Skip to main content

CSI and Design Coordination

I have often been asked about how to implement a good design coordination process.  My response is have you ever thought of implementation of a new process from a CSI approach?  First let’s understand what the purpose and objective of a design and coordination process should be.  Ensuring that the goals and objectives are met by providing and maintaining a single point of coordination and control for all activities and processes within the design stage of the lifecycle.  If we approach this from a Continual Service Improvement perspective the first question to ask is:


What’s the vision?  
Come to an accord among key stakeholders about what it is you want to create and what the underpinning critical success factors should be in support of the defined goals and objectives of the organization.  Will they ultimately support the long term mission and vision of the business leadership?
Where are we now?
Set that baseline starting point about the current condition of where your service design activities are.  Remember these must be measured and agreed. Questions need to be asked and assessments need to be made.  What activities are currently performed and by whom?  What are the challenges and weaknesses that are being experienced?  What is working well?  What are the pain points that are being expressed by both the business and your IT organization?  What skills and capabilities are listed in your skills library and which will we need to acquire into the future?
Where do we want to be?
This is where we now agree on priorities for improvement.  These of course, will be based on the overall vision for Service Design and the current state of affairs.  The guiding principle should be that the implementation of the Service Design Coordination process should ensure a reliable, repeatable, consistent delivery of the resources to deliver the practices of Service Design.
How do we get there?
Through the implementation of an agreed and detailed plan on how to move from the “AS IS” state to the “TO BE” state.
Did we get there?
Through the use of defined and agreed metrics, KPIs and CSFs determine if the improvements to the Service Design processes and activities have been successful in meeting the agreed “TO BE” state.  If a gap continues to exist between the new current state and the desired state, then another cycle of improvements will be necessary.   Remember that these improvements can be implemented in a phased approach.
How do we keep the momentum going?
By using are ongoing monitoring and measuring capabilities to ensure the level of performance of our  new Service Design practices become part of our culture and that they can continue to meet the ever changing needs of the organization.

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…