Skip to main content

Use CSI to Meet Changing Customer Needs

You can’t always go home again, but you can use Continual Service Improvement (CSI) to meet the changing needs of your customers.

I recently posted a blog about returning to a service desk I had managed and spoke about how the changing business environment had impacted management’s ability to sustain the current list of Critical success factors (CSFs) and Key Performance indicators (KPIs). The 1st question that was asked was “What should we measure?” Within the new business reality we reviewed how the corporate vision, mission, goals and objectives had changed? We spoke with service owners, business process owners, business analysts and customers and asked what was critical to them. What services that we were providing was creating the most value to them and enabling them to meet these new goals and objectives?

Management then identified the gaps of “what we should measure”, to “what we can measure”. From this a more customer focused list was developed. The overriding objective of these new service measurements was to provide a meaningful view of the IT service as experienced by our customers. The three key areas that customers most cared about were:
  • Is the service available? 
  • Is it reliable? 
  • Is it being delivered with the proper level of performance? 
Service desk along with Technical Management began to tie incidents to particular CIs and measured component availability. Management reviewed the “Expanded incident lifecycle” and reliability of services and components. They measured the maintainability of components and CIs tied to particular service incidents. They measured the serviceability of their suppliers to meet contracted services. From a performance perspective they worked with capacity management and tied performance related incidents of services to components and CIs. All of these positively impacting the availability and reliability of those critical business services on which the customer depended.

 

 


 

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

What is the difference between Process Owner, Process Manager and Process Practitioner?

I was recently asked to clarify the roles of the Process Owner, Process Manager and Process Practitioner and wanted to share this with you.

Roles and Responsibilities:
Process Owner – this individual is “Accountable” for the process. They are the goto person and represent this process across the entire organization. They will ensure that the process is clearly defined, designed and documented. They will ensure that the process has a set of Policies for governance.Example: The process owner for Incident management will ensure that all of the activities to Identify, Record, Categorize, Investigate, … all the way to closing the incident are defined and documented with clearly defined roles, responsibilities, handoffs, and deliverables. An example of a policy in could be… “All Incidents must be logged”. Policies are rules that govern the process. Process Owner ensures that all Process activities, (what to do), Procedures (details on how to perform the activity) and the policies (r…

How Does ITIL Help in the Management of the SDLC?

I was recently asked how ITIL helps in the management of the SDLC (Software Development Lifecycle).  Simply put... SDLC is a Lifecycle approach to produce the software or the "product".  ITIL is a Lifecycle approach that focuses on the "service".
I’ll start by reviewing both SDLC and ITIL Lifecycles and then summarize:
SDLC  -  The intent of an SDLC process is to help produce a product that is cost-efficient, effective and of high quality. Once an application is created, the SDLC maps the proper deployment of the software into the live environment. The SDLC methodology usually contains the following stages: Analysis (requirements and design), construction, testing, release and maintenance.  The focus here is on the Software.  Most organizations will use an Agile or Waterfall approach to implement the software through the Software Development Lifecycle.
ITIL  -  is a best practice for IT service management (ITSM) that focuses on aligning IT services with the needs …

Incidents when a Defect is Involved

Question: We currently track defects in a separate system than our ticket management system. With that said, my question is does anyone have suggestions and/or best practices on how to handle incidents when a defect is involved? Should the incident be closed since the defect is being worked on in another defect tracking system if it is noted in the incident ticket? I am considering creating an incident statuses of 'closed-unresolved' so the incident can still be reported on in our ticket management system but know it is being worked on/tracked in the defect system. With defects, it is possible that we may never work on them because they are very low priority and the impact is low to the user. However, in some cases a defect is being worked on. Should we create a problem ticket instead?
Thanks, René W.

Answer: RenĂ©. In ITIL, the activity you are describing is handled by the Problem Management process. ITIL does not use the term “defect” but it does use the term “known error” to…