There are several ways to approach sourcing for a ServiceNow project in the Netherlands. You can opt to manage it internally, bring in temporary expertise, or partner with one of the Big Five consultancies—be it through local, nearshore, or offshore resources. Each of these options comes with its own set of pros and cons. Factors such as cost, quality, risk, and timelines will likely vary across these choices.

Below, you’ll find a proposal generated based on market rates that are typically seen in the industry according to ChatGPT.

Executive Summary

This proposal outlines the options for implementing the ServiceNow platform to support ITSM processes, including integration with existing systems (IAM, HCM, Intune, JAMF, Azure, AWS, and GCP) and utilizing ITOM for infrastructure discovery. The approach incorporates adopting ServiceNow’s out-of-the-box (OOTB) processes, defining a digital product/service portfolio, and using the Common Service Data Model (CSDM). We present three staffing options for the project, evaluating their pros, cons, expected costs, and durations. The goal is to balance internal team capacity building with effective delivery and long-term ownership.

Project Scope

  1. Implementation Goals
    • Agile ITSM implementation with OOTB processes.
    • Integration with IAM, HCM, Intune, JAMF, Azure, AWS, and GCP.
    • ITOM implementation for IP infrastructure discovery.
    • Adoption of ServiceNow CSDM.
    • Definition and documentation of a digital product/service portfolio.
  2. Post-Project Goals
    • Internal ownership of platform management (platform ownership, product ownership, daily platform administration).
    • Outsourced technical maintenance and support.
    • ITSM process governance setup and role definition as per process guides.
  3. Excluded Scope
    • Adoption and training of ITSM processes (addressed in a separate project).

Options for Project Execution

Option 1: Fully Internal Execution

  • Description: Build an internal project team to execute the implementation.
  • Pros:
    • Full control over project execution.
    • Accelerated knowledge transfer and upskilling of internal staff.
    • Long-term cost savings by reducing dependency on external expertise.
  • Cons:
    • High risk of delays due to lack of experience with ServiceNow implementations.
    • Significant investment in initial training and onboarding.
    • Potential quality concerns without experienced oversight.
  • Estimated Costs (per project phase):
    • Training: €150,000 (CAPEX).
    • Internal FTEs: €80,000–€100,000 per role (CAPEX).
  • Total Cost: €500,000–€700,000 (CAPEX).
  • Duration: 12–16 months.

Option 2: Hybrid Model (Internal Team + External Experts)

  • Description: Combine internal resources with experienced external consultants (freelancers or Big Five consultancy).
  • Pros:
    • Balanced risk with experienced consultants guiding internal team members.
    • Accelerated execution and upskilling of internal staff.
    • More control over project management compared to full outsourcing.
  • Cons:
    • Higher initial costs compared to full internal execution.
    • Dependency on external resources for critical aspects.
  • Estimated Costs (per project phase):
    • Internal FTEs: €40,000–€60,000 per role (CAPEX).
    • External Freelancers: €150–€200/hour (CAPEX).
    • Big Five Consultants: €200–€300/hour (if selected, CAPEX).
    • Combined Training Costs: €100,000 (CAPEX).
  • Total Cost: €800,000–€1,200,000 (CAPEX).
  • Duration: 8–12 months.

Option 3: Full Outsourcing to Big Five Consultancy

  • Description: Outsource the project entirely to a Big Five consultancy firm with offshore development capabilities.
  • Pros:
    • Minimal internal resource demand during implementation.
    • Expertise and proven frameworks for ServiceNow implementation.
    • Predictable delivery timelines.
  • Cons:
    • High cost of engagement.
    • Limited internal knowledge transfer.
    • Dependence on external vendor for future enhancements.
  • Estimated Costs:
    • End-to-End Project Execution: €1,500,000–€2,000,000 (CAPEX).
  • Total Cost: €1,500,000–€2,000,000 (CAPEX).
  • Duration: 6–9 months.

Hybrid Model (Option 2) is recommended to achieve the following objectives:

  • Deliver a high-quality implementation within a reasonable timeframe.
  • Enable internal upskilling by pairing less experienced staff with seasoned professionals.
  • Retain sufficient control over the project.

Target Operating and Sourcing Model

  1. Technical Maintenance
    • Fully outsourced to an external vendor.
    • Estimated Cost: €200,000/year (OPEX).
  2. Daily Platform Administration
    • Retained in-house.
    • Estimated Cost: €50,000/year (OPEX).
  3. Product and Platform Ownership
    • Retained in-house.
    • Estimated Cost: €100,000/year (OPEX).

Conclusion

Adopting the hybrid model provides a pragmatic balance between cost, control, and capacity building. This approach will enable a successful implementation while preparing internal teams for future platform management. Below is a comparison of the three options:

 

Criteria Fully Internal Execution Hybrid Model Full Outsourcing
Total Cost (CAPEX) €500,000–€700,000 €800,000–€1,200,000 €1,500,000–€2,000,000
Duration 12–16 months 8–12 months 6–9 months
Internal Upskilling High Moderate Low
Project Control High Moderate Low
Risk of Delays High Moderate Low
Dependency on Vendor Low Moderate High

A detailed project charter and execution plan will follow upon approval.

Next Steps

  1. Approve the recommended hybrid approach.
  2. Identify internal staff to participate in the project.
  3. Begin procurement for external resources.
  4. Define detailed project milestones and timelines.