We compared ManageEngine ServiceDesk Plus and ServiceNow based on our users’ reviews in five categories. After reading all of the collected data, you can find our conclusion below.
Comparison Results: Based on the parameters we compared, ServiceNow is the preferred product. This is because users cannot agree on whether or not ManageEngine ServiceDesk’s service and support team is effective.
"The tool's most valuable feature is task creation. The tickets get timestamps as well."
"The auto-routing feature saves a lot of effort, where we used to spend a lot of time manually assigning things."
"The workflow automation is the most valuable feature of this solution."
"I am enjoying the report features, they are quite good."
"The strength is its pricing. It is easy to use."
"What I found most valuable in ManageEngine ServiceDesk Plus is its ticketing function plus change management, which helps us monitor all service requests within the team and even extend the requests to level two support."
"The product is extremely user-friendly. It is easy to build the workflows and electronic forms."
"When somebody wants to follow up with a problem from the past, the solution makes it easy. It keeps everything in one system and updated."
"Identifies better ways to license software or eliminate unused software to save money."
"We have found the service easy to use, although, we have ended up customising a lot of parameters."
"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."
"For change management, I find the CAB workbench very useful. I haven't seen any other solution that has a CAB workbench or advanced automated solutions for a change advisory board. ServiceNow also has the Workflow Engine which works very well and is very intuitive."
"The solution is stable, scalable and easy to use."
"We used ServiceNow for change management, release management, and event management."
"It actually has quite a wide list of modules and processes. Currently, we are implementing project management and Scaled Agile Framework for one of our customers."
"You can put information in or export it out quickly, which is very useful when you have weekly or monthly reports."
"When I think of improvements the first thing that comes to mind would have to be the active management function. I have encountered some bugs with this aspect of the tool. I wouldn't necessarily identify these issues as bugs, they're more like processes issues associated with the scanning assets; the process could be improved."
"ServiceDesk's reporting module could use an update. It looks outdated, and the interface could be more intuitive."
"Its reporting can be improved. It can have better analytics reports. Even though they provide integration with another tool called Analytics Plus to get those reports, it would be quite helpful to have them on the fly and out of the box. A lot of improvement is required in change management and release management. Their change management module is quite simple, and they need to do a lot of work on the change management module. The release management is out only on the cloud. It is not available in on-premises deployments. In the next release, I would like it to have effective project management. They do provide the project management and contracts management modules, but these modules need a bit of improvement."
"They could improve the screens."
"I'd like to understand more technical features due to the fact that I want to teach globally. I understand all the questions in the search engine. I want to find more technical information about the product."
"For ITIL functions, it should be more complex, including financial functions. We are expecting it to be easier for customization within workflows and templates."
"It would be better if they could just bring up interface changes because, from the past five years, I don't see any difference in the way or look and feel of the application."
"ManageEngine ServiceDesk Plus could improve by having better integration with Microsoft Azure."
"Making a mobile version would be helpful."
"The RPA needs improvement. That's a new area for them that they're just entering into now."
"The interface requires an upgrade."
"The biggest complaint I have is that the ServiceNow search engine is not very robust."
"Their GUI could be updated."
"When we are using the solution on mobile phones on their networks the performance is reduced with a delay of approximately 8 seconds. There is less delay using the desktop computers connected to the WiFi or to the network directly."
"Local solutions have lower costs."
"The product’s standard user experience is not the best."
More ManageEngine ServiceDesk Plus Pricing and Cost Advice →
ManageEngine ServiceDesk Plus is ranked 4th in IT Service Management (ITSM) with 57 reviews while ServiceNow is ranked 1st in IT Service Management (ITSM) with 212 reviews. ManageEngine ServiceDesk Plus is rated 8.0, while ServiceNow is rated 8.4. The top reviewer of ManageEngine ServiceDesk Plus writes " Easy to configure and affordable compared to other software options". On the other hand, the top reviewer of ServiceNow writes "A stable and scalable solution that has excellent features and is useful for collecting data and building KPIs". ManageEngine ServiceDesk Plus is most compared with JIRA Service Management, Freshservice, BMC Helix ITSM, Zoho Desk and SCSM, whereas ServiceNow is most compared with BMC Helix ITSM, Microsoft Power Apps, Pega BPM, IBM Maximo and BMC Helix Discovery. See our ManageEngine ServiceDesk Plus vs. ServiceNow report.
See our list of best IT Service Management (ITSM) vendors and best Help Desk Software vendors.
We monitor all IT Service Management (ITSM) reviews to prevent fraudulent reviews and keep review quality high. We do not post reviews by company employees or direct competitors. We validate each review for authenticity via cross-reference with LinkedIn, and personal follow-up with the reviewer when necessary.