Skip to main content

Balance in Operation III

In every organization the one constant is change.  In service operation, all functions, processes and related activities have been designed to deliver specific level services.  These services deliver defined and agreed levels of utility and warranty and doing so while delivering an overall value to the business.  The catch is this has to be done in an ever changing environment where requirements, deliverables and perceived value changes over time.  Sometimes this change can be evolutionary or can take place at a very fast pace.

This forms a conflict between maintaining the status quo and adapting to changes in the business and technological environments.  One of the key roles of service operation is to deal with the tension between these ever changing priorities.
This struggle can be broken down into four general imbalances that provide the service provider an opportunity to develop some guidelines to resolve these conflicts:

·         Internal  IT view vs. External business view

·         Stability vs.  Responsiveness

·         Service  quality vs. Cost

·         Reactive vs. Proactive
We will focus today on one of the more difficult elements to bring into balance: service quality versus service cost.

Early in a service lifecycle it is possible to achieve significant increases in the quality of a service with a relatively small amount of money.  For example, increasing availability or creating some enhanced functionality maybe easily accomplished with a relatively small amount of additional resources.  After a service has had time to mature it can become quite expensive and resource intensive to increase measures of quality to the customers and end users.  For example, improving the same service as mentioned above from say 98% availability to 99.9% availability or delivering some additional capability to a more finite group of users can be cost prohibitive.

Determining the optimal balance of cost and quality should be determined during the service strategy and service design phases of the lifecycle, however it is often left to service operation teams whom are generally not equipped nor have the authority to make those levels of decisions.
Having strong and well defined Service Level Requirements and Service Level Agreements from Business Relationship Management (BRM)) and Service Level Management (SLM) should create a clear understanding of the business purpose and potential risks in meeting customer needs.
It is crucial that we achieve a balance between these two views.  Services must be designed and delivered around customer needs and requirements.  They must have the ability to create the desired business outcomes for the users and deliver necessary value to the customer.   At the same time, however, it can be possible to compromise those needs and requirements by not properly planning the cost of delivering those services. 

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…