Setting Up Stockrooms Hardware Asset Management - do I need to use Hardware Asset Management Scope

WazzaJC
Tera Expert

Setting Up Stockrooms Hardware Asset Management - do I need to use Hardware Asset Management Scope

 

Hi ServiceNow Community Colleagues,

 

Just a really quick question, I would appreciate help/guidance on.

 

If I am setting up new Stockrooms related to Hardware Asset Management, do I have to be in the 'Hardware Asset Management' Scope or it would not matter if I am in the 'Global' Scope ?

 

Is it essential to be within 'Hardware Asset Management' Scope if just setting up Stockrooms that relate to Hardware Asset Management processes or I can just do this in the usual 'Global' Scope ?

 

What approach is recommended - can it cause me any issues if I just set these Stockrooms up in the standard Global Scope ?

 

Many thanks and I always appreciate the community's help.

1 ACCEPTED SOLUTION

jMarshal
Mega Sage
Mega Sage

There are pros/cons to each approach.

If you want to keep all aspects of your HAM implementation "compartmentalized" to easily identify components of each object in the platform and which module it is associated with, do it in the HAM scope...but that may be a bit "overkill".

You will experience extra "overhead" with needing to change scope, when you want to adjust the record (admin task) in the future. We set up our walkup location this way (scoped instead of global) and find that it is a good way to ensure you are only adjusting the values for the walkup location with intent (it requires a second, conscious step of changing scope)...but some folks find that overly "tedious".

Putting it in global is low-risk (in terms of keeping things "compartmentalized") as there aren't a lot of reasons why you would have a "stockroom" which is not related to HAM in any way...as opposed to other in-platform objects/artefacts which are more ambiguous and could be associated with various different areas/modules, and in that sense, you may want that "compartmentalization" for management/organizational/architecural/governance purposes.

...and in global, you don't need any special permissions or actions (to change scope, etc) for administration tasks related to the stockroom attributes/configuration.

 

Hope this helps!

View solution in original post

2 REPLIES 2

jMarshal
Mega Sage
Mega Sage

There are pros/cons to each approach.

If you want to keep all aspects of your HAM implementation "compartmentalized" to easily identify components of each object in the platform and which module it is associated with, do it in the HAM scope...but that may be a bit "overkill".

You will experience extra "overhead" with needing to change scope, when you want to adjust the record (admin task) in the future. We set up our walkup location this way (scoped instead of global) and find that it is a good way to ensure you are only adjusting the values for the walkup location with intent (it requires a second, conscious step of changing scope)...but some folks find that overly "tedious".

Putting it in global is low-risk (in terms of keeping things "compartmentalized") as there aren't a lot of reasons why you would have a "stockroom" which is not related to HAM in any way...as opposed to other in-platform objects/artefacts which are more ambiguous and could be associated with various different areas/modules, and in that sense, you may want that "compartmentalization" for management/organizational/architecural/governance purposes.

...and in global, you don't need any special permissions or actions (to change scope, etc) for administration tasks related to the stockroom attributes/configuration.

 

Hope this helps!

Hi @jMarshal  this is excellent, all makes perfect sense and crystal clear.

Thanks very much for taking the time to provide very valuable feedback to help me with this, much appreciated! 🙂