We just raised a $30M Series A: Read our story

Micro Focus Service Manager OverviewUNIXBusinessApplication

Micro Focus Service Manager is #18 ranked solution in top IT Service Management (ITSM) tools and #24 ranked solution in top Help Desk Software. IT Central Station users give Micro Focus Service Manager an average rating of 6 out of 10. Micro Focus Service Manager is most commonly compared to ServiceNow:Micro Focus Service Manager vs ServiceNow. The top industry researching this solution are professionals from a computer software company, accounting for 29% of all views.
What is Micro Focus Service Manager?

Service Manager on SaaS provides you with a cloud-based, industry leading IT Service Management solution.

Micro Focus Service Manager is also known as HPE ITSM, HPE Service Manager.

Micro Focus Service Manager Buyer's Guide

Download the Micro Focus Service Manager Buyer's Guide including reviews and more. Updated: November 2021

Micro Focus Service Manager Customers

resultspositive, Globicon

Micro Focus Service Manager Video

Pricing Advice

What users are saying about Micro Focus Service Manager pricing:
  • "I would say that identify your requirements and pay for the support to implement and test those requirements, and then hope that you did a good job because the cost of their service is fairly expensive."

Micro Focus Service Manager Reviews

Filter by:
Filter Reviews
Industry
Loading...
Filter Unavailable
Company Size
Loading...
Filter Unavailable
Job Level
Loading...
Filter Unavailable
Rating
Loading...
Filter Unavailable
Considered
Loading...
Filter Unavailable
Order by:
Loading...
  • Date
  • Highest Rating
  • Lowest Rating
  • Review Length
Search:
Showingreviews based on the current filters. Reset all filters
Francois Blanc
Consultant at a computer software company with 10,001+ employees
MSP
Top 10
A better GUI in place but still not user friendly and quite complex to implement

Pros and Cons

  • "The design has been revamped in terms of GUI. The current interface is quite easy to read."
  • "The solution does not interface well with other products and is difficult to implement."

What is our primary use case?

We primarily use the solution for incident management, program management, as well as for change, release and configuration management. 

What is most valuable?

It's quite a complicated solution. The design has been revamped in terms of GUI. The current interface is quite easy to read. However, it's very much dependant on how everything is set up. Many people manage to have it properly set up with a reduced number of steps to create or to change or to close any other ticket. 

However, one of my latest customers decided to implement some items in very specific ways in terms of dealing with change management that is really bureaucratic but the way they implemented it with the tool was actually quite efficient. The modules were very utilitarian and it became like just clicking boxes. To track changes, track approvals or avoid any changes with support could be implemented in the publisher which made it quite efficient.

What needs improvement?

On certain implementations, it can be very difficult to customize and then very difficult to maintain as well. This is because it is quite a complex solution.

Users need to be very conscious of how they set up the solution in terms of how they propose and ultimately set up the end terminals to make it easy to use for end-users. 

The setup on past projects had been quite difficult for two reasons: the first is that it's quite a technical tool so it takes a lot to set it up and customize it. The other issue is that there's a lack of tool experts, which makes it even more difficult to set everything up properly.

The solution does not interface well with other products and is difficult to implement.

The entire system needs to be redesigned to help improve overall usability and design.

When you synchronize or perform a task for event management from external tools, you have issues of performance because synchronization can take four or six hours before there is a solution.

It's very hard for the end-user to customize items, but if they were able to, it would be easier for them to arrange specific views and reports that would be more relevant to them.

For how long have I used the solution?

I started using the solution in 2008, when it was named Service Center. It's been about 20 years since I was first introduced to it.

What do I think about the stability of the solution?

It has really gained stability in the last few latest years. When I started working on it, I recall an implementation where there was an issue with stability. The customer had upgraded to Service Center from one version to another and something went wrong. They were unable to go back to the old version and then they were unable to resolve the issue. They were without any IT assistance for six weeks. It was very frustrating.

This was ten or twelve years ago, however, and they've made great gains since then. I've spent two years using the latest version of the product. We have been able to upgrade everything without any issue at all.

What do I think about the scalability of the solution?

The solution is quite scalable. Some of our clients include some utility companies in France and some clients in the nuclear and electricity industry. It's a solution that can scale well for enterprises.

How are customer service and technical support?

Although I don't contact technical support directly, I have clients that have. From a technical point of view, support is pretty skilled. The company makes sure they are generally experienced and competent.

How was the initial setup?

The initial setup is really complex. Afterwards, it depends on the people that are handling the implementation. Some companies that are implementing the product have some pre-defined templates that happen to help to set it up quite easily and with few negative items for the end customer to deal with. I personally don't have any access to such tools for at least the past five years now so I don't know how easy it actually is if a user does have these predefined templates. The tool doesn't work out of the box. You really have to put effort in to get it working once you have installed it.

Deployment of the most recent version takes about four to six months. How many people needed to deploy the solution depends on the company and the setup. It could be anywhere from two to four people, but a company must ensure they are experts. You'll also need some additional resources for the server and the network, etc. You'll need to take into account also if you need to define the processes, etc. and agree to everything at the beginning of the project. I'd estimate a maximum amount of four people would be needed for a deployment.

What about the implementation team?

We have a team that helps with customizing and onboarding new customers. We also have a subsidiary that is dedicated to implementing the tool for customers. 

What other advice do I have?

I've been consulting with companies about using the solution and largely deal with the on-premises deployment model.

I'd advise others to really take their time and think about the specifications before they embark on implementation. They must be sure that the positions are implemented or not via their ITSM processes that are already in their company. 

To implement some features, it's possible to lose an entire year, so it's best to hire an expert to provide guidance and advice about what is feasible.

I'd rate the solution six out of ten. It's an improved rating since the last version. However, it still needs to be more user-friendly can could continue to improve its stability.

Disclosure: I am a real user, and this review is based on my own experience and opinions.
ITCS user
PPM Services Director at a tech services company with 51-200 employees
Real User
Top 5Leaderboard
Incident management with good support but the configuration and reporting could be simplified

Pros and Cons

  • "It can adapt to any process in the organization."
  • "With the new version moving toward the codeless configuration is good, but it's losing flexibility."

What is our primary use case?

We implement some modules of this solution for our clients, mostly we did the integrations with the MF PPM. They are a medium-size development that focuses on a particular functionality.

What is most valuable?

It's flexible in terms of configuration and making changes. It can adapt to any process in the organization. It can be customized.

It's a new version with a fresh interface and incident management. The SMAX is the most recent that I remember and behind that is the smart service, it's a smart search when entering the system, it automatically recognizes an incident, takes a screenshot and opens a ticket. It's nice progress made to the user interface and incident management.

The codeless configuration is more simplified. Most of the customer's requirements can be done without coding, it's simple and very quick.

It has nice charts.

What needs improvement?

The reporting is not very strong. it can be improved. Customers need to combine different data from different sources to the same report, but it's quite difficult to do. You have to do it with many different versions.

With the new version moving toward the codeless configuration is good, but it's losing flexibility. There should be a larger selection of configuration tools made available to allow some parts of coding to be codeless and others allowing you to make some coding for business rules and workflow. You need some coding ability and functionality. It is difficult to find a customer who doesn't want to make any kind of customizations. It comes with many limits making it very difficult especially with on-premises customers.

I like the support but they could improve.

In the next release, I would like to see improvements made to reporting and the dashboard. Also, I would like to see the configuration simplified without losing flexibility. The best model that I have seen was with PPM where you can provide some coding with flexibility allowing you to configure to the customer's requirements but having limitations at the same time, but they are meaningful limitations that are easy to negotiate with the customer explaining that it is to prevent it from being a completely customized tool that will be very difficult to maintain, upgrade and update the versions. I would like to see a balance between the two. Flexibility plus simplifying the configuration.

For how long have I used the solution?

I have been familiar with this solution since 2013. We work with this solution based on the customer's needs. It was periodically job and experiance until 2018.

What do I think about the stability of the solution?

There are always some amount of known issues in any tool, but I can conclude that the solution is stable, as long as all hardware and software recommendations and requirements are met. There were between one to two hundred employees in operating.

How are customer service and technical support?

I have contacted the technical support team. We had open tickets with them, especially with the last year.

The technical support is ok, we have dealt with them for many years.

I would rate them a seven out of ten.

How was the initial setup?

It's quite straightforward.

It only took one day to deploy for our testing purposes, but for customers, it can take anywhere from one to three days to ensure that all of the technical requirements are met. 

What about the implementation team?

We implemented it ourselves.

What other advice do I have?

I would recommend this solution. It's a classic with an operating system that can easily adapt and be implemented.

70 to 80% of the time with different cases the customer's requirements can be met.

The customer can start to implement the incident management with just one post. if you feel that you want to add more, you can add the change management, it can be implemented step by step.

There is always a place for improvement.

I would rate this solution a seven out of ten.

Which deployment model are you using for this solution?

On-premises
Disclosure: My company has a business relationship with this vendor other than being a customer: Partner
Learn what your peers think about Micro Focus Service Manager. Get advice and tips from experienced pros sharing their opinions. Updated: November 2021.
552,305 professionals have used our research since 2012.
David Babcock
Principal at a tech services company with 51-200 employees
Real User
Top 5
Allows us to track and identify trends, but is not user-friendly for knowledge management

Pros and Cons

  • "Incident management is the most valuable because we're using it to manage tickets for an accounting system. With the reports that are available, it allows us to track and identify trends at the type and item level. It also helps us in managing the workload better than what we had in Remedy, which is what we were using before 2013."
  • "We aren't able to take emails that come in and turn them into tickets, especially when it comes to attachments. When an email has an attachment, like a screenshot, it is a very cumbersome process, and it does not work very well. I shouldn't have been paying technicians to cut and paste attachments from an email into the ticketing system. It should do that automatically. Other solutions are able to do that. This is something that needs to be improved. Test manager and knowledge management areas are probably amongst the worst parts of this solution. We try to use this solution for knowledge management, but it is not user-friendly. Therefore, it has limited ROI as you need to spend time to try and fully capitalize on the knowledge management system."

What is our primary use case?

We predominantly use it for incident management, change management, and knowledge management.

What is most valuable?

Incident management is the most valuable because we're using it to manage tickets for an accounting system.

With the reports that are available, it allows us to track and identify trends at the type and item level. It also helps us in managing the workload better than what we had in Remedy, which is what we were using before 2013.

What needs improvement?

We aren't able to take emails that come in and turn them into tickets, especially when it comes to attachments. When an email has an attachment, like a screenshot, it is a very cumbersome process, and it does not work very well. I shouldn't have been paying technicians to cut and paste attachments from an email into the ticketing system. It should do that automatically. Other solutions are able to do that. This is something that needs to be improved.

Test manager and knowledge management areas are probably amongst the worst parts of this solution. We try to use this solution for knowledge management, but it is not user-friendly. Therefore, it has limited ROI as you need to spend time to try and fully capitalize on the knowledge management system.

For how long have I used the solution?

I have been using Micro Focus Service Manager since 2013.

What do I think about the stability of the solution?

If you are talking about the performance from a software perspective, then we have had no issues with that.

What do I think about the scalability of the solution?

Scalability is probably fairly good if you are willing to pay for it. It can be very pricey.

We have a worldwide system, but only about 120 people are inputting, tracking, or managing through Micro Focus Service Manager. From an ITIL perspective, we have people from all three levels using it, that is, level one, level two, and level three. We have administrators who can go in and back out and create types, items, systems, and things like that. Everybody else is pretty much just a regular user. They don't have a whole lot of roles within Micro Focus Service Manager.

How are customer service and technical support?

When we started, the support was great because we were paying for it. Once we stopped paying for their subject matter experts, it was not stellar by any stretch. At the moment, I would probably rate them a four out of ten.

Which solution did I use previously and why did I switch?

We were using Remedy, and it wasn't robust enough in our opinion. We wanted an integrated system not only for incident management but also for change management and testing. Remedy didn't provide that at the time, and Micro Focus did.

How was the initial setup?

It was complex, but that was not all Micro Focus' fault. It was the fault of too many users trying to have their little niche specifically programmed into Micro Focus Service Manager.

What's my experience with pricing, setup cost, and licensing?

I would say that identify your requirements and pay for the support to implement and test those requirements, and then hope that you did a good job because the cost of their service is fairly expensive.

What other advice do I have?

I would rate Micro Focus Service Manager a five out of ten because it does what it needs to do. It is not bad from that perspective, but it clearly has room for improvement.

Which deployment model are you using for this solution?

On-premises
Disclosure: I am a real user, and this review is based on my own experience and opinions.
IN
Enterprise Service Management Head at a tech services company with 51-200 employees
Real User
Top 20
Flexible and easy to customize but their technical support is lacking

What is our primary use case?

We mainly use this as a service-desk solution for receiving calls, issues, and requests from the end-users.

What is most valuable?

Its flexibility and ease of customization are its most valuable features.

What needs improvement?

Their end-user interface and technical support features could be improved.

For how long have I used the solution?

I have been using this solution for 10 years.

What do I think about the stability of the solution?

Its stability is quite good.

What do I think about the scalability of the solution?

Micro Focus Service Manager's scalability is quite good. We have more than 10 of our clients using this solution.

How are customer service and technical support?

In terms of their technical support, they are not great…

What is our primary use case?

We mainly use this as a service-desk solution for receiving calls, issues, and requests from the end-users.

What is most valuable?

Its flexibility and ease of customization are its most valuable features.

What needs improvement?

Their end-user interface and technical support features could be improved.

For how long have I used the solution?

I have been using this solution for 10 years.

What do I think about the stability of the solution?

Its stability is quite good.

What do I think about the scalability of the solution?

Micro Focus Service Manager's scalability is quite good.

We have more than 10 of our clients using this solution.

How are customer service and technical support?

In terms of their technical support, they are not great and not very bad. Their technical support should be improved.

How was the initial setup?

The initial setup was not complex at all.

What other advice do I have?

I would recommend Micro Focus Service Manager.

On a scale of 1 - 10, I'd rate this solution a 7.

Which deployment model are you using for this solution?

On-premises
Disclosure: My company has a business relationship with this vendor other than being a customer: Partner