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 used ServiceNow for various functions like incident management, ITSM (information technology service management), and we also used it for CMDB (configuration management database).

I worked for a manufacturing company and we were using ServiceNow for managing the company's IT functions, particularly for ITSM.

In my current company, we use it for CMDB.

I found the reporting capabilities of ServiceNow really valuable.

The service catalog feature is also interesting, particularly because it is highly customizable. You can create anything you want to create. This is one of the good things I like about ServiceNow.

Its integration capabilities is also a valuable feature because you can connect ServiceNow with any other application.

What could be improved in ServiceNow is the response time or loading time. It's slower, but it could be based on the license you have. Everybody here in our company says it is slow whenever we access it, so that needs improvement.

The user interface can also be improved. They should make it better than what it is currently. It should be more user-friendly.

An additional feature I'd like to see in ServiceNow has something to do with its out of the box pattern. Currently, I'm using it mainly for CMDB. Each company will have different hardware or configuration items, but ServiceNow only provides certain scripts or patterns to discover all these onto the CMDB.

If there's any new device, we'll need to customize the out of the box pattern, so maybe that's a feature that can be improved. With any device you add, everything should be added on the CMDB using whatever out of the box pattern or script is provided in ServiceNow. Currently, that is not the case.

If we have a new device that is added to our company's network, we have to go and customize the existing ServiceNow pattern to discover that device. This is the problem we're facing.

I've been using ServiceNow for two years.

This tool is stable. It performs well, but like I mentioned, its response time can be improved, but overall, it's good. It's reliable.

I find this tool easy to scale.

Every now and then, we'll face some issues with scripting, pattern, etc. We always go to the HI portal which is the maintenance portal of ServiceNow, and there we ask for support by raising a ticket to ServiceNow directly.

The support is not 100% good, because sometimes we experience delays in their responses, but it's okay. It's not bad. They'll see to it that they resolve the issues, but it may not always be on time.

We used BMC Remedy, but since we were using a very old version, we can't compare it to ServiceNow. ServiceNow is a lot better and more user-friendly compared to that tool.

For large-scale companies, the cost of ServiceNow is not expensive, but for small and mid-scale companies, it is higher. I worked with large organizations and they never had a problem with the cost, so it depends on how large the company is.

I evaluated BMC Remedy.

I'm using the latest version of ServiceNow.

I was not involved in the initial setup of ServiceNow, whether in my previous or in my current company. I do not know much about it, but how easy or complex the setup is will depend on the company. If it is a large-scale company, the initial setup would be complex and it'll take a lot of time.

Even if it's deployed on cloud, it would still require maintenance. We just purchase the licenses and initially during deployment and training, they'll help. After that, it depends on the company to manage and maintain the solution. If we get into any issues, we'll definitely need to reach out to them.

We are 1,000 people in IT, so we have 1,000 IT users of ServiceNow. As for end users, we have between 30 to 40,000 employees in the company, and at least 30,000 employees will submit a request or incident using ServiceNow. We're using this tool on a daily basis.

I don't think there is any additional costs, as support is covered in the standard fees, but I could be wrong, as I was not involved in the initial setup or financial discussion, so I wouldn't know much about it.

My advice to others looking into using ServiceNow is that they can do their research and ensure that this platform is the one they're looking for. If after reading all the information and comparing different ITSM options available, they find that ServiceNow suits their business, then they can go for it. They should not go for it blindly, because there could be many others which are better than this solution. They should research well before they make their decision.

My score for ServiceNow is a seven 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.

Most of our tickets go through ServiceNow.

Any tickets that we need to open in order to interact with other teams and make things happen go through ServiceNow. 

When I need to create an AWS account, I use ServiceNow. I need to use ServiceNow to request a new machine. 

We use ServiceNow for everything that requires us to interact with other teams.

They use it for internal communication across all departments.

What I believe works well is the chain of tasks that occurs when you follow up after completing a task. The subsequent chain of tasks, I believe, is valuable.

The interface, in my opinion, is not very good. It's very unclear where the status is and what steps I need to take next. I don't think the layout is very good.

The interface requires an upgrade. I'm not sure if I'm using the most recent version, which could be the issue. However, I don't have control over which versions we use, and I do find the interface to be very cumbersome, there is a lot of information here, and it's difficult to find what you are looking for. 

I find myself occasionally looking at the request and wondering if I already approved it or not because the status is a little strange. It's not great.

It's not very intuitive.

I interact with ServiceNow quite a bit. I have been using it for eight years.

ServiceNow is relatively stable. I haven't noticed any problems with stability.

I believe it scales well, but I'm not sure. I'm not familiar with the back end or how it's set up.

It performs well, I have never had any problems with performance.

The company employs over 40,000 people. I'm going to say that the majority of people will need to use it, or maybe half of them use ServiceNow extensively.

I've never had any contact with technical support.

Black Duck, Veracode, and SonarQube are some of the tools we use.

I wasn't involved in the initial setup because it was already in place when I joined the organization.

I've heard that some of its features are difficult to implement. I've never done it myself, but from what I've heard from other teams, it takes a long time to create a full flow. It's not quite that easy.

We have a team that handles updates, patches, and fixes.

I would rate ServiceNow a seven out of ten.

We use it as a tool to develop and monitor attestations and assessments where we develop questions based on our policies and ask application owners to explain and show compliance with our policies through a series of attestation questions.

I refer to it often when I'm looking up applications in the CMDB. The CMDB gives me a lot of information on the application in terms of what certain parameters are, who owns the application, and what's the structure of the organization owning the application. It gives me a fair amount of information.

We are using the latest version. We stay up to date with all the patches.

It helps with how well our applications are compliant with our policies, and that helps with the overall security of our applications. We are very detailed with our policies, and there is a buy-in for security across the company. So, we're able to show which applications are in compliance with the policies and which aren't, and we're able to target those that aren't for a little extra work and attention.

The thing that I like most about it is the easy integration with the CMDB. I'm able to look at the CMDB for applications and develop my assessments and attestations based on the application and point them at that application owner. So, I can really automate the whole thing.

Its setup is tough. It takes a lot of knowledge and a lot of experience.

In terms of features, we're pretty happy with the product as it is. They make regular improvements. We look at them, evaluate them, but we haven't seen anything that we wanted to use it for, though we continuously reevaluate our tools to see where we can expand our capabilities.

I have been using this solution for three years.

We find the product to be very stable. Because it is a cloud-based application, you have your issues with networks and all, but I don't consider that a part of the problem with the application. I find the application to be extremely stable.

It is fairly easy to scale. When you start adding a lot of different modules to it, it becomes a bit more complex, but if you have well-trained staff who can manage it in production, it becomes relatively simple, especially once you develop processes to handle that.

In terms of usage, just about everybody in the company uses it. If you're in technology or you're using technology, you use the interface with this application one way or the other. This is the company's ITIL tool. This is how we handle requests and manage the integrity of our systems and applications. I think it's going to be here for a while. How long? I can't tell.

Tech support is very knowledgeable. We've used them, and they've been very helpful. If someone is starting with ServiceNow, I would recommend them to spend a fair amount of time with their tech support. However, they do tend to point you towards some of their vendors who provide consulting services, and as with most consulting services, it can be all over the place.

We were using another solution. It was the standard for service management for so many years, but it was horrible. I don't remember the name.

The setup is tough. It takes a lot of knowledge and a lot of experience. So, you have to basically work with the product on an almost exclusive basis to become very knowledgeable. However, it is very powerful, especially once you have people who can write JavaScript and who can improve and make the product do a lot more than it does coming out of the box.

We have operations staff that handles the ongoing maintenance. It's not anything where we're having to pull down servers or anything. It's just managing access and maintaining the integrity of the CMDB. Everything else is just types of ITIL efforts such as handling tickets, processing requests. That's it. I find it very useful.

I cannot speak for the company in terms of what the company sees. All I can say is that from what I've used it for, it has been extremely valuable because I don't have to go around with spreadsheets to people. So to me, it is a return on efficiency.

For the modules we use, we found it competitive. I can't think of any costs in addition to the licensing fees.

My advice would be to look at it very carefully. It is a great product, but make sure that it fits your company culture and the way you want to do things because it is a big product.

I would rate it a nine out of 10.