How to reflect org structure in ServiceNow for optimum effect? Business Units vs Departments vs Companies vs other org related tables

[Michal Sadowski]

Hi ITBM Superstars,

Here's another curveball from a real work-in-progress implementation.

We want to assign Projects and Demands to what the client calls Divisions and Business Units. Division is a parent of one or more business units in their org structure. 

We're looking at OOTB Business Unit & Department tables that sit idle in the client's instance and are there in Project and Demand forms OOTB. Plus there are OOTB Performance Analytics reports, interactive filters and other components based on these tables that we want to use in the future.

Problem 1 (easier) is the client wants table names to reflect their reality. So OOTB Business Unit would have to be relabelled Division and OOTB Department would have to be relabelled Business Unit...

Do you see any risks here?

Problem 2 (harder) is that the client's org structure is partially reflected in ITSM/CSM applications in both Domains and Companies tables. Unfotunately it would be impractical to hook up to this data for two reasons: 1. it is not and will not be aligned with Project and Demand Management processes, 2. It lives in tables (Domains & Companies) that are not used in OOTB PA reports, filters & other components for Demands and Projects.

What's your experience with essentially duplicating the org structure in SNOW for a different set of processes? Do you think it's OK to use Business Unit and Department table (currently idle) a bit creatively to meet medium-term requirements or would you take it upon yourself to re-architect in a way that marries everybody's needs and serves all processes and all teams that use ServiceNow?

Thanks.

[Matt Rose1]

I always recommend to clients that they conform to the out of the box data model as much as possible. For similar implementations I have done, I've relabeled tables/field labels/module names to reflect the client's terminology if they are not willing to change it.

I've also employed the Parent field on the Business Unit table to implement an organizational hierarchy as well and added fields to Demand/Project to refer to the top level of the hierarchy (e.g. Line of Business) or one level down (e.g. Division). Reporting then is created on those fields instead of the OOTB Business Unit field. I am still using the OOTB tables as intended, just creating new fields to refer to the data with the terms the client actually uses.

Anyway, I agree that Org Mgmt in ServiceNow is not trivial but is one area that is often neglected. Thanks for your thoughts!