Shoud All changes go through CAB?

[dsemeniuk]

How do other people do this.

I am being told that all changes should go through CAB, no matter how small or big.

I am not in agreement with this as this would probably just bog down the process and efficiency of getting changes completed if they all have to wait for CAB review and approval.

How do other people do this?

Do you have weekly CAB meetings and have set lead times as in you must have your RFC in so many days to the next CAB meeting?

What do you use for turn around times for getting a change reviewed and approved.

[sparkz]

Hi,
I have always had a level of Change Management approval for low risk, low impact changes. Generally work that can follow a good standard type process but are not preapproved, or, work such as installing a server into a rack.

This allows us simply to schedule the change based on the FSC. without going to CAB.

In my current organisation we are in the same situation as you've described and I am currently implementing that level of authorisation. I do have a model I can show you if you're interested.

Regards,
Mark

[mmallory]

Hi,
My understanding is that not all changes need to go through a CAB. All changes should be approved either via Change Management review (Change Manager or CAB(/EC), or pre-approved Standard Changes.

My take on this is that it would depend on the frequency of the the change, and the risk and impact.

If frequency is high and risk and impact are low, I would opt for the Standard Change route, otherwise I think that just Change Manager review is adequate.

Thanks
-Matt

[ARoll]

Agree with both posters above. not all changes will require to be reviewed by a cab. The basic premise of the cab is to review higher impact and risk changes that could have an impact on an IT Service. By having all changes including small scale items essentially leads to inefficiency and could potentially lead to a rubber stamping mentality. This isn't to say though that apart of your agenda or meeting follow up that you can't include those minor changes that are to be implemented. This would allow your cab membership to see everything that is taking place but not necessarily discuss. A format that i've followed in a previous life was this:

Review of signifficant and major changes for upcoming period

Review of Past period emergency/Urgent changes

Open discussion of minor changes(if any questions for those upcoming)

Review of previous periods implemented changes(typically signifficant/major)

Review of pending to be approved standard changes(New standard changes)
_________________
Adam
Practitioner - Release and Control
Blue Badge

"Not every change is an improvement, but every improvement requires a change"

[Ed]

I agree with the previous posts, however, in the name of accuracy I feel I must add the following.

In point of fact a CAB can be virtual i.e. does not actually meet, it depends on the needs of the business. If the people that you want to attend are required elsewhere on a regular basis, it may become more prudent to do it all by E-Mail (ITIL does not preclude this).

I would agree that a face to face meeting is preferred, but this is not always possible.

Regards

Ed

[dsemeniuk]

[sparkz]

No problem.

Can you give me some details to send it to?

[joeblough]

You need to have weekly meetings setup to discuss all changes along with a set date to submit RFC. Any RFC not submitted before that deadline should automatically follow Emergency Change Procedure.

[sparkz]

[Mnsotapop]

Mark, I'd like to see that also if you don't mind. I'll PM my email addy

I guess PM isn't active?

[Steelmaker]

Mark,If I could see it as well, that would be great!

Thanks..[/url]