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: lowcostbiletedeavion
New Today: 1
New Yesterday: 78
Overall: 144635

People Online:
Visitors: 59
Members: 0
Total: 59

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 - Known Error Database
 Forum FAQForum FAQ   SearchSearch   UsergroupsUsergroups   ProfileProfile   Log in to check your private messagesLog in to check your private messages   Log inLog in 

Known Error Database
Goto page Previous  1, 2
 
Post new topic   Reply to topic    ITIL Forum Index -> Problem Management
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
SwissTony
Senior Itiler


Joined: Feb 26, 2009
Posts: 118
Location: Geneva

PostPosted: Thu Dec 03, 2009 10:44 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Hi Caperz..

Sorry, my earlier post was brief & not the full answer. My answer is yes, on the basis that:

1- While the Service Desk are the primary users of the KEDB, they are not the only users.

2- By documenting the fix within the KEDB the Service Desk agents are able to identify it as a KE, advise the user/s that there is a workaround & that it will be forwarded the the group who can resolve. Also, they are then able to correctly assign the ticket. Increasing time, efficiency, & customer satisfaction, etc etc.

3- What benefit is there to not include it in the KEDB?
Back to top
View user's profile
Caperz
Itiler


Joined: Jul 24, 2009
Posts: 23
Location: Sydney, Australia

PostPosted: Fri Dec 04, 2009 5:35 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Thanks for your reply SwissTony.

I have my opinion on this topic, but am curious on getting input and feedback on how other organisations are working with Known Error records.

Does anyone see the benefit in setting up the KEDB so that a KE record is only accessed by the people that can actually apply the workaround in the document ? - In other words not allowing Service Desk staff to see KE documents where they cant apply the fix contained in the document

Why or why not ?
_________________
ITIL V3 Capability - Operational Support & Analysis Certified
Back to top
View user's profile
UKVIKING
Senior Itiler


Joined: Sep 16, 2006
Posts: 3312
Location: London, UK

PostPosted: Fri Dec 04, 2009 6:34 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Caperz

Let me ask you this question:

If the Service Desk - who manage incidents - discover an incident which meets the criteria for the workaround, how are they suppose to send the incident resolution team the work to be done if they do not that there is a workaround
_________________
John Hardesty
ITSM Manager's Certificate (Red Badge)

Change Management is POWER & CONTROL. /....evil laughter
Back to top
View user's profile
Caperz
Itiler


Joined: Jul 24, 2009
Posts: 23
Location: Sydney, Australia

PostPosted: Sat Dec 05, 2009 6:09 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Hi UKViking,

Do you see the any danger or harm of curious or adventurous Service Desk staff trying to snoop around systems that they shouldnt be, if they have some information in a work-around that needs to be applied by a specialist group ?

Remember - I have not said that I am for the questions that I have asked... I would like to just get an idea of how Known Error Managememt is being applied out there.

I look forward to your response.
_________________
ITIL V3 Capability - Operational Support & Analysis Certified
Back to top
View user's profile
UKVIKING
Senior Itiler


Joined: Sep 16, 2006
Posts: 3312
Location: London, UK

PostPosted: Sat Dec 05, 2009 10:18 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Caperz

In answer to your question

I want my Service Desk staff to be inquisitive and willing to learn

I also want to trust my staff - in what ever role they are in - to do their job

If the solution requires specialist work, supposedly the specialist groups have unique logins and password to keep the rest of the IT staff from doing it

en
_________________
John Hardesty
ITSM Manager's Certificate (Red Badge)

Change Management is POWER & CONTROL. /....evil laughter
Back to top
View user's profile
SwissTony
Senior Itiler


Joined: Feb 26, 2009
Posts: 118
Location: Geneva

PostPosted: Sat Dec 05, 2009 10:21 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Hi Caperz.....to answer the last question: access control, identity management = no problem.
Back to top
View user's profile
Caperz
Itiler


Joined: Jul 24, 2009
Posts: 23
Location: Sydney, Australia

PostPosted: Sun Dec 06, 2009 2:34 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Thank you for your replies guys.

I must say I agree with your views, suggestions and feedback. I do see the value in all KE records being available and visible to the Service Desk team if they cant implement the work-around themselves.

How do you distinguish between work-arounds that are intended for the Service Desk (that they can apply) and ones that they cant ?

Does anyone have a sample or a suggestion for the fields that are included in a Known Error record in your organisation and/or what works well ?

Appreciate your help on this and hope the feedback helps others.
_________________
ITIL V3 Capability - Operational Support & Analysis Certified
Back to top
View user's profile
Marcel
Senior Itiler


Joined: Sep 21, 2006
Posts: 63
Location: USA

PostPosted: Sun Dec 13, 2009 11:34 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

I agree with the idea that Known Errors and their documented workarounds should be visible to all, even though some may require specific skills/access rights to perform. The only exception I would make is regarding Known Errors that document security vulnerabilities. Depending on the content of your Known Error records you may want to be careful how much information and to whom you are willing to provide regarding the identified holes in your credit card database, for instance.

As far as making a distinction between workarounds that your Service Desk can apply and the ones they cannot, I would suggest to make that part of the workaround description. Like: "Replace config file X.1 with config file X.2. This requires root access and should be performed by a senior Windows System Administrator."

Regarding the data in your Known Error record, some suggestions beyond the items you listed in a previous post in this thread:
- Root Cause Category (e.g. code defect, design flaw, component failure, procedural flaw ... this can help you to take a deeper dive and for instance identify poor coding practices)
- Proposed solution (this is the permanent solution, not the workaround)
- Planned solution date (when do you think the error will be eliminated from the environment)
- relationship to the RFC that introduced the error into the environment (good to track, although in reality you will not always be able to find the flawed RFC nor will you be willing to spend the time finding it .... in the cases that you do find it, track it)
- relationships to the incidents resolved by the workaround documented in the KE (this would indirectly tell you how often it was used and by whom; no need to track this separately within your KE record)
- impact, urgency, and priority
- version that will include the fix for this KE (useful for software related KEs)
- date when workaround was identified
- date when workaround was last modified

One thing to keep in mind is that organizations deal with Known Errors in ways that are different from the strict ITIL definition of having a root cause AND a workaround. Some will record a Known Error when all they have is a workaround, while others (including mine) will record one only if they have a root cause, regardless of having a workaround at that point in time. This in turn may be driven in difference by the tools being used. In some tools KE is nothing more than a flag or status change on a problem record; in others (including ours) a KE is a separate record. These differences can influence the responses you get on any question pertaining to KEs and the KEDB.
_________________
Manager of Problem Management
Fortune 100 Company
ITIL Certified
Back to top
View user's profile
Caperz
Itiler


Joined: Jul 24, 2009
Posts: 23
Location: Sydney, Australia

PostPosted: Tue Dec 15, 2009 9:26 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Hi Marcel,

Thanks for your feedback and comments.

It has defnitely helped to hear the views and responses about the way other organisations are working out there with Known Error Management.

I look forward to sharing my experiences with this forum.

Cheers

Caperz
_________________
ITIL V3 Capability - Operational Support & Analysis Certified
Back to top
View user's profile
Display posts from previous:   
Post new topic   Reply to topic    ITIL Forum Index -> Problem Management All times are GMT + 10 Hours
Goto page Previous  1, 2
Page 2 of 2

 
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.