Skip to main content

Reference Models

In 1999 the US Federal Government took a step toward improving the quality, performance, delivery and support of IT-based services. This step was the creation of the Federal Enterprise Architecture Framework (FEAF). 

This framework consists of five reference models. A reference model is an abstract or logical framework or structure that describes the interconnections between ideas, concepts, elements or components that make up a whole system. We can look to the FEAF reference models as a guide for how we might approach an ITSM implementation regardless of industry or organizational structure.
  • Performance Reference Model: Used to measure the performance of major IT investments 
    • This equates to a CSI or Metrics Program 
  • Business Reference Model: Process-driven structure that describe business operations regardless of the organization that performs them
    • This equates to a Service Portfolio framework
  • Services Reference Model: Classification of service components and elements with respect to how they support business and/or performance objectives 
    • This equates to a Service Catalog framework
  • Data Reference Model: Describes the data, information and knowledge used to support business and performance objectives
    • This equates to a Service Knowledge Management System (SKMS) framework
  • Technical Reference Model: Categorizes the technical standards, elements and components used to deliver and support IT Services
    • This equates to a Configuration Management System framework
Each of the models support the one above it to create a holistic picture of how to ensure that value is being delivered to customers through top-down design of the models and bottom-up delivery of the capabilities and resources.
If you are struggling with how ITSM works in the big picture of your organization, you might take some time to investigate and research the Federal Enterprise Architecture Framework and its associated reference models.

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…