We performed a comparison between Broadcom Clarity and ServiceNow Strategic Portfolio Management based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Project Portfolio Management solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."Being able to look at the data across team members, resources, projects and coming up with the algorithms and resources."
"It has improved communication vertically, with some amount of data to be able to show that more resources are necessary, or why projects aren't moving as fast as management would like. That sort of communication makes my job a lot easier."
"With the new UI, CA is heading in the right direction, and fast. They're adding features, I would say major features, two times a year, which is fast. They're adding features, I would say major features, two times a year, which is fast."
"What has been valuable are the workflows that are there today in order to keep our executive staff informed as well as our program managers and department managers."
"I appreciate the report that shows how utilized a person is set to be within the coming months. I use that feature a good bit."
"The new UI makes it easier for people to go in there and know what to do. To train people, it's faster, more intuitive."
"Visibility is the number one feature. They can see where the bottlenecks are, they can see what their project statuses are, why are things being held up, etc."
"It is a scalable, easy-to-deploy, and user-friendly solution for enterprise businesses."
"The performance is good."
"The solution was quite easy to use. The interface was quite user-friendly, and I've become quite familiar with it."
"You don't need a lot of plugins."
"The demand management tool is very strategic because it helps assess risk, gives you a visual of different demands, and rates those values."
"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."
"Competitive in terms of research"
"The ease of use is the most valuable feature. It's very intuitive to set up."
"The interface is user-friendly. It's one of the most user-friendly on the market, and the most complete."
"We're looking at adding the Agile piece to it. I want to make sure that that integration is very smooth."
"In the future, I would like to see integrated Agile features and better integration with Agile tools."
"The architecture must be improved."
"The integration needs to be improved with Jaspersoft and Microsoft Project."
"I think user-friendliness is the key. Right now it's really clunky. We're also looking to upgrade, but an upgrade is not going to fix everything. The new UX is good, but there are still a lot of limitations. Once they work through those kinks and get those limitations removed, we'll be able to upgrade."
"When we upgraded to 15.1, we had some challenges around Jaspersoft, and also some issues with supporting some of the complex process work flows that we had designed internally, that were affected by some changes in the process engine."
"Financials are okay, but there's a lot of room for improvement in financials.Financial plans, if those could be made so that you're not always grouping your financial data by predefined attributes, that would be helpful for us."
"There are some tool limitations. We had to create some of our own summary competencies to create more of an agile tool concept, or an agile team concept, that they did not really have."
"The price is too high."
"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 product comes with little options out of the box."
"The configurations are fine, but the user interface could be improved."
"When we originally set it up, we had some kind of success manager free of charge, and now it's an additional charge over and above what we're paying."
"ServiceNow Strategic Portfolio Management must improve its interface, which is not very interactive or user-friendly compared to other tools like Zendesk. The real-time reporting feature doesn't help much in our decision-making process. It's quite complex to use and lacks the rich features needed for visualization. Overall, I find it to be very poor."
"The timing reporting module, and how it's used is a bit difficult to understand. Everything related to project management is quite extensive. It needs to be simplified. At first, our users didn't want to use it, because it seems a bit complex."
"The portfolio management tool is not as good as DevOps or Jira because it requires a Russian site and BitLocker to train users or run projects."
More ServiceNow Strategic Portfolio Management Pricing and Cost Advice →
Broadcom Clarity is ranked 2nd in Project Portfolio Management with 136 reviews while ServiceNow Strategic Portfolio Management is ranked 3rd in Project Portfolio Management with 27 reviews. Broadcom Clarity is rated 8.0, while ServiceNow Strategic Portfolio Management is rated 8.0. The top reviewer of Broadcom Clarity writes "A dynamic solution with a lot of great out-of-the-box calculations, but integration with reporting utilities is a bit painful". On the other hand, the top reviewer of ServiceNow Strategic Portfolio Management writes "A very strategic demand management tool that visualizes risks and ratings in a bubble chart". Broadcom Clarity is most compared with Microsoft Project, Jira, Planview Portfolios, Smartsheet and monday.com, whereas ServiceNow Strategic Portfolio Management is most compared with Microsoft Azure DevOps, Jira, Jira Align, Microsoft Project Server and Planview PPM Pro. See our Broadcom Clarity vs. ServiceNow Strategic Portfolio Management report.
See our list of best Project Portfolio Management vendors.
We monitor all Project Portfolio Management 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.