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: CEgglesto
New Today: 17
New Yesterday: 58
Overall: 146175

People Online:
Visitors: 58
Members: 1
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 - Service Desk quality codes
 Forum FAQForum FAQ   SearchSearch   UsergroupsUsergroups   ProfileProfile   Log in to check your private messagesLog in to check your private messages   Log inLog in 

Service Desk quality codes

 
Post new topic   Reply to topic    ITIL Forum Index -> The ITIL Service Desk
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
db0
Newbie
Newbie


Joined: Oct 11, 2010
Posts: 3

PostPosted: Tue Apr 19, 2011 6:56 am    Post subject: Service Desk quality codes Reply with quote

In our ITSM tool, we have a concept called Quality Codes. These quality codes can be given to anyone who participates in the restoration of a specific incident, but fails to correctly execute their responsibilities. For example, If the service desk opened an incident and failed to throughly perform all troubleshooting steps, and the person that the incident was escalated to realizes the service desk failed to accurately execute their 1st level troubleshooting responsibilities, the 2nd level person can assign a quality code to that person.

Does anyone else use a service desk tool that has this concept of a quality code? If so, what is this concept called in your tool? i dont think there is an ITIL term for this concept.

Thanks.
Back to top
View user's profile
Diarmid
Senior Itiler


Joined: Mar 04, 2008
Posts: 1884
Location: Newcastle-under-Lyme

PostPosted: Thu Apr 21, 2011 3:41 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Is this some kind of name and shame or just a general slagging off?

How is the quality of the entries managed? Do second line staff have a proper procedure to follow when they use this facility?

Does it serve a useful purpose?

How does the second line person know sufficient about the circumstances to form a judgement?

Isn't this really something for incident review to deal with?

Perhaps I'm misunderstanding because it sounds weirdly nonsensical to me.

It is one thing to note that an opportunity may have been missed, but entirely another to attribute blame.
_________________
"Method goes far to prevent trouble in business: for it makes the task easy, hinders confusion, saves abundance of time, and instructs those that have business depending, both what to do and what to hope."
William Penn 1644-1718
Back to top
View user's profile Send e-mail
BorisBear
Senior Itiler


Joined: Mar 10, 2008
Posts: 403
Location: Sunderland

PostPosted: Thu Apr 21, 2011 6:13 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Diarmid wrote:
Is this some kind of name and shame or just a general slagging off?

How is the quality of the entries managed? Do second line staff have a proper procedure to follow when they use this facility?

Does it serve a useful purpose?

How does the second line person know sufficient about the circumstances to form a judgement?

Isn't this really something for incident review to deal with?

Perhaps I'm misunderstanding because it sounds weirdly nonsensical to me.

It is one thing to note that an opportunity may have been missed, but entirely another to attribute blame.



Because the service desk person should be documenting everything pertinent on the incident record......if they don't then that's a damning indictment of quality
Back to top
View user's profile
Diarmid
Senior Itiler


Joined: Mar 04, 2008
Posts: 1884
Location: Newcastle-under-Lyme

PostPosted: Thu Apr 21, 2011 8:41 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

If basic stuff is getting missed off the records or not done to the extent that you need a set of codes to describe it, then you don't have much of a viable management system to start with. At that level it should be so much an aberration that it just gets dealt with.

The only exception I might countenance is the first week/month of start-up in a big-bang approach, but even there it would be better at the pilot stage.

What really bugs me about it is that it encourages confrontation and silos instead of co-operation and integration.
_________________
"Method goes far to prevent trouble in business: for it makes the task easy, hinders confusion, saves abundance of time, and instructs those that have business depending, both what to do and what to hope."
William Penn 1644-1718
Back to top
View user's profile Send e-mail
BorisBear
Senior Itiler


Joined: Mar 10, 2008
Posts: 403
Location: Sunderland

PostPosted: Fri Apr 22, 2011 12:52 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Diarmid wrote:
If basic stuff is getting missed off the records or not done to the extent that you need a set of codes to describe it, then you don't have much of a viable management system to start with. At that level it should be so much an aberration that it just gets dealt with.

The only exception I might countenance is the first week/month of start-up in a big-bang approach, but even there it would be better at the pilot stage.

What really bugs me about it is that it encourages confrontation and silos instead of co-operation and integration.


That's a negative way of looking at it - what about providing confirmation of adherence and identifying opportunities for improvement.

Almost everyone in a service provision is subject to CSAT assessments these days
Back to top
View user's profile
mredekar
Itiler


Joined: Dec 30, 2005
Posts: 21
Location: Navi Mumbai, Maharashtra, India

PostPosted: Sun Jul 17, 2011 8:36 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Q
Does anyone else use a service desk tool that has this concept of a quality code?
A
I have seen at least 12 Service Desks in different IT organizations very closely. I am afraid but I have not seen this type of Quality Codes. It will not be fare, letting 2nd level person to gauge 1st level person based on one incident. However if it is trend, it needs serious attention. Incident Manager (or Service Quality Assurance person wherever affordable) should analyze the set of incidents and the quality of the information captured therein.

Q
If so, what is this concept called in your tool? i dont think there is an ITIL term for this concept.
A
This is not a best practice and hence it is not captured in ITIL. If your organization is benefitting from this type of immediate evaluation of work, it may be advisable to continue .
I have some observations in this concept.
1. It is assumed that 2nd level person is most qualified SME, as he/she is correct all the time.
2. If 2nd level person misjudges the case, is there any further evaluation to judge 2nd level person or his/her diagnosis?
3. If 1st level person has valid reasons to undertake diagnosis in different (may be incorrect) way, anybody listens to him/her?
4. 2nd level person can be biased over a 1st level person while giving quality codes.
5. It is not clear as to how these quality code / scores are used for overall improvement if any
Back to top
View user's profile
Display posts from previous:   
Post new topic   Reply to topic    ITIL Forum Index -> The ITIL Service Desk 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.