to go back there and make all those tweaks. There should be just a configuration file that goes to the new version. When a new release comes out and I've tweaked it, I shouldn't have to go back and manually tweak everything again. 

When we look at ITSM pieces, there is a knowledge base that works really well. I feel that the Project Management module does not leverage the knowledge base the way it should. I don't think it needs to be a separate knowledge base. There should be links. Currently, if I am configuring a project and looking at a particular tab or field, and I want to know more details about that, there is no simple way other than to go into the knowledge base and do a search. There is no simple way for me to just click and see the approved knowledge base article about that particular tab or field. 

There is no built-in ability to get to these articles, and the customer would have to build it. All the stuff is in the knowledge base, but I am constantly required to go and do a search and find it. After that, I have to try and figure out if this is the approved one. Most knowledge bases are designed so that your end users can submit articles, at least successful ones. You've got to get the subject matter expertise into the knowledge articles, and there is a clear delineation between the ones that are approved versus the ones that work right. I want both types of articles in there, but I want to be able to delineate which ones are the approved ones and tie them in Project Management. This functionality is already there in some other areas, but it is not there in Project Management. Not being able to link that knowledge base in a more fluid way is a big miss because it just makes adoption much harder.

Resource management should be easier. This is an area where I would love to see an improvement. The nature of ServiceNow is that it tends to be a bunch of fields. It is a bit like an Excel spreadsheet. You're in a software interface, but you've got a bunch of rows and columns. Other than dashboards, there are a lot of rows and columns views that often do not help you to easily see and manage resources. More graphical and more click-and-drag ability around resource management would be really good. The data is in there, and you can run dashboards, reports, and stuff like that, and very often, get the information in a somewhat consumable view. However, it tends to have frozen columns. It would be amazing if they can make resource management a little bit more graphical. There are other solutions that I've seen where resource management was a more visual experience.

I have been using this solution for six years.

From a perspective of it working, there are bugs occasionally, but for the most part, it is very solid. There are always pockets of problems, but when it comes to Project Management, I am yet to see a significant bug or issue. Most of the bugs and issues are more related to a lack of functionality as opposed to something that is broken or bad data. All such functionalities get added in the next version. 

From the perspective of doing what it is supposed to do, it is very solid. My experience has been very good, especially with the most recent release.

It is highly scalable. Once you get over the initial pricing shock, you can have multiple people in there, and you can scale quickly and easily. It is one of those things where you get a better price for more people and most subscription licenses. Technically, it can scale up, but it starts getting expensive.

In the current environment, they have licenses for 180 people who are actively using the Project Management module. They have 30,000 end users, and their users have view-only access to Project Management. Once it is stable, and they are completely comfortable with it, which may be a year or longer, they might potentially expand it to the entire environment. They have 30,000 people in the US, and they also have health systems in South America. So, the total number of users could be between 50,000 to 60,000. Going to South America would probably be two to three years out.

I've got a lot of experience with ServiceNow outside of the Project Management module. Focusing just on the Project Management module, my experiences have been very good. ServiceNow, at least for this particular module, has been smart and only tends to let you get on the phone with somebody who really knows the product. There are not that many support calls typically, and they tend to be just the technical staff that are supporting the module. While you can have end-user support, I've not worked with many customers who buy the support for the Project Management module for anybody who is not actively using it as a project manager, and even those project managers usually rely on the core administrator team. They'll tell them what the problem is, and that core team will call support.

When I've been on the calls with support, which I have done on a regular basis over the last couple of years and certainly with this current customer, I've been very pleased with their knowledge. These are highly technical calls, and it is not what I would call typical support. It is definitely the third-tier support that we are calling and getting, and my experience has been extremely good for the Project Management module.

I've definitely used over 20 project management solutions, but they can't be compared with ServiceNow. Some of them were homegrown, and some of them were built into the electronic medical record solution that was there. 

The current customer I'm working for didn't make a switch. They had made that decision and gone to ServiceNow four years ago. They adopted Project Management probably two years ago. It seemed very logical to go ahead and switch over to ServiceNow Project Management because people were already logging into ServiceNow. About a year ago, in fact, right about the time when COVID hit us, they actually finished the implementation. There have been some hits and misses because the staff resigned and things like that. 

Other customers that I've worked for had either Microsoft Project files or Excel spreadsheets. Many times, they also had a web-based project management solution that literally was a task list with a percent complete and literally four fields per task, and those would be stacked in. A lot of these were more team management solutions such as Microsoft Office 365. None of them is a competitor to what you get from ServiceNow.

It is overly complex mainly because it has a lot of content. There are some out-of-the-box configurations, and there is also a lot of content that is not configurable out of the box. Of course, most organizations aren't mature enough to use the additional content and additional tabs. Typically, the implementers are smart enough to deal with that, but I've worked with customers that weren't smart enough to go ahead and say, "Hey, we need a subject matter expert to come in and install this module." Sometimes, they brought somebody in to do just the bare bone install, and then they wanted to configure it themselves. 

You need a subject matter expert. ServiceNow doesn't always do it, and very often, it is third parties who implement it, but they don't do a great job of educating their customer on what they should and shouldn't do as their initial install. They just say here is the tool to some extent. You should ideally go for subject matter experts that are either recommended by ServiceNow or are directly from ServiceNow. Of course, it gets more expensive as you go up that chain.

ServiceNow could do a better job of prepping their coordinators and supporting this process. It is tough because most of the customers first need training on project management in general before you start teaching them how to use the tool. There is no lack of support. It is just not well-organized and prioritized support. There is a knowledge article for everything from ServiceNow, and all the information is there, but it is not organized in a way, especially for a new user, to say that don't worry about this. We'll get to this later. Here are the things you should worry about, and here are the things that you really should do as best practice. That's the key.

I have been advising and working with implementation teams over the last three years. Every single time, after they implemented and started using it, they started to discover things that they wish they'd known beforehand. That's why it would be good to have an organized set of best practices from ServiceNow saying, "Hey, you're implementing. This is new. You don't have a mature organization that has a bunch of requirements. So, here are the minimum out-of-the-box things that you should enable. We're also going to hide all that stuff that you don't need, and we're going to get these fundamentals working." Guided and organized best practices for organizations that are new to project management would be a huge win for ServiceNow.

It is a cloud product, so it requires just configuration from us. Typically, implementation takes two to three months, which includes all the beforehand and after closeout. You have some meetings, make some agreements, install the product, and get it up and running. Installation would take just two to three weeks, and the implementation would take two to three months because you've got to do training and everything else to truly get it in there. Most organizations also end up having to come back and do remediation that takes an additional three to six months. We're not talking about the setup where everybody is working on it. We're talking about a setup where you've got a small team that is typically working on the issues, coming up with solutions, and then implementing them later. There is usually a three-month to six-month clean-up afterward. It's not uncommon for me to see close to a full year from the first conversation to when they feel like they've got stable, usable, and good reporting coming out of the solution.

It was a company recommended by ServiceNow. ServiceNow has got a top-six list, and this was number two on their list. In terms of knowledge and the ability to solve problems, they were very good. Because there are no organized best practices and things like that from ServiceNow to help customers in avoiding mistakes, I've not seen an implementor that does it properly. I am constantly trying to help, but, of course, you also typically have that executive that just wants to get it slammed in. This is because they think that with the tools in place, things will suddenly get better. However, good technology rarely results in good results. You've got to have adoption in order to have good results.

While I'm certainly complaining about some deficiencies, I have been very pleased with this implementor's ability to come in, implement, explain, tweak, and get things right. I have been very pleased with what they do. Deficiencies are more typical of all of the implementers, including ServiceNow.

In terms of maintenance, I have not worked too closely with the PMO staff that does that, but as I understand it, they've got four people. Two are directly involved, and two are more along the lines of training and support. There are really four roles for them. There is one role of subject matter experts who are constantly looking at what functionality is in use and for which functionality they want to start adopting. They look at what can we do with the Project Management tool. They also create a lot of dashboards and reports. The end-user functionality is very powerful, but when you want a dashboard that starts grabbing things from multiple places, it is not easy. They spend a fair amount of time doing that kind of work. They also provide support and spend a fair amount of time troubleshooting the data, which isn't because the product isn't working correctly. It is because the users aren't correctly using it. They also simply look at the data for management. They kind of audit the data to see that what we know and what we're hearing in the status update meetings matches what's in the tool. When it doesn't match, they audit the content and figure out whether there is a problem. All four of them probably spend at least 30% or 40% of their time doing that audit process, sitting in meetings, hearing what's going on, looking at the status reports, matching those up with what's in the tool, and making sure that it matches.

That's a tough call. I would say yes, but I don't think that many of the customers are calculating or tracking that sort of thing. From my perspective, when we say the return on investment, a lot of times we're talking about hard dollars and being able to readily show that my expenses were reduced. The return on investment for most of the project management solutions is improved performance in project management, and therefore, it is a bit of a soft cost saving because of the improved efficiency and ability to deliver projects. That's usually where ROI is seen, and it is tough to make that a metric.

I'm not aware of any additional costs. I'm pretty sure that the current client is paying just the licensing fee per user. I do know that they've got some support agreement with ServiceNow, but I don't think that is broken out or specific to Project Management. It is just inclusive.

I certainly would recommend it on a regular basis as a viable scalable project management solution. It is a solid solution. It has got all the features and functionalities I want. The lack of visualization of data, ease of implementation, and ease of configuration results in difficulty in training people, and it needs to be more visual and a little bit easier to configure and maintain. Currently, as soon as you install the new version, you've got to go back there and make all those tweaks. It is not all or nothing sort of thing. It is just a case of how much of the functionality done in a manual way has to be redone in each update. That could change over time. They're constantly improving how this works, but in my experience, that was very much the case for the last two upgrades that I've done. Occasionally, I've had problems where existing data from a prior version did not migrate. There is some wonkiness, and you got to go in and clean things up a little bit, but it is pretty minor. It is one of those things where when you've got a solution like ServiceNow that every single person in the organization is using, and you do the update the next morning and realize that none of your reports are right because you've tweaked it, and now, you have to go and fix it. In fairness, if you only use it out of the box the way ServiceNow says you should use Project Management, it probably wouldn't be an issue, but I am yet to see a customer use ServiceNow Project Management out of the box with no changes.

Comparing it to all other project management solutions without consideration of cost, I would rate ServiceNow a seven out of ten.

There are multiple use cases associated with ServiceNow. The major use case is IT service management, incident management, and IT operations management. ServiceNow offers GRC and solutions that integrate with other security systems for cybersecurity. I have been involved in both ITOM and ITSM.

ServiceNow offers a range of ITSM, IT incident management, and PRCPs. The entire platform makes it an excellent product for users. Its capability to manage end-to-end ITSM is necessary because no other competitor is offering such a comprehensive solution.

The utilization of AI in ServiceNow needs enhancement. Their incident management system requires attention. If you examine it closely, there's an extension available in the market for future consideration. ServiceNow is quite advanced in incident management solutions. If ServiceNow aims to improve its incident management capabilities by incorporating AI/ML and other general components, it would advance the product and enhance its use cases, ultimately boosting productivity. This would lead to improved overall value for enterprise customers.

I have been using ServiceNow for eight to ten years.

ServiceNow is a very stable product. I have heard a couple of integration issues in some places.

ServiceNow can be easily scalable. However, scaling down may pose a problem because, if someone has purchased a certain quantity of subscription-based licenses, they cannot be reduced. You have to complete the term of those licenses whether you're scaling down or up.

We cater the solution to enterprise customers.

Our delivery team used to interact with ServiceNow, and they used to receive support from them. They are responsive. Most of the time, issues are resolved. They ensure a smooth delivery process and quick response. In certain complicated situations, such as new integrations where ServiceNow is not supported, there is a lot of email exchanges.

Positive

ServiceNow offers a very comprehensive tool that covers end-to-end IT services and IT operations management. This is where enterprise customers seek an end-to-end solution. ServiceNow is being adopted by numerous customers. I have experience with BMC Solutions.

BMC also provides an IT service management platform called BMC Remedy. Remedy is less comprehensive and user-friendly compared to ServiceNow. I've encountered support and configuration issues with BMC Remedy.

There is a large pool of trained workforce available for ServiceNow. Considering their market share, which exceeds 60%, there are ample skilled resources in the market. ServiceNow technology has been established. I haven't encountered challenges with ServiceNow projects in terms of implementation or configuration wherever I've worked. However, the deployment can vary depending on the company and partner, and how they've structured their practice teams and training resources.

If it's a Greenfield project, then a new deployment is necessary. For enterprise customers, integration becomes the key focus. ServiceNow offers a substantial integration portfolio to address these needs.

Return on investment is good because once the overall comprehensive solution is deployed, it offers a lot of ROI to the end customers. If a customer opts for a point solution to manage their ITSM and adopts different technologies to integrate, it is going to cost them, and then it will add up to their complexity.

The solution is expensive compared to other tools but holds value for money.

Overall, I rate the solution a nine out of ten.