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: ErnestBra
New Today: 16
New Yesterday: 58
Overall: 146174

People Online:
Visitors: 69
Members: 2
Total: 71 .

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 - Forward Release Schedule vs Forward Schedule of Change
 Forum FAQForum FAQ   SearchSearch   UsergroupsUsergroups   ProfileProfile   Log in to check your private messagesLog in to check your private messages   Log inLog in 

Forward Release Schedule vs Forward Schedule of Change

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


Joined: Aug 14, 2006
Posts: 16
Location: London, UK

PostPosted: Thu Aug 24, 2006 12:27 am    Post subject: Forward Release Schedule vs Forward Schedule of Change Reply with quote

Hello all,

I'm slightly confused. I work as a Release Manager (one of many strings on my bow) and I am currently establishing new processes. I have been asked to develop a Forward Release Schedule for publication/distribution. The term is familiar to me for some reason but I don't know what it is or what it should contain.

My understanding has always been that all planned Changes/Releases to the live environment are contained within the Forward Schedule of Change rather than having two separate schedules.

Can anyone explain the difference (if there is one) and what should be contained within each?

I want to avoid duplicating information.

Regards,

Ryan
Back to top
View user's profile
m_croon
Senior Itiler


Joined: Aug 11, 2006
Posts: 262
Location: Netherlands

PostPosted: Thu Aug 24, 2006 12:52 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

I'd say it is a mather of time-scope. The way we have implemented it, a FSC is more short term (a couple of weeks ahead, with the actual changes), whilst a release schedule informs people of planned releases for the next year.
Back to top
View user's profile Visit poster's website
ryanhardcastle
Newbie
Newbie


Joined: Aug 14, 2006
Posts: 16
Location: London, UK

PostPosted: Thu Aug 24, 2006 1:18 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

m_croon,

Thanks I can see how that would work however the requirement for our FSC is for a 12 month forecast. It will include future projects etc.

It might just be that it is a FSC we need and nothing more.

I have close links with Release and Change and because of my techie background I maintain the FSC although I don't actually schedule the Changes/Releases myself.

Regards,

Ryan
Back to top
View user's profile
m_croon
Senior Itiler


Joined: Aug 11, 2006
Posts: 262
Location: Netherlands

PostPosted: Thu Aug 24, 2006 8:59 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Ryan,

The good thing about ITIL is that you can always ajust it to the needs and demands of your own organisation Very Happy

therefor: nothing wrong with a 12 month FSC. However, might I suggest that you accompany this with a funnel-like status-structure! Most likely, changes (as I know them) will not be very detailed and down to earth 12 months in advance. Therefor, you could use change-status (what's the plural of status?) such as:
* Suggested (somebody (the customer?) wants it but parties involved are still not sure.
* Agreed (both parties agree that this change will be executed 'some day')
* Funded (there is a contract, signed proposal, IOU etc. so you know for sure you get payed)
* (other statusses normally used in change management such as planned for CAB, accepted for test, accepted for production, refused, finished). These statusses would in my opinion not be used untill only a few months or weeks (depending on the change) before the planned live-date for the change.

Hope this helps,

Cheers,

Michiel
Back to top
View user's profile Visit poster's website
Guerino1
Senior Itiler


Joined: Jan 01, 2006
Posts: 500
Location: New Jersey

PostPosted: Tue Aug 29, 2006 3:31 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Hi Ryan,

A Release is nothing more than a grouping of one or more Changes.

Something I truly dislike about ITIL is that is has made a best practice of implementing and rolling out Changes without corresponding Releases, which to my recollection has always been a poor practice. Most Software developers and architects seem to understand this concept, as it has been a requirement for managing SW for many decades. I also see it being practiced with hardware designers and manufactures that deliver tangible products, such as ASICs (Computer Chips) or Compture Systems. For some unknown reason I find that many Infrastructure people seem to either not get this concept or want to take short cuts and not do it. I don't know why that is.

The object data model/representation is such that a Product has one or more Releases and a Release has one or more Changes.

A Forward Schedule of Releases is a more coarse view of what work is planned throughout a period of time.

A Forward Schedule of Changes is a more granular view of what work is planned throughout the same period of time.

You should be able to see what Releases/Changes are planned to be rolled out, which ones are in which environments (Dev, Integ, UAT, Prod), etc.

Done correctly, your calendar should show Releases and you should be able to drill in to see Changes for each(all) Release(s).

I hope this helps.

Regards,
_________________
[Edited by Admin to remove link]
Back to top
View user's profile Send e-mail Visit poster's website
marlisafazio
Newbie
Newbie


Joined: Jun 24, 2005
Posts: 2

PostPosted: Wed Aug 30, 2006 5:43 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

m_croon wrote:
Most likely, changes (as I know them) will not be very detailed and down to earth 12 months in advance. Therefor, you could use change-status (what's the plural of status?)


Although there is some conflicting pronounciations out there, the one that makes the most sense and sounds the least strange comes from Wikipedia

* Plural of Status is Status (from the Latin), not Statuses
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.