Skip to main content

WTF? Why the Failure?


Through the implementation of best practices, one of ITSM's critical success factors is to enhance the business' perception of the IT organization.  By creating a service strategy which helps to define good design, encourage effective transition processes and deliver valuable services through efficient and effective operational management, we work hard at making this goal a reality. Unfortunately, IT is often perceived to be ineffective and inefficient. 
Recently, the government’s inability to deliver a working website for the affordable care act was splashed all over  news with many of my non-IT friends and family asking, how could this happen?  How come IT people never get it right?
I want to respond with “BUT WE DO” and list many of the successes that I have been part of during my career.   But I look at them sheepishly and respond with” I don’t really know”.  As I think about this, I begin to get angry and not just because I’m an American tax payer, but because as an IT professional, I know the kinds of tools that we as an industry have at our disposal to ensure that these kinds of failures should never happen. Given the development of integrated tool sets, best practice frameworks, auditable standards and the focus on continual improvement it is inconceivable that a professional organization could deliver a product of such poor quality? Unfortunately, it happens and more often than we want to admit. 
The thing that is most disturbing for me is that ringing in my ears of “How come you IT people never get it right?”  It seems we have a lot more work in front of us, to enhance the public’s perception of our industry.  Perception is often reality and a successful service management program has to recognize and address internal and external perceptions of IT's ability and performance.   It's not easy but is quite possible when the message is one of learning from past successes and failures as part of your continual improvement.

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…