The Zurich release has arrived! Interested in new features and functionalities? Click here for more

Add State to Change Request

Brian Lancaster
Tera Sage

My company is doing what they call request for change which is really two processes put in one. The first process is the SDLC and the second is Change Request. They want to modify change request to handle both. I'm telling them that this is a bad process but I'm being overruled so I don't need anybody telling me that. They want approvals from CI owners to being development then go into development then do UAT. I was thinking of adding 3 new state that will be after new but before Asses. They are: DevApproval, Development, and UAT. Now we don't have our CMDB fully setup so in some cases when the CI doesn't have owner they want them to be able to move to access and skip the three new state. So I'm note sure how to modify ChangeRequestStateModel_Normal to reflect the new state and being able to sometimes move directly to assess based on this DOCs Article. Any help would be appreciated. 

1 ACCEPTED SOLUTION

Dr Atul G- LNG
Tera Patron
Tera Patron

Hi @Brian Lancaster 

As a BPC, I would never recommend adding a new state in the Change process. The main reasons are:

  1. Complexity – The Change workflow is already complicated, and making corrections is not easy.

  2. Not Just a Dropdown – Adding a new state isn’t simply adding a dropdown value; it requires building the entire workflow logic (e.g., handling rejections, rollbacks, and transitions).

  3. Heavy Customization – Introducing new states means significant customization, which can cause issues later, such as hiding states from standard processes or dealing with emergency changes.

A better approach is to use the Change Task. For example, assign tasks to the required teams and close those tasks before moving the Change itself forward. If the tasks are incomplete, keep the Change in the current state.

*************************************************************************************************************
If my response proves useful, please indicate its helpfulness by selecting " Accept as Solution" and " Helpful." This action benefits both the community and me.

Regards
Dr. Atul G. - Learn N Grow Together
ServiceNow Techno - Functional Trainer
LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/dratulgrover
YouTube: https://www.youtube.com/@LearnNGrowTogetherwithAtulG
Topmate: https://topmate.io/atul_grover_lng [ Connect for 1-1 Session]

****************************************************************************************************************

View solution in original post

4 REPLIES 4

Dr Atul G- LNG
Tera Patron
Tera Patron

Hi @Brian Lancaster 

As a BPC, I would never recommend adding a new state in the Change process. The main reasons are:

  1. Complexity – The Change workflow is already complicated, and making corrections is not easy.

  2. Not Just a Dropdown – Adding a new state isn’t simply adding a dropdown value; it requires building the entire workflow logic (e.g., handling rejections, rollbacks, and transitions).

  3. Heavy Customization – Introducing new states means significant customization, which can cause issues later, such as hiding states from standard processes or dealing with emergency changes.

A better approach is to use the Change Task. For example, assign tasks to the required teams and close those tasks before moving the Change itself forward. If the tasks are incomplete, keep the Change in the current state.

*************************************************************************************************************
If my response proves useful, please indicate its helpfulness by selecting " Accept as Solution" and " Helpful." This action benefits both the community and me.

Regards
Dr. Atul G. - Learn N Grow Together
ServiceNow Techno - Functional Trainer
LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/dratulgrover
YouTube: https://www.youtube.com/@LearnNGrowTogetherwithAtulG
Topmate: https://topmate.io/atul_grover_lng [ Connect for 1-1 Session]

****************************************************************************************************************

They want the entire process to be auditable. Just using Change Tasks does not allow that as I cannot audit when UAT on development was being done. I don't like this process anymore then you do but I cannot fight it as it is coming from the top person in IT.

Brian Lancaster
Tera Sage

I gave them a new process so we will set what they say.

  1. user submits a request selecting a business offering CI so I know who the approver it.
  2. request gets approved and IT determines its viability then creates a story in the agile module
  3. agile module we do the development and UAT.
  4. Then create a release and associate to a change
  5. Change process says as is out of the box.

 

perfect solution.

*************************************************************************************************************
If my response proves useful, please indicate its helpfulness by selecting " Accept as Solution" and " Helpful." This action benefits both the community and me.

Regards
Dr. Atul G. - Learn N Grow Together
ServiceNow Techno - Functional Trainer
LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/dratulgrover
YouTube: https://www.youtube.com/@LearnNGrowTogetherwithAtulG
Topmate: https://topmate.io/atul_grover_lng [ Connect for 1-1 Session]

****************************************************************************************************************