{"id":11742,"date":"2026-07-09T16:28:03","date_gmt":"2026-07-09T10:58:03","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/desqcon.com\/staging\/?page_id=11742"},"modified":"2026-07-09T16:46:26","modified_gmt":"2026-07-09T11:16:26","slug":"case-studies","status":"publish","type":"page","link":"https:\/\/desqcon.com\/staging\/case-studies\/","title":{"rendered":"Case Studies"},"content":{"rendered":"
\n
\n
Case studies<\/div>\n

What ITSM, HAM, CMDB and SAM maturity improvement looks like, by industry<\/h1>\n

The scenarios below are representative engagements, composite examples built from patterns we see repeatedly across clients in each industry, not tied to any single named organization. Real, named case studies will replace these as client permissions come through.<\/p>\n <\/div>\n<\/section>\n\n

\n
\n
0<\/div>
Process implementations delivered<\/div><\/div>\n
0<\/div>
ServiceNow ITSM implementations<\/div><\/div>\n
0<\/div>
ServiceNow ITOM\/ITAM implementations<\/div><\/div>\n
0<\/div>
SAM implementations<\/div><\/div>\n <\/div>\n<\/div>\n\n
\n
\n
\n
\n <\/svg>\n <\/div>\n
\n
Life sciences & pharma<\/div>\n

Regulated environments, zero tolerance for audit gaps<\/h2>\n <\/div>\n <\/div>\n
\n GxP compliance workflows<\/span>\n Clinical trial systems support<\/span>\n Regulatory audit readiness<\/span>\n Lab equipment asset tracking<\/span>\n <\/div>\n
\n
\n Illustrative scenario<\/span>\n ITSM<\/span>\n

Cutting change lead time without sacrificing compliance<\/h3>\n

Global pharmaceutical manufacturer, ~5,000 employees, regulated GxP environment.<\/em><\/p>\n

Challenge:<\/strong> Change approvals routinely took days, audit trails were scattered across disconnected tools, and emergency changes were common because the formal process was too slow to use.<\/p>\n

Approach:<\/strong> Redesigned Change Management with built-in compliance checkpoints, implemented automated audit logging, and retrained the Change Advisory Board on a clearer RACI model.<\/p>\n

Outcome:<\/strong> Faster, audit-ready change approvals without sacrificing compliance rigor.<\/p>\n

\n
-35%<\/div>
Change cycle time<\/div><\/div>\n
-50%<\/div>
Audit findings<\/div><\/div>\n
-28%<\/div>
Emergency changes<\/div><\/div>\n <\/div>\n <\/div>\n
\n \n \n \n \n 2.1<\/text>\n 3.8<\/text>\n Before<\/text>\n After<\/text>\n Change management maturity<\/text>\n <\/svg>\n <\/div>\n <\/div>\n <\/div>\n<\/section>\n\n
\n
\n
\n
\n <\/svg>\n <\/div>\n
\n
Energy, oil & gas<\/div>\n

Distributed field operations, unified visibility<\/h2>\n <\/div>\n <\/div>\n
\n Field asset visibility<\/span>\n SCADA\/OT incident response<\/span>\n Safety-critical change control<\/span>\n Remote site CMDB sync<\/span>\n <\/div>\n
\n
\n Illustrative scenario<\/span>\n CMDB<\/span>\n

Building a unified asset picture across distributed field sites<\/h3>\n

Multinational operator with regionally distributed field sites and legacy regional systems.<\/em><\/p>\n

Challenge:<\/strong> Asset and configuration data was scattered across regional systems with no single source of truth, slowing incident triage and obscuring ownership during safety-critical outages.<\/p>\n

Approach:<\/strong> Consolidated CMDB on BMC Helix, ran an Asset & Configuration Management maturity uplift, and standardized incident severity and ownership across all regions.<\/p>\n

Outcome:<\/strong> Faster, more confident incident response and materially better asset visibility.<\/p>\n

\n
-30%<\/div>
Mean time to resolve<\/div><\/div>\n
+45%<\/div>
Asset data accuracy<\/div><\/div>\n
-20%<\/div>
Unplanned downtime<\/div><\/div>\n <\/div>\n <\/div>\n
\n \n \n \n \n 1.8<\/text>\n 3.5<\/text>\n Before<\/text>\n After<\/text>\n Asset & config maturity<\/text>\n <\/svg>\n <\/div>\n <\/div>\n <\/div>\n<\/section>\n\n
\n
\n
\n
\n <\/svg>\n <\/div>\n
\n
Manufacturing<\/div>\n

Multi-plant hardware, one source of truth<\/h2>\n <\/div>\n <\/div>\n
\n Shop-floor hardware lifecycle<\/span>\n Plant equipment warranty tracking<\/span>\n Multi-site procurement consolidation<\/span>\n IoT device asset registry<\/span>\n <\/div>\n
\n
\n Illustrative scenario<\/span>\n HAM<\/span>\n

Ending duplicate hardware spend across a multi-plant footprint<\/h3>\n

Global industrial manufacturer running dozens of plants, each managing hardware locally.<\/em><\/p>\n

Challenge:<\/strong> Laptops, plant-floor terminals, and networking equipment were tracked in per-site spreadsheets with no central visibility, leading to duplicate purchases, missed warranty renewals, and slow break-fix response.<\/p>\n

Approach:<\/strong> Implemented centralized Hardware Asset Management with barcode-based lifecycle tracking, standardized procurement-to-retirement workflows, and integrated the hardware register into the CMDB as a single source of truth.<\/p>\n

Outcome:<\/strong> Meaningful reduction in duplicate spend and much faster break-fix turnaround plant-wide.<\/p>\n

\n
-22%<\/div>
Duplicate hardware spend<\/div><\/div>\n
-35%<\/div>
Break-fix turnaround<\/div><\/div>\n
+40%<\/div>
Warranty capture rate<\/div><\/div>\n <\/div>\n <\/div>\n
\n \n \n \n \n 1.7<\/text>\n 3.7<\/text>\n Before<\/text>\n After<\/text>\n Hardware asset management maturity<\/text>\n <\/svg>\n <\/div>\n <\/div>\n <\/div>\n<\/section>\n\n
\n
\n
\n
\n <\/svg>\n <\/div>\n
\n
Banking & financial services<\/div>\n

Software spend and compliance, under one dashboard<\/h2>\n <\/div>\n <\/div>\n
\n Software license compliance<\/span>\n Vendor audit readiness<\/span>\n SaaS spend optimization<\/span>\n Branch hardware refresh planning<\/span>\n <\/div>\n
\n
\n Illustrative scenario<\/span>\n SAM<\/span>\n

Reclaiming software spend ahead of a compliance audit<\/h3>\n

Regional bank spanning retail and commercial banking operations.<\/em><\/p>\n

Challenge:<\/strong> The bank was paying for thousands of underused software licenses across its application estate, with no central visibility into usage, renewal dates, or compliance exposure ahead of vendor audits.<\/p>\n

Approach:<\/strong> Implemented ServiceNow SAM Pro with usage-based license reclamation, automated renewal tracking, and a live compliance dashboard ahead of the next vendor audit cycle.<\/p>\n

Outcome:<\/strong> Meaningful license cost reduction and an audit-ready compliance posture.<\/p>\n

\n
-18%<\/div>
Software license spend<\/div><\/div>\n
+32%<\/div>
License utilization<\/div><\/div>\n
-50%<\/div>
Audit prep time<\/div><\/div>\n <\/div>\n <\/div>\n
\n \n \n \n \n 1.6<\/text>\n 3.4<\/text>\n Before<\/text>\n After<\/text>\n Software asset management maturity<\/text>\n <\/svg>\n <\/div>\n <\/div>\n <\/div>\n<\/section>\n\n
\n
\n
\n
\n <\/svg>\n <\/div>\n
\n
Retail<\/div>\n

Peak-season reliability, built ahead of time<\/h2>\n <\/div>\n <\/div>\n
\n Peak-season readiness<\/span>\n POS incident response<\/span>\n Store hardware lifecycle<\/span>\n E-commerce platform stability<\/span>\n <\/div>\n
\n
\n Illustrative scenario<\/span>\n ITSM<\/span>\n

Surviving peak season without repeating the same outages<\/h3>\n

Omnichannel retailer running e-commerce and in-store systems through a small central IT team.<\/em><\/p>\n

Challenge:<\/strong> Peak-season traffic repeatedly overwhelmed a lean IT team, and without formal Problem Management, the same root causes kept resurfacing year after year.<\/p>\n

Approach:<\/strong> Stood up a Problem Management practice, integrated proactive monitoring, and built seasonal readiness runbooks ahead of peak events.<\/p>\n

Outcome:<\/strong> Fewer repeat incidents and materially better uptime through peak periods.<\/p>\n

\n
-45%<\/div>
Recurring incidents<\/div><\/div>\n
-30%<\/div>
Root cause resolution time<\/div><\/div>\n
3.6\/5<\/div>
Problem mgmt maturity<\/div><\/div>\n <\/div>\n <\/div>\n
\n \n \n \n \n 1.9<\/text>\n 3.6<\/text>\n Before<\/text>\n After<\/text>\n Problem management maturity<\/text>\n <\/svg>\n <\/div>\n <\/div>\n <\/div>\n<\/section>\n\n
\n
\n

Want to be our next case study?<\/h2>\n

Start with a free maturity assessment and see what's possible.<\/p>\n Start free maturity assessment<\/a>\n <\/div>\n<\/section>\n\n