Skip to main content

Component Failure Impact Analysis

Availability Management balances business availability requirements against the associated costs.

So, should we consider availability requirements before the service has been designed and implemented or after?  The Availability Management process should begin in the Service Strategy stage of the lifecycle and continue in each stage of the service lifecycle. Availability Management ensures that the design approach takes two distinctive but related perspectives. Designing for availability focuses on all aspects of the technical design of the IT service. Designing for recovery ensures that in the event of a service failure, the business can resume normal operations at normal as quickly as possible. One of the techniques that can be invaluable to both perspectives is the Component Failure Impact Analysis (CFIA).

The CFIA can be used to predict and evaluate the impact a component failure can have on its related IT service. This activity identifies areas of weakness or fragility within our technical infrastructure and how additional resilience would improve the service. This technique can also be used to identify the impact and dependencies on IT support skills, competencies and the ability to support a new IT service.

The output from the CFIA helps to ensure that the design of the IT service can prevent or minimize the impact of a component failure to business operations and users. CFIA achieves this by identifying these critical areas:
  • Single points of failure (SPOF)
  • Impact of component failure on the business operations and users
  • Component and people dependencies
  • Component recovery times
  • Identify and document recovery options
  • Identify risk reduction measures
The ITIL Service Design book provides good detail on how to perform and score a Component Impact Analysis. 

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…