Skip to main content

Inclusion – Required for DevOps Continuous Delivery Pipeline

As a noun the official definition of the word inclusion is defined as the state of being included or being made a part of something. When a book covers many different ideas and subjects, it is an example of the inclusion of many ideas. When multiple people are all invited to be part of a group, this is an example of the inclusion of many different people. There are many certification classes available for DevOps, Agile and ITSM. All of them will speak of Inclusion.

When considering inclusion in a DevOps Continuous Delivery Pipeline, service providers frequently miss the inclusion of some very necessary elements. In order to ensure real value, and cost-effective solutions fast, it is back to basics. Consider the inclusion of the following:

  • Requirements: In the past, there has been more of a focus on the Utility (Functional Requirements) for a product or service than there was on the Warranty (Non-Functional) Requirements. Full blow requirements up front before the development ensures a stable antifragile environment and customer outcomes that deliver true value. Consider inclusion for requirements including Security, Compliance, Availability, Capacity and Continuity first. Most find the code, the integrated testing, and the results to be better than anticipated. Want to really be proactive and not always firefighting? Let’s do it right the first time with the inclusion of all requirements.
  • Value Stream Stakeholders: This is a big one. It is not just Dev and Ops that need to integrate but rather all stakeholders in the Value Stream. And yes, this includes the Customer, the Business Partner, CISO and practitioners. Shatter the silos. There is no such thing as “We are too big” or “We are too small” or “You just don’t understand, we have a certain culture here”. There is one “Value Stream” and inclusion of all parties from idea to the realization of value is required. 

…educate & inspire

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: René. 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…