Search
Topics
  Create an account Home  ·  Topics  ·  Downloads  ·  Your Account  ·  Submit News  ·  Top 10  
Modules
· Home
· Content
· FAQ
· Feedback
· Forums
· Search
· Statistics
· Surveys
· Top
· Topics
· Web Links
· Your_Account

Current Membership

Latest: CCavill
New Today: 131
New Yesterday: 154
Overall: 131029

People Online:
Visitors: 71
Members: 7
Total: 78 .

Languages
Select Interface Language:


Major ITIL Portals
For general information and resources, ITIL and ITSM World is the most well known for both ITIL and ITIL Books. A shorter snapshot approach can be found at ITIL Zone

Related Resources
Service related resources
Service Level Agreement
Outsourcing

Note: ITIL is a registered trademark of OGC. This portal is totally independent and is in no way related to them. See our Feedback Page for more information.


The Itil Community Forum: Forums

ITIL :: View topic - Fast Track Changes
 Forum FAQForum FAQ   SearchSearch   UsergroupsUsergroups   ProfileProfile   Log in to check your private messagesLog in to check your private messages   Log inLog in 

Fast Track Changes

 
Post new topic   Reply to topic    ITIL Forum Index -> Change Management
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
Puli
Newbie
Newbie


Joined: Dec 04, 2007
Posts: 5

PostPosted: Tue Dec 04, 2007 11:54 pm    Post subject: Fast Track Changes Reply with quote

Hi All.

Our business has some 1500+ changes going though my team at the moment.

We use a Risk Assessemnet and A leadtime rating which gives us a risk (Red Amber and Green), and a Leadtime rating E (Emergency, 1 2,3 and 4). This is done via asking different questions eg Impact of change No of users effected etc.

All our changes are vetted by my team before being sent out for approval. If there is a problem with the change we go back to the raiser logging the fact that there was a problem and sent it out.

What we would like to do is to have all our Green 4 changes (Which is the lowest risk and some 40% of all changes), bypass the change team, and go striaght out for approval. However the is a big conccern that as my team will not vet it (But we still get ouside approval) more incidents will happen and a bigger risk to our service.

Has anyone done this before?, and if so what sort of things did you tried to reduce Risk? Or is this really against ITIL?

I understand the term Standard Chnage which I know this is not and am looking at this as well.

Thanks very much

Paul.
Back to top
View user's profile
Ed
Senior Itiler


Joined: Feb 28, 2006
Posts: 411
Location: Coventry, England

PostPosted: Wed Dec 05, 2007 12:04 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Hi Paul

I am not sure that I understand your process.

When you say that the Changes go out from your team for approval, are you saying that the Change Management Team do not have the final say?

If so, this is not Change Management, but simply risk assessment, without any responsibility.

Have I got this right, or have I misunderstood?

Regards

Ed
Back to top
View user's profile
Puli
Newbie
Newbie


Joined: Dec 04, 2007
Posts: 5

PostPosted: Wed Dec 05, 2007 1:32 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Hi Ed,

Currently the change comes into us and we assess them. If they clash with something happening over the weekend, or the Business requires a service to be up we do have via our CAB the final say.

We will of course try and suggest a different time that the change could be done etc.

"Fast tracking" would bypass us as a team althought other people either IT or Business would still have to approve. So the process will be Raiser- out for approval, approved, (Or rejected) ,implemented, and then closed.

Of course there will be rules such as If this is happening at a weekend for example then its not a Green or leadtime 4 type change and then get assess according.. We would also do Reports done on any incidents, random sampling etc......

So at the moment we do change management, but the push is to use the 40% of our time on other things other than assesing low level changes to the ones that could cause us harm.

Hope this helps

Paul

Cheers
Paul
Back to top
View user's profile
Ed
Senior Itiler


Joined: Feb 28, 2006
Posts: 411
Location: Coventry, England

PostPosted: Wed Dec 05, 2007 1:56 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Hi Paul

I guess for me the basic problem here is the loss of control.

I fight to ensure that all the changes come through me/my team.

I actually want to manage those changes you are trying to shed.

I understand that these changes do not fit the Standard Change criteria, and this makes them even more in need of control for me.

They do not have to go the whole CAB route if it is decided that the Change Manager has sufficient authority to authorise these low risk/low impact Changes. This might be your way out.

I really, really would not want to let them go to be approved by someone who was not looking at the big picture.

Regards

Ed
Back to top
View user's profile
Puli
Newbie
Newbie


Joined: Dec 04, 2007
Posts: 5

PostPosted: Wed Dec 05, 2007 7:37 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Thanks for the infomation and advice Ed.

Paul
Back to top
View user's profile
Mark-OLoughlin
Senior Itiler


Joined: Oct 12, 2007
Posts: 306
Location: Ireland

PostPosted: Wed Dec 05, 2007 7:58 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

I agree with Ed.

You may want to do it the other way.

You need to ensure that all changes are vetted before going to CAB. This allows you to ensure that all details are correct and there are no conflicts etc.

This also allows you to ascertain if there are any ones that can be pre-approved at this level i.e. that do not need to go to the CAB so you free up CAB time if anything.
_________________
Mark O'Loughlin
ITSM / ITIL Consultant
Back to top
View user's profile
Skinnera
Senior Itiler


Joined: May 07, 2005
Posts: 121
Location: UK

PostPosted: Fri Jan 04, 2008 7:11 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

For my organisation we have a fast track process which means that whilst my team still vet the content of the Change, it doesn't go to a CAB but directly to an empowered representative within the support organisation (ie the Head of the area of one of their DRs, never lower). This is typically done for Fault Fix or Emergency (preventative) Changes.

Equally, these same people have given my team the authority to approve Changes that have been rated as Low Risk and Low Impact, again after we have vetted that the right information, clarity, plans etc are present.

This reduces the volume of Change coming to the CAB (put into context we implement 30k Changes per year) without exposing us to inordinate risk.

In terms of 'losing control' of Change approval, or Chaneg Management not having 'the final say', I guess there are different models in different organisations.
In my case, the volume of Change we deal with, the speed at which it is implemented, and the scope of infrastructure and service it touches is too vast for my team to understand everything and 'technically' approve it. That's what our CAB is for. Smile
Back to top
View user's profile Send e-mail
Display posts from previous:   
Post new topic   Reply to topic    ITIL Forum Index -> Change Management All times are GMT + 10 Hours
Page 1 of 1

 
Jump to:  
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum

Powered by phpBB 2.0.8 © 2001 phpBB Group
phpBB port v2.1 based on Tom Nitzschner's phpbb2.0.6 upgraded to phpBB 2.0.4 standalone was developed and tested by:
ArtificialIntel, ChatServ, mikem,
sixonetonoffun and Paul Laudanski (aka Zhen-Xjell).

Version 2.1 by Nuke Cops 2003 http://www.nukecops.com

Forums ©

 

Logos/trademarks property of respective owner. Comments property of poster. Rest 2004 Itil Community for Service Management & Foundation Certification. SV
Site source copyright (c)2003, and is Free Software under the GNU / GPL licence. All Rights Are Reserved.