Avoiding Value traps in ServiceNow Implementation

[SGUPTA1]

All of us will agree that the ultimate goal of any ServiceNow implementation is to provide value to the client. Yet, even with the very experienced team, we sometimes find ourselves falling short of expectations. In this blog, based on my experience in implementation, I'll explore four common value traps, why is it easy for fall for them, and the problems they can bring over time. By understanding these traps, we can be better prepared to avoid these costly mistakes.

Trap 1: Taking the "Lift and Shift" approach.

Also known as “like for like” approach, this is mostly used when the objective is to replace or decommission any existing system with ServiceNow. The idea is to replicate the current state in the future state and that gets reflected in the design. Whether it is de-commissioning the older tools such as BMC remedy or moving from Agent workspace to Service Operations workspace there has been huge investment of time and effort in the existing processes and the users feel comfortable with the status quo – albeit some pains. The thought of altering these processes can be daunting and at the same time the option to have far less process re-design, reduced effort for the change management is attractive. However, this approach can be problematic for several reasons. The old processes do not make use of the latest capabilities provided by ServiceNow such as NowAssist and GenAI tools. They were probably designed keeping the old architecture in mind. Additionally, existing tools might have undergone extensive customization, potentially introducing technical debt which could carry over into target state.

Trap 2: Ignoring the Current State.

At the same time, an argument can be made as to why bother analyzing the current state of systems and processes when they are being replaced. If teams totally ignore current state, there are chances that they might miss important stakeholders, may not understand existing pain points, inefficiencies, and bottlenecks. They could also overlook critical aspects on performance and optimization opportunities. There is also a missed opportunity for making Organization Change Management (OCM) more effective as business users are more likely to adapt to new processes or ways of working if they exactly understand what has changed from past and how it is done in the new system.

Trap 3: Trying to get 100% coverage.

Value realization in ServiceNow implementations often adheres to the Pareto principle, where most of the value is derived from a smaller subset of use cases, typically around 20%. However, many projects suffer from ambiguous scopes that fail to appreciate this principle. Consequently, workshops may be inundated with efforts to design features that are sparingly used or attempt to cover undefined scopes, such as designing all workflows, creating all requests, discovering all asset types, assessing all risk types, mapping all services, and more. This approach leads to a waste of time and can result in analysis-paralysis, hindering progress and detracting from the implementation's overall success.

Trap 4: Reducing the Organization Change Management (OCM) time.

Amid cost pressures, it's common for projects to consider trimming expenses, and often, Organizational Change Management (OCM) efforts are seen as a potential area for cuts. The common strategy is to cut the OCM efforts or restrict the OCM team’s engagement to the later phases of the project. The underlying assumption is that the OCM efforts can be reduced for use cases where the impacts are lesser rather than trimming the overall scope. However, this needs cautious approach because hidden complexities or dependencies within seemingly low impact use cases can emerge unexpectedly, demanding more attention than initially anticipated. There could also be stakeholders with high influence and interest and may still require adequate communication and support during the transition.

Conclusion: We covered four common traps which can hinder value realization. By addressing these common value traps, the implementation teams can enhance the likelihood of realizing the value from deployments. In the next segment of this blog series, I'll explain strategies for addressing to understand and mitigate the impacts of these value traps.

Reference:

'ServiceNow for Architects and Project Leaders' book by Roy Justus | David Zhao