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: TFDX
New Today: 9
New Yesterday: 62
Overall: 141984

People Online:
Visitors: 73
Members: 3
Total: 76 .

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 - Confusion on CM process
 Forum FAQForum FAQ   SearchSearch   UsergroupsUsergroups   ProfileProfile   Log in to check your private messagesLog in to check your private messages   Log inLog in 

Confusion on CM process
Goto page 1, 2  Next
 
Post new topic   Reply to topic    ITIL Forum Index -> Change Management
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
ajmond
Newbie
Newbie


Joined: Mar 15, 2008
Posts: 7

PostPosted: Sun Mar 16, 2008 3:18 am    Post subject: Confusion on CM process Reply with quote

Hello I just the one on ITIL.
I have a question on change management process.
After CAB authorized we will proceed on build-test and deploy I would like to know who will authorize testing result before deploy on production environment.
Back to top
View user's profile
asrilrm
Senior Itiler


Joined: Oct 07, 2007
Posts: 441
Location: Jakarta, INA

PostPosted: Sun Mar 16, 2008 8:01 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

ITIL defined that "Change Management ensures that changes are recorded, evaluated, authorized, prioritized, planned, tested, implemented, documented and reviewed in a controlled manner"

CM is the one in charge of coordinating and approving the test.
Back to top
View user's profile
Diarmid
Senior Itiler


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

PostPosted: Mon Mar 17, 2008 6:10 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Change management is required to ensure that all the steps are followed. This is not the same as authorizing/approving each step.

The change plan will identify testing and testing approval by appropriate authority according to the nature of the change.

A "hands on" change management function will approve proceeding to next step after confirming that the right person/body has approved the test results. There is nothing wrong with the next step authority being allowed to proceed on sight of the test result approval, without any explicit call on a change manager, if that is how you want it to work.

So long as the controls are in place and are adhered to all will be well. It is often best to be more hands on with a new system and then as everybody's understanding matures, let things run smoothly and give the change manager a monitor and review role once changes have gone through CAB.

In any event authorization/approval must always be performed by the person or body that has the technical skills, organizational knowledge and legitimate authority for that action in that context. Once a change has gone through CAB the success criteria for each step should have been documented.
_________________
"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
Skinnera
Senior Itiler


Joined: May 07, 2005
Posts: 121
Location: UK

PostPosted: Mon Mar 17, 2008 11:56 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

I'd have to agree with Diarmid as opposed to asrilrm - only a very hands on CM function with the appripriately skileld people could actually coordinate and approve the test.

For me, CM is there to ensure that the right people have done that, and sigend it all off in blood etc.
Back to top
View user's profile Send e-mail
asrilrm
Senior Itiler


Joined: Oct 07, 2007
Posts: 441
Location: Jakarta, INA

PostPosted: Tue Mar 18, 2008 12:27 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

I wanted to add more lines to explain more about it, but I was afraid it would be too long and confusing.
Of course the ones who is authorized to approve the test is the appropriate authorities.

In my office, to ensure that the Acceptance Test paper was inspected by the Change Management Team, the Change Coordinator's signature is required to be there.
And nothing whatsoever could be implemented on production without the acknowledgment signature of the Change Coordinator.

Cheers
Back to top
View user's profile
UKVIKING
Senior Itiler


Joined: Sep 16, 2006
Posts: 3296
Location: London, UK

PostPosted: Tue Mar 18, 2008 12:47 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

2 pence

The truth about about Build and Test fitting where is the process differs between what kind of change is the work and the business's impact

For example:

Network changes usually build and test their work in their own test lab - which usually is a separate testing environment with out connections to the live environment

System changes - h/w upgrades and additional hardware are usually test free because the parts can always be un-installed

Software changes are the worst / best for Build / Test issues.

For some commercial upgrades of software -& patches, the company issuing the patch/upgrade usually has done the test - ie microsoft service packs, KB patches; sun patches etc

For some bespoke applications being used by companies, they can not really test the patch before hand on whether or not a vendor upgrade will cause problems.

For example: Microsoft O/S service packs and monthly updates may impact on microsoft SQL based applications but not impact on MS SQL because of the crappy way Microsoft and the vendor write code

Therefore, the back out plan needs to be well developed and undestood by all involved.

That and the fact that you can test for EVERYTHING is usually why
_________________
John Hardesty
ITSM Manager's Certificate (Red Badge)

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


Joined: Mar 15, 2008
Posts: 7

PostPosted: Wed Mar 19, 2008 4:44 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Thanks all for your suggestion.
As start at my office I will separate 2 process. One is project or enhancement change an the other one is Operational change.

For me I will work on operation change that covered
- Error from H/W, S/W, network
- Patch
- Operational. .....

For my process
1.start with request for change that requester will fill in change control request form - information, reason, plan, implementation method(instruction, script), testing result, check point time, back out plan.
2. Submit to Change coordinater
3. Change coordinator will review completely information if not will request more information.
4. If completed of change information , change co. will prioritize and classification request.
5. Change committee will assess change information for risk analysis and authorized.
6. If authorized change co. will inform requester and implementer for implement as agreement plan and methodlogy.
7. If implement over checkpoint time, implementer will discuss to change co.-change co will discuss with higher authorizer for authorize. If continue will define new check point time.
8. If failed will implement fall back plan.
9. Change co announce implementation result to related team.
10. Change co will review result and update information on database.
11. Close change.
Back to top
View user's profile
asrilrm
Senior Itiler


Joined: Oct 07, 2007
Posts: 441
Location: Jakarta, INA

PostPosted: Wed Mar 19, 2008 5:05 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

That would be fine
Just want to share that if you have a lot of RFCs in a week (let's say more than 3 RFCs), then you would consider having Change Implementers for specific areas to help you.
The Change Coordinator (alias Change Manager) cannot cope everything by himself
Back to top
View user's profile
Skinnera
Senior Itiler


Joined: May 07, 2005
Posts: 121
Location: UK

PostPosted: Wed Mar 19, 2008 7:30 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

asrilrm wrote:
Just want to share that if you have a lot of RFCs in a week (let's say more than 3 RFCs), then you would consider having Change Implementers for specific areas to help you.
The Change Coordinator (alias Change Manager) cannot cope everything by himself
I support that - my team managed in excess of 31000 RFC's in 2007, hence the distribution of responsibility across the organisation.
We facilitate, govern & police the process, to make sure they are all doing it right... Twisted Evil
Back to top
View user's profile Send e-mail
ajmond
Newbie
Newbie


Joined: Mar 15, 2008
Posts: 7

PostPosted: Sat Mar 22, 2008 2:37 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Hi! senior

Is it OK for my idea? any suggestion. Please

During find service support solution I will use excel as DB.
I thinks no more than 20 requests per week.

Could you suggest me for solution for small request?
Back to top
View user's profile
asrilrm
Senior Itiler


Joined: Oct 07, 2007
Posts: 441
Location: Jakarta, INA

PostPosted: Sat Mar 22, 2008 1:58 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

I don't think I understand clearly what you meant.
I've stated that your idea would be fine as long as it fits your need.

About the DB, did you mean Change Management DB under Excel?
Well, in the ITIL course it is said that a pencil and a piece of paper would suffice so using Excel would be fine.
However bear in mind that later you might want to implement CMDB, or maybe you have already implemented it. The CM database would become part of the CMDB, so you would have to think how to integrate them.
Back to top
View user's profile
ajmond
Newbie
Newbie


Joined: Mar 15, 2008
Posts: 7

PostPosted: Sun Mar 23, 2008 5:47 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Yes, sir.
Next period, I would like to CMDB, this is on find out product.
But the the earlier I will use excel.
Back to top
View user's profile
elewis33
Newbie
Newbie


Joined: Apr 01, 2008
Posts: 12
Location: Salt Lake City, UT USA

PostPosted: Wed Apr 02, 2008 4:56 am    Post subject: Additional clarification Reply with quote

Don't mean to hijack this thread but I have an additional question of clarification regarding CM.

I'm a project manager in an IT organization. As such, I want to have access to a change management/change control process that will allow my projects to move changes into the production environment in a controlled manner. So projects can initiate one or more changes (and possibly none, assuming nothing is being changed in the operating environment as a result of the project). As I see it CM and RM are the interface between projects and operations.

On the other hand, our change manager believes that change requests are the mechanism that initiate projects. So he sees change management much higher up on the food chain, so to speak.

Now, it's my understanding that the way ITIL defines CM and RM is that they are processes that are in support of service delivery, or what I call "operations". Based on my years of experience with project management (over 10 years) that projects are generally undertaken to improve products or services (or operations).

Anyone got any thoughts on this topic or struggled with the same question?

Earl
Back to top
View user's profile
UKVIKING
Senior Itiler


Joined: Sep 16, 2006
Posts: 3296
Location: London, UK

PostPosted: Wed Apr 02, 2008 7:02 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

elewis33,

first, there is change management and then there is change management.

confusing aint it.

The change mgmt process associated with a project may or may not impact on areas unrelated to the project. The chng mgmt system here wants to make sure that the project succeeds or fails

The change mgmt process associated with a 'live' IT environment such as a network environment, servers, systems and application is more concerned with ensuring that the services that the live environment provides is not impacted adversely or undocumented

The worst thing you want to hear or say as a change mgmt type is

hmm... i did not know that ... was attached to ....

or

uh-oh.....

....

Ask your change mgmt lead to ask how he/she wants projects to get from a non-live environment/state to a live environment / state

Tell him you want to mke sure the actions needed on the live environment to move your project forward dont impact the live environment or services
undocumently.

good luck
_________________
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: 1884
Location: Newcastle-under-Lyme

PostPosted: Wed Apr 02, 2008 10:20 am    Post subject: Re: Additional clarification Reply with quote

Hi,

elewis33 wrote:


On the other hand, our change manager believes that change requests are the mechanism that initiate projects. So he sees change management much higher up on the food chain, so to speak.

Earl


Hogwash.

Of course RFCs can lead to projects. In fact they always lead to projects, but not necessarily explicitly calling them projects.

On the other hand, of course projects (from anywhere in the business) can require IT service changes and these would have to be requested from the project to IT Change Management.

So, you can think of this as a sub-project or a project stage or just as a work request from the project. Whatever is the best way to manage it.

For example, a service improvement initiative can lead to a project that will require changes of various things at various times, and intermediate verification activities to validate the outcomes.

So the project plan could be a series of planned change requests with some glue in between to steer the improvement objectives.

If you tried to do this by simply listing and presenting a string of RFCs to Change Management you would be very lucky to meet your improvement objectives.

The idea of a hierarchy is absurd.
_________________
"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
Display posts from previous:   
Post new topic   Reply to topic    ITIL Forum Index -> Change Management All times are GMT + 10 Hours
Goto page 1, 2  Next
Page 1 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.