Please share with the community what you think needs improvement with SCSM.
What are its weaknesses? What would you like to see changed in a future version?
There is some difficulty when it comes to deploying this solution. The user interface needs to be improved. One of our customers has complained to say that the workflow needs to be more customizable.
For this product, they are supposed to have an integration that will work with other resources in Microsoft Azure and other cloud providers because everything is going towards Azure now. I see how people are moving from on-premise to the cloud. So that's the direction we are looking at. And as an integrator, we're supposed to tell them the importance of it and how they will migrate and move on. We would like the integration process to be more simplified. They would have to allow some open-source that is a good product to speak to them even to lead to the open-source product. If the open-source product wants to talk to Microsoft or Service Manager they should have an API to do it.
One of the disadvantages in this product is that the reporting module is not very easy. It requires SQL development skills, which not all customers or IT professionals have. There are very few reports available and to create a custom report requires some special skills. The solution would benefit from making reporting and creating custom reports much easier and user-friendly. Microsoft is a technology giant so they have the resources to do improvements or enhance the product, but I don't know if they will invest in it. It depends on their policy or their long-term development plans. Other ITSM solutions, for example, have other resources and they have very strong, and very flexible reporting modules that are easy to use. Microsoft should emulate them and do the same to enhance their product. The customization in the form is not easy. It requires if we want to customize a form (like a change management or incident form) an installation of some tool called Services Manager Altering Tool. This is difficult. In comparison, in Service Now, you can add a custom field, and do some changes right in the form. With Service Manager, yes it is there and we can do it, but it is not easy or straightforward. We require special skills to make it happen. It needs to be easier. The solution would benefit from offering a web interface and a better Sales Service Portal. If the solution could add event planning and event management as a feature in the future that would be ideal. Currently, event management is measured within incident management, which is not the best practice according to ITI when we integrate the CSM with Escom. Escom is a monitoring tool, and when Escom triggers an alert and creates a ticket in Service Manager, it goes in as an incident ticket. I believe it's supposed to be an event. However, I suppose it could be either an incident or event, depending on the type, severity, or nature of the issue.
Better integration with other services in Azure is needed because everything is moving from on-premises to the cloud, and as an integrator, we have to help our clients with the migration. I would also like to see integration with open-source solutions allowed. In general, we would like to have the integration process made simpler. Technical support can be improved.
In SCSM (System Center Service Manager) there is a need to be cognizant of the management of the CMDB (Configuration Management Database). It needs to be improved. My initial base experience for alarms was BMC Remedy, and that works really well. From that example, I could see the concept of what the CMDB does but also what it was not doing. So in the SCSM, you can improve the CMDB by using customization on the interface. Because you are able to add configuration items a little easier, SCSM can be much better at doing the job that you need it to do. If I need a separate tool for customization or to add a class, this is the hard way and it makes the tool harder to use. For example, if I need to add a level of severity or if I need to add something else which is not related to IT in some other product, that ends up being harder to customize in BMC than SCSM — even if I know about CMDB. Products that are more difficult will, of course, make it a little tricky for people with less experience to work with. In SCSM, there are some features they provide for you to customize. It is a very easy graphic interface where you can add your stuff in a very easy way. It is different than doing it with the CSM (Content Management System). I know how to do it with CSM because I have already done it. But for the other people with less experience, it is much harder in BMC if you look at the level of difficulty by comparison. I would like to also see improvements in the CMDB. One of the recommendations I will make is that searches for ITIL (Information Technology Infrastructure Library) level V3 or V4 compliant software at SCSM have more complete disclosure. There is no real database, resource or content that exists to help support users find this information. It puzzles me as to why because it can only enhance the utility of the software. If you search the internet, you will not even see if Microsoft SCSM is compliant with some particular software. It is compliant, and I know it is compliant, but I do not know if it is fully or partially or only marginally compliant. This type of information should be made readily available and should be there to access as the manufacturer knows the answers and compliances.
It's not too hard to compile stuff but it is hard to manage the solution. Even the design itself makes it difficult for management. In the next release of the solution, they should include Enterprise Service Management.
The patch management aspect of the solution should be improved. It's quite complicated and not user-friendly. If your systems are not patched properly, you are unable to pull reports. They should make it easy to use and to make it possible for users to log calls on the portal. It needs to be web-based.
The interface needs to support better customization. I would like to have the ability to integrate with other systems from the back-end. I am using Orchestrator and it is a little bit difficult because there are too many constraints. I want to connect to other applications to get the data directly. Mobile application integration would be an improvement.
It crashes our client's computers. Sometimes they get blue screens. It would be useful if SCSM could check the upgrades or patches before we implemented them to see if they are going to crash a client's system. Or, if it does install, and the client's system crashes, it would be good if the solution could revert back somehow.
The price of this solution is high and it needs to be cheaper.
There are a few bugs. I would definitely suggest that if the end user is a layman, he needs to be trained how to use the solution properly.