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: Harris4489
New Today: 76
New Yesterday: 79
Overall: 149856

People Online:
Visitors: 49
Members: 1
Total: 50 .

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 - Interface between change management and defined projects ?
 Forum FAQForum FAQ   SearchSearch   UsergroupsUsergroups   ProfileProfile   Log in to check your private messagesLog in to check your private messages   Log inLog in 

Interface between change management and defined projects ?

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


Joined: Nov 09, 2005
Posts: 3
Location: Drammen, Norway

PostPosted: Thu Nov 10, 2005 7:29 am    Post subject: Interface between change management and defined projects ? Reply with quote

Hi All.

As a newbie in ITIL, and working in a large company also a newbie in ITIL, I have some questions Smile
To give a proper background, this will be a really long post…
Hope someone can share their experiences.

First of... After doing the foundation certification, I was a bit at a loss Question
I recognised that some of the activities I regularly do are formalized in Incident and problem management.
Since we have always had a CAB, I can easily relate to the Change Management process.

Since I had problem relating the majority of my normal task's/responsibility to any of the other Service Support and Service Delivery process guides, I bought the ICTIM book, and read trough it.

I believe that most of my responsibilities are more related to P&D, Deployment, Operations, and to some extent to Technical Support (witch I have difficulties seeing as different from Problem or incident third line...)

But it seems as if someone had made the decision to not implement any of the ICTIM processes in my company.
The implemented processes are (Service desk), Incident, Problem, CM, Change, "Build&Test"(defined as its own process for some reason), and Release.

Since the implementation of ITIL, it seems like my projects, which can be initiated by Problem Management, Group IT (Globally responsible, typical P&D stuff), customer’s trough Service Delivery, are struggling getting progress...

The relevant ITIL decisions made are:

a) All changes or introduction of any new device should go trough the change process.

b) All installations of anything must go trough the "build & test" process.

c) Nothing will be "released to production" if the above steps have not been performed.

As a typical example.
Group Finance has asked me to move a Finance infrastructure solution from an external party, to internal IT Operations.

We started the project by planning needed resources, doing the detailed technical design.

We needed HW resources to continue to build of a test solution, and prepare for a functionality pilot.
In the pre-ITIL era, normally a project would order and get delivered the resources necessary, if this was not already available.
Since the company have decided that request for any new HW should go trough change before being introduced, we then made a Change Request to be assigned HW resources(Basically to initiate HW ordering)

After an evaluation of a "change coordinator", the change was assigned to the "build and test" process, and was handled by a "build and test" coordinator.
We got the resources required after a couple of weeks, and the project members continued with functionality testing and documented like crazy. (Since this is a defined requirement for the "build & test” process.)

Then we needed to do load testing and prepare for the pilot.
To do this realistically, we needed the production hardware (since the build & test hardware are VMWARE virtual)
Again we needed to fill out a new change, go the same route as the one above, and we're now preparing to set up the solution in the same manner as the first test solution.

All tough I understand the idea of having a solution going trough a test environment, (specifically if this was a solution or software upgrade), I can help resent some of the bureaucracy introduced due to ITIL.

My project timeline, very simplified, now looks like this.

    1. Receive mandate and budget for project.
    2. Create detailed technical design.
    3. Create change request to get all needed hardware, and create work orders to persons from the operational team to install the virtual VMWARE servers.
    a. Change is evaluated by a “change coordinator”
    b. Change is evaluated in CAB since no standard change
    c. Change is moved to “build & test” process.
    d. Documentation attached to the request is reviewed by “Build & Test coordinator”
    e. Work orders are created to install the virtual servers.
    i. Servers are installed by “someone”
    f. Project get message that servers are available for any usage.
    4. Project members do installations, functionality testing, and documentations.
    5. Create change request to get all needed hardware, and create work orders to persons from the operational team to install the physical servers.
    Installation documentation, Design documentation, backup documentation, Support guided and User guides have to be attached.
    a. Change is evaluated by a “change coordinator”
    b. Change is evaluated in CAB since no standard change
    c. Change is moved to “build & test” process.
    d. Documentation attached to the request is reviewed by “Build & Test coordinator”
    e. “Someone” is ordering the hardware.
    f. Work orders are created to install the servers.
    i. Servers are installed by “someone” according to the documentation.

    --------Project have not gotten this far yet
    g. Project get message that servers are ready.
    6. Project need to perform new functionality testing, since solution is set up by persons without any knowledge to the systems.
    a. If any changes due to test result witch affects documentation or CI’s, back to new change request
    7. Project need to perform performance testing
    a. If any changes due to test result witch affects documentation or CI’s, back to new change request
    8. Project will run limited pilot, to verify global accessability.
    a. If any changes due to test result witch affects documentation or CI’s, back to new change request

<----------- Who knows if we ever makes it any further…

I can not believe that this is how other companies have implemented ITIL.
I would estimate that before the solution have been used by the first pilot end-user(before we know of this can actually go into production) the project members have spent abouth double the amount of time normally used on such a project, in addition to the work we have created for all the "coordinators"

Can anyone tell me how they have implemented the line that runs between pre-production activities and production, or projects and change management ?

Rgds, but a bit frustrated...
Bjorn Tore
Back to top
View user's profile
ashuapar
Newbie
Newbie


Joined: Nov 08, 2005
Posts: 1

PostPosted: Thu Nov 10, 2005 9:15 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Hi,

Question is not about time and resources in pre installation phase, it is about the time and resoruces engaged post implementation. ITIL Framework is build on the past experiences which includes success and failures. Benefits of ITIL implementation will be realised post impleementation in terms of reduced overhead for troublshooting and loss of time and business.

To address to the current situation create common pool of shared resources which can be engaged for temporary basis dduring the project.
To make the project more manageable and practical, have the phases with targets defined taking into consideration each minutes details.

Regards,
Ashutosh
Back to top
View user's profile
Y-servicemanager
Guest





PostPosted: Wed Nov 23, 2005 5:56 am    Post subject: Change Management Reply with quote

Hi Bjorn,

I understand your total frustration, as when the change process does not support the internal flow how can it support or improve customer perception? Well, I think your organisation has taken change management a little too literal. I do not know whether you have the book Service Support as on page 166 there is a beautiful figure of the interconnection between change management and project/ program management. Actually a project is ONE change which needs to be approved by the CAB, upfront. Monitoring and deviations are managed by the project manager and/or project board during the project. Be very careful that both are not taking over each others jobs. It is no use to let the CAB approve every part of the project, as to what do you do when they do not approve the last needed change in the project, cancel the project? I don''t think that will work in practice, better to have a good solid project plan and design plan approved by the CAB. After that you only need to inform them about the progress (for information only). When plans deviate severly from initial plans than it is wise to let the whole plan be reapproved.

The worst that can happen is that ITIL becomes a paper tiger and an adminstrative struggle which will lose all commitment in the organisation. Please don't let that happen! Wink

Good luck
Back to top
Bjorn-Tore
Newbie
Newbie


Joined: Nov 09, 2005
Posts: 3
Location: Drammen, Norway

PostPosted: Wed Nov 23, 2005 6:49 am    Post subject: It ain't easy Reply with quote

Shocked

Thanks for the answers, both..

And i agree, it looks like we have taken change management, and some other processes a bit far.
The problem now is to figure out how to explain/convince this to management Smile

I've also verified where the "build & test" process that confused me has come from.
HP ITSM Referance framework.
Basically it's an ITIL based framework.
However, in my view, there is one major difference between ITIL and the HP framework. And that is what is defined as "core", or the "foundation" for all the other processes.

For instance, Operations, defined in ITIL as part of ICTIM(specified by ogc: "is the foundation for ITIL service management processes.) is in HP Referance not a part of the core.

And as we all know, if the focus on the management seminars are, Service Support & Service Delivery, witch is relatively easy to report KPI's on, the core processes is such as daily operations, project deployment, design & planning is forgotten.

At least I learn a lot, and identify new things everyday that easily maps to one ITIL process or the other:)

So the statement that ITIL is "documented common sense", also makes sense to me:)

However, I was on a local itSMF meeting today, and one question that came up in the panel discussion(representatives for 4 large companies was present in the panel) was. "Did you involve any personnel, while selecting, designing, documenting the processes/work instructions for your company, that where/are the technical specialists?)
The answer was no, from all four companies. They felt that technical personell was to easily let astray by details, to be involved.

My imidiate impression after this meeting, is that ITIL as a framework is in for a crash landing, if it is the "documented common sense" of non-technical IT management.

Rgds
Bjorn Tore
_________________

Rgds
Bjorn Tore
Back to top
View user's profile
tameil
Newbie
Newbie


Joined: May 13, 2006
Posts: 1

PostPosted: Sun May 14, 2006 12:35 am    Post subject: Still on the Relationship with Project Management and CM Reply with quote

"Y-servicemanager" that reply about the ONE RFC for each project is certainly an eye-opener.
Since I am also in the process of sorting out the relationship with Project Management and Change Management I too have a question.

Is there a project Leader assigned to "monitor" certain types of changes that could impact many customers even though the change is relatively “easy”? (I say “easy” because there has never been a back-out required for these kinds of changes – the Administrators know their stuff----for eg. Applying Microsoft Security patches to a Critical server.

"Monitor" in this case would mean that they would be responsible for ensuring that the test results are ok in Development, they would do a risk analysis and then they would submit the RFC.

Thanks
Tameil
Back to top
View user's profile
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.