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

THE ITIL BOOKS

The five ITIL books can be obtained directly from the publisher's website:
HERE

Or as downloadable PDFs: HERE

Current Membership

Latest: DavidESOTT
New Today: 32
New Yesterday: 79
Overall: 222534

People Online:
Visitors: 110
Members: 1
Total: 111 .

Login
Nickname

Password

Don't have an account yet? You can create one. As a registered user you have some advantages like theme manager, comments configuration and post comments with your name.

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.


Search



Languages
Select Interface Language:


Advertising
Please contact us via the feedback page to discuss advertising rates.

The Itil Community Forum: Forums

ITIL :: View topic - Incident Priority - High and downgrade or low and escalate
 Forum FAQForum FAQ   SearchSearch   UsergroupsUsergroups   ProfileProfile   Log in to check your private messagesLog in to check your private messages   Log inLog in 

Incident Priority - High and downgrade or low and escalate

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

Incident Priorities
Start at priority 3 and raise to 2 based on SLA
0%
 0%  [ 0 ]
Start at priority 2 and lower to 3 based on issue being resolved within the SLA
0%
 0%  [ 0 ]
Total Votes : 0

Author Message
TCH-Frank
Newbie
Newbie


Joined: Jun 02, 2015
Posts: 2

PostPosted: Wed Jun 03, 2015 7:30 am    Post subject: Incident Priority - High and downgrade or low and escalate Reply with quote

Hello all. New to the forums.

I have a quick question regarding best practice. Say there is a potential incident that could occur on a fairly routine basis. This issue has the potential to be rather impactful but normally is resolved within a reasonable time.

When it comes to opening an incident... should we open it as a priority 3 and escalate it to a priority 2 based on a pre-defined SLA? Or should we start it off as a priority 2 and move it to a priority 3 if the issue is resolved within the specified time?

Thank you for your assistance!
Back to top
View user's profile
UKVIKING
Senior Itiler


Joined: Sep 16, 2006
Posts: 3582
Location: London, UK

PostPosted: Wed Jun 03, 2015 4:04 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Neither. If you change the priority, up only. Down never.
_________________
John Hardesty
ITSM Manager's Certificate (Red Badge)

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


Joined: Mar 04, 2008
Posts: 1894
Location: Helensburgh

PostPosted: Wed Jun 03, 2015 9:13 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

What is the point in changing the priority after resolution? The priority is what guides your decisions about when and how much resource to spend resolving an incident.

If you lower the priority afterwards you are in effect saying that you should have tackled other incidents first but you let this one jump the queue.

Also priority has little if anything to do with SLA and much to do with business impact.

Further if an SLA is measured against individual incidents then it is not worth much as it is a hostage to fortune.
_________________
"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
Kranti
Senior Itiler


Joined: Jun 05, 2015
Posts: 59
Location: Hyderabad ,India

PostPosted: Sun Jun 07, 2015 4:04 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

First get this captured in known Error Data base ,get a problem ticket raised and fix the issue permanently so that you need not increase or decrease the priority .

There is no point increasing a priority or decreasing a priority for a known issue which is closed in reasonable time
_________________
Kranti Kiran Kumar Gedela

Project Manager - SAP

ITIL® Expert
Prince2®
CSM® CSPO® CSP®
PMI® SAP®
Lean Six Sigma Black Belt ®
Back to top
View user's profile Send e-mail
TCH-Frank
Newbie
Newbie


Joined: Jun 02, 2015
Posts: 2

PostPosted: Tue Jun 09, 2015 1:09 am    Post subject: Clarification! Reply with quote

Thanks for the replies everyone.

It isn't an error so to speak. We monitor customer activities, and sometimes the customers are just delayed in sending us files. Normally, this doesn't pose an issue so the ticket is a priority 3. On occasion if the problem lingers it can cause major issues to other customers, hence classifying as a priority 2. The actual impact can vary based on the significance of the customer and the length of the delay.

It isn't a systematic issue so there is no work around and no reason to add to the KEDB.
Back to top
View user's profile
UpritS
Newbie
Newbie


Joined: Jun 08, 2015
Posts: 5

PostPosted: Tue Jun 09, 2015 7:44 am    Post subject: Re: Clarification! Reply with quote

TCH-Frank wrote:
Thanks for the replies everyone.

It isn't an error so to speak. We monitor customer activities, and sometimes the customers are just delayed in sending us files. Normally, this doesn't pose an issue so the ticket is a priority 3. On occasion if the problem lingers it can cause major issues to other customers, hence classifying as a priority 2. The actual impact can vary based on the significance of the customer and the length of the delay.

It isn't a systematic issue so there is no work around and no reason to add to the KEDB.


As you mentioned the root cause and workaround/fix is not identified it cannot be defined as a known error,
There is not enough business support doesn't mean priorities can be modified to tune up with, a priority should be based on impact / urgency, on the other hand your service level management should ensure business support in order to achieve SLA targets.
Back to top
View user's profile
Garofski
Newbie
Newbie


Joined: Aug 12, 2008
Posts: 9

PostPosted: Sat Jul 23, 2016 6:27 am    Post subject: Re: Clarification! Reply with quote

UpritS wrote:
TCH-Frank wrote:
Thanks for the replies everyone.

It isn't an error so to speak. We monitor customer activities, and sometimes the customers are just delayed in sending us files. Normally, this doesn't pose an issue so the ticket is a priority 3. On occasion if the problem lingers it can cause major issues to other customers, hence classifying as a priority 2. The actual impact can vary based on the significance of the customer and the length of the delay.

It isn't a systematic issue so there is no work around and no reason to add to the KEDB.


As you mentioned the root cause and workaround/fix is not identified it cannot be defined as a known error,
There is not enough business support doesn't mean priorities can be modified to tune up with, a priority should be based on impact / urgency, on the other hand your service level management should ensure business support in order to achieve SLA targets.


The root cause has been identified you just need to priorities a resolution to get it resolved. This is something that your Service Delivery team should deal with as this (as it seems from another supplier) need to be ]on top of and make sure they stick to the agreement
Back to top
View user's profile
lsimonsen
Newbie
Newbie


Joined: Jan 31, 2017
Posts: 5

PostPosted: Wed Feb 08, 2017 3:02 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

You should base the priority off of what the overall business impact is from the start of the incident. So if it impacts many people and external customers, then that would raise the priority level. If it only impacts 1 person and that person is internal then that is very low priority to begin with.

Now while the incident is in progress we have to use our brains to decide if the priority should be raised. For example if that 1 person being impacted is the CEO and he is saying that he will miss a very important business meeting if his phone is not fixed NOW!! well then obvious we need to raise the priority level of that. This is how we work incidents.

Now if you are talking about a problem that continues to happen the exact same way every single time and you have to do the exact same thing to fix it every time well then that should go to problem management rather than incident management yes?
Back to top
View user's profile
lsimonsen
Newbie
Newbie


Joined: Jan 31, 2017
Posts: 5

PostPosted: Wed Feb 08, 2017 3:05 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

UKVIKING wrote:
Neither. If you change the priority, up only. Down never.


Can you site where this is stated in ITIL? I am curious to read about it.
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.