ServiceNow Strategic Portfolio Management Reviews

We are using the product for project resource and finance management.

As a product, the primary reason we like it is it gets integrated with our ITSM solution so that we don't have to go for an external product for project management like Jira. It seamlessly integrates with our ITSM. It pretty much has all the features you want to manage. You don't need separate products for your project, your resource, or your finance. It's an integrated solution where the same product will actually get us for all three.

The solution needs a few things in terms of resource management. It still lags behind some of the company leaders like Workday. It's not yet there yet. The solution, currently, whatever it is, it's very concrete. Customizing it is a bit of a tedious task. That's the one thing I pretty much feel is a downside.

The initial setup is complex. 

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

It is getting stable, relatively compared to how it was one or two years back. Though it was not up to the mark, it's quite stable now.

Scalability-wise, it's good.

There are around 400 users who are using this.

Technical support is useful. There are a lot of things we incur during implementation, post-implementation, et cetera. There is some technical support that is required.

We are using pretty much each and every product of ServiceNow.

The initial setup is quite complex. It's not easy. I would say its implementation is on the complex side, since, unlike other modules, these are pretty much concept-oriented, and having a successful implementation is a pretty tedious task. It took four to five months to deploy the product.

The deployment was handled by our team in-house. We did not need any help from any integrators or consultants. 

Pricing-wise, I can't comment individually on this, as it depends on the region. It depends on the overall number of licenses. It also depends on other factors like what are the other solutions, are the products we are taking from ServiceNow. Generally, it's neither cheap nor very costly. For a customer who has already ServiceNow ITSM and some other products in place, I would say it's moderate.

We have enough products. We have one for project management, a separate one for time management. We had separate things. However, once we were into ServiceNow for ITSM, ITBM was offering all these solutions on the same platform. We didn't look into other options. We decided on ServiceNow to stay within the same umbrella solution.

We're a partner and reseller. 

Users should go with this product only if they are already planning to use ServiceNow for other IT like asset management or service management. If they are planning to use ServiceNow, then it makes sense to go with it. Otherwise, it is not necessary to go for ITBM.

I'd rate the solution seven out of ten.

We use it for portfolio, program and project management. 

It was implemented throughout the company and the governance processes of strategic projects are carried out in the system. Different levels of professionals use the system, both in agile, hybrid and waterfall approaches.

It acts as a single point of truth for our project management. We are able to gather the information in it for reporting. The parameters of project forms act like minimum requirements for the project, enhancing project management skillset.

We like the ease of making the dashboards, gathering information of a set of projects, programs and portfolios. Also, the status report feature, embedded with project schedule and financials, makes it an excellent tool for knowledge management during the project. The whole history of the project is there. 

The possibility to customize some of the approval flows between a demand, an idea, and a project is another thing that is valuable. We are able to customize it in-house.

Import of really big project (hundreds of tasks) done in MSProject, we face some problems with dependencies and subtasks. 

Also, currently the 'percent complete' field is purely duration-based, therefore the presence of parallel workstreams limits the usefulness of that metric, since the amount of work being performed every day could be widely varying. An useful metric to be developed would be a 'percent work complete', such as the one available by default in Microsoft Project.

I have been using this solution for one year, since January/21.

We are in Brazil, and for us, it could be a little expensive the licensing for some cases.

Microsoft Project, Planview, Jira Software and some others in the local market.

I would rate it a nine out of 10.

We are in the early phases of integrating our IT service incidents with a knowledge base. Additionally, we plan to create a security portfolio and manage tickets related to security and privacy.

It manages portfolios and aligns our current portfolio with internal changes. This process is integral to our team’s management strategy as we continually update the portfolio.

It provides flexibility. As long as you can imagine a solution and have a way to create it, the tool allows you to implement that flexibility effectively.

ServiceNow need to focus on internal empowerment rather than awareness to drive the change. Previously, our company depended on external parties to handle incidents. We are taking ownership of incident management, and everyone is aligned with this shift. Our IT team, service management, security managers, and others are committed to ensuring reliability and business continuity.

It is stable and performs well. The user experience is positive and shows improvements over time.

It is scalable, but I'm not comfortable creating a scale because my manager would be most comfortable providing that figure.

I rate the solution’s scalability a seven out of ten.

We have a strong base for support and can still effectively utilize the out-of-the-box features. Most of the documentation is already available for portfolio management, so we need to digest and apply what’s written.

The initial setup is straightforward. We are customizing it out of the box. We inherited the system. We own and manage the system, having taken over its management responsibilities.

I recommend it because it is a stable and proven tool within the ServiceNow ecosystem. It offers a well-designed setup right out of the box. Compared to EasyVista, which we considered previously, ServiceNow's solution is more straightforward and user-friendly.

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

We are using ServiceNow Strategic Portfolio Management for incident management project portfolio management.

The most valuable feature of ServiceNow Strategic Portfolio Management is incident management.

The portfolio managed is good for IT, but it's not good for non it's not necessarily great for construction projects, such as the building of physical infrastructure.

I have been using ServiceNow Strategic Portfolio Management for approximately four years.

The solution is stable.

I rate the stability of ServiceNow Strategic Portfolio Management a nine out of ten.

The solution is scalable in our usage. We are not a large company.

We have approximately 100 users using the solution.

The solution is regularly used.

I rate the scalability of ServiceNow Strategic Portfolio Management a six out of ten.

I previously used BMC prior to ServiceNow Strategic Portfolio Management.

The initial setup is of a medium difficulty level. It is not easy or complex. However, it is clunky. The user interface is difficult to find features and navigate around. The forms are generic and the solution was primarily developed as an incident management tool which it is good at, but project management is something they developed later. It feels like it was an afterthought.

I rate the initial setup of ServiceNow Strategic Portfolio Management a five out of ten.

We have seen an ROI using this solution.

I rate the price of ServiceNow Strategic Portfolio Management a seven out of ten.

My advice to others is this solution might not be for everyone and other options should be considered.

I rate ServiceNow Strategic Portfolio Management a seven out of ten.

There are aspects of the solution that are good, but it's not great at everything that it does.

The feature I find the most valuable is the one that lets you see how much time has been used in processing a ticket. This allows us to better monitor performance.

The interface is cluttered with a lot of names and areas. It may not be user friendly enough for a first timer. He or she may not be able to see or understand or remember what's the difference between clicking the safe button in a ticket or safe and exit or the other buttons. They could provide a lot more description to each button, then the user could figure out how to use it properly themselves instead of clicking the wrong buttons. 

The way the interface is designed, sometimes it's not straightforward or easy for me to perform a calculation of statistics (calculation on how many incidents tickets are relevant to certain expert) and I may have to manually open all the tickets and add the numbers up on my own to analyze the statistics. I will have to use the human efforts to maybe reach all the subjects and all the contents of the tickets to be able to produce a report to sub total how many similar cases has happened for certain issue and to given clear picture of what has happened in one year's time with the other IT support activities. There should be a way to automate this process.

I have been using ServiceNow Strategic Portfolio Management for a year and a half. 

Sometimes, the system may be slow because it's hosted on the web server, which we may not have full control.

On a scale of one to 10, with one being the worst and 10 being the best, I would rate the scalability a seven. 

On a scale of one to 10, with one being the worst and 10 being the best, I would rate the tech support a seven. 

On a scale of one to 10, with one being the worst and 10 being the best, I would rate the initial setup a seven. 

They could somewhat improve on pricing. On a scale of one to 10, with one being the cheapest and 10 being the most expensive, I would rate the solution's pricing a seven.

There is an ongoing cost associated with using the system because you have to trust the with all the sensitive data. The solution is hosted by ServiceNow and if you use more plugins and/or features to expand the capabilities – such as machine learning and AI – you have to trust ServiceNow for keeping all the corporate data confidential.

We are using ServiceNow Strategic Portfolio Management for Agile development. In the same system, you have Agile, traditional, and hybrid development methodologies.

The most valuable features of ServiceNow Strategic Portfolio Management are the multiple methodology possibilities for projects. It has hybrid, traditional, and Agile capabilities. Additionally, the solution integrates well with other platforms, such as Microsoft Azure.

ServiceNow Strategic Portfolio Management could improve by having more Agile features. Other solutions, such as Rally have more.

I have been using ServiceNow Strategic Portfolio Management for approximately three months.

We have approximately 700 users using the solution.

I have used Rally previously. I found the teams and backlog structures are more clear in Rally.

The initial setup of the solution was simple and user-friendly.

I rate ServiceNow Strategic Portfolio Management an eight out of ten.

The price keeps going up, and to remain competitive, it needs to have a competitive edge. I would like to see more of the latest innovations, in terms of AI, ML, and all of the latest cutting-edge technologies, included in the platform.

The stability is excellent. ServiceNow is one of the leading platforms when it comes to stability.

The scalability is very good. ServiceNow is one of the leading platforms when it comes to scalability. Thousands of projects can be managed.

Technical support from ServiceNow is great. There is a good amount of documentation available. ServiceNow also has certain training programs and cohort programs through which they educate people regarding their platform.

We've previously used Anaplan, MS Project, and Clarity. We switched because of issues with integration in terms of the wider ITSM platform and other tool sets. 

The complexity of the initial setup can vary depending on the amount of data that needs to be migrated.

If you want to implement ServiceNow ITBM, I would recommend an organic approach rather than going full throttle and moving all your projects at once, for example, from Microsoft Project or Clarity, onto ITBM.

On a scale from one to ten, I would rate ServiceNow ITBM at eight because it is not as intuitive as Microsoft Project.

We use ServiceNow IT Business Management for production support.

The performance is good.

It could be more user-friendly.

I have been working with ServiceNow IT Business Management for two years.

We don't have any complaints regarding the stability of ServiceNow IT Business Management.

ServiceNow IT Business Management is a scalable solution.

We have approximately 1,000 users in our company.

At this time, we don't have plans to increase the usage.

I, personally, have not had any interaction with technical support.

The initial setup is straightforward.

It took three and six months to complete the deployment.

I am not aware of how much we are paying for the licensing.

We are not using it as a business management solution, so I would recommend it for ticketing and incident tracking. However, we are not utilizing the entire portfolio.

I would rate ServiceNow IT Business Management an eight out of ten.