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: RWessel
New Today: 17
New Yesterday: 53
Overall: 145938

People Online:
Visitors: 63
Members: 3
Total: 66 .

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 - At least one incident ticket must be associated to a problem
 Forum FAQForum FAQ   SearchSearch   UsergroupsUsergroups   ProfileProfile   Log in to check your private messagesLog in to check your private messages   Log inLog in 

At least one incident ticket must be associated to a problem

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


Joined: Aug 13, 2009
Posts: 3

PostPosted: Thu Aug 13, 2009 11:55 pm    Post subject: At least one incident ticket must be associated to a problem Reply with quote

I work in very large organization that has an IT Standards Council.
The office who drafts standards (but does not implement/run these in day-to-day operations) has recently updated the Problem Management standard - and since I lead Problem Management for the infrastructure group - I have been participating in the reviews of this.

In the draft standard it stipulates that at least one incident must be associated to a problem.

I strongly disagree and replied with all the usual concerns about this precluding proactive problem management, and about 5-6 quotes in the V3 books that do not stipulate this.

Where I'm getting stuck:
They've stated that POTENTIAL incidents should be logged as incident tickets and then these should be associated to a problem.

I don't see the value in this exercise since the information that I'd be asking people to include in these potential incidents would be repeated in the problems that they log anyways.

I also see this as an impedence to process usage by our operational teams who will view this as "make-work"

I'm looking for other opinions on this... please and thanks
Back to top
View user's profile
Diarmid
Senior Itiler


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

PostPosted: Fri Aug 14, 2009 2:30 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

I guess these potential incidents will have to be potentially resolved and you can use the resolution applied to help get your problem analysis under way.

Your IT standards council have an issue - but I'm too polite to elaborate on that.

They need to provide procedures for managing potential incidents so that they do not get mixed up with real ones.

For example, how do you close them? what priority do they have? do you need to provide a whole swathe to properly represent all aspects of the problem?

The bit I'm most excited about is the problem review for these - "have the potential incidents ceased to occur since the problem resolution was put in place?"
_________________
"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
Marcel
Senior Itiler


Joined: Sep 21, 2006
Posts: 63
Location: USA

PostPosted: Fri Aug 14, 2009 4:38 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

I second what Diarmid said.

Here is a clear example where it would be appropriate to open a Problem ticket without any prior Incidents (or potential Incidents Wink ):

A new system goes live. During testing a couple of issues were found that cannot be fixed before going to production and yet are not significant enough to delay the implementation. In other words, a Problem is deliberately introduced into production but has not yet caused any service disruptions (i.e. no Incidents). This Problem should be recorded to ensure it will be addressed at some point in accordance with its priority.

There are certainly other examples like that. There are also examples where you could say that there has been an Event (for those organizations that have implemented Event Management) but not an Incident. I'm wondering if your IT Standards Council is referring to Events when they say 'potential Incidents'. Not quite clear.
_________________
Manager of Problem Management
Fortune 100 Company
ITIL Certified
Back to top
View user's profile
Katherine
Newbie
Newbie


Joined: Apr 17, 2008
Posts: 9
Location: South London

PostPosted: Fri Aug 14, 2009 5:55 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Another possible way for problem logs to be created without an incident is when a developer is investigating a problem and discovers another problem that is not noticeable to the users. There won't ever be an incident raised as there is no visible impact to the users.
Back to top
View user's profile
Bluesman
Itiler


Joined: Mar 19, 2008
Posts: 29

PostPosted: Fri Aug 14, 2009 6:09 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Do not allow "fake" incidents, they only confuse, and they screw your stats.

A proactive Problem investigation must be made visible=matchable to all.

No incidents have happened YET, but when and IF the first one appears, the SD need to be able to rapidly match it against an ongoing Problem investigation, or against the FSC or against the RFC queue or or or..

Again, visibility is the issue.

So, open a Problem ticket, do your RCA/RFC stuff as ususal. If your tool doesn´t allow a "zero incident" history for it - chuck the tool.

my 0.02 USD
_________________
---------------- bragging line -----------------
V2 Combined Practitioner (service support)
Problem Mgr
Back to top
View user's profile
Caperz
Itiler


Joined: Jul 24, 2009
Posts: 23
Location: Sydney, Australia

PostPosted: Mon Aug 17, 2009 8:55 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

I agree with all the replies and feedback.

Problemchild - Does the IT Standards council give a reason as to why there must be at least one incident attached to a problem record ?
_________________
ITIL V3 Capability - Operational Support & Analysis Certified
Back to top
View user's profile
problemchild
Newbie
Newbie


Joined: Aug 13, 2009
Posts: 3

PostPosted: Tue Aug 18, 2009 2:41 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Thank you very much for all your feedback! It is great to know that my interpretations/understandings of ITIL is on track with at least a few others.

To answer some of your questions:
Event Mgmt has not been formally implemented in our org, though, we do have plenty of monitoring tools sitting on our infrastructure and the alerts they generate are fed into our incident module of the tool - but categorized appropriately so they do not count towards any SLAs etc.

I've asked them in the past if they had this suggestion based on Event Mgmt, and they've declined to limit their reasoning to this.


Do they give a reason for wanting to log at least one incident before a problem can be logged: Yes. Their reason is that since the ITIL definition of V3 covers potential incidents, and incidents should be documented, we should be logging these.

I really appreciate everyone's feedback so far, it helps!
Back to top
View user's profile
ChasingSleep
Senior Itiler


Joined: Nov 18, 2008
Posts: 78

PostPosted: Wed Aug 19, 2009 1:21 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Quote:
Their reason is that since the ITIL definition of V3 covers potential incidents, and incidents should be documented, we should be logging these.


ITIL is not a standard!

Who cares if ITIL says to do it?

You do what is best for you!

If ITIL 4 says you must jump from a bridge, are you going to do so? Smile
Back to top
View user's profile
problemchild
Newbie
Newbie


Joined: Aug 13, 2009
Posts: 3

PostPosted: Wed Aug 19, 2009 1:26 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

I think they would jump. Landing head first, thereby avoiding damage to anything important.
Back to top
View user's profile
UKVIKING
Senior Itiler


Joined: Sep 16, 2006
Posts: 3313
Location: London, UK

PostPosted: Wed Aug 19, 2009 3:29 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Hmm

If the Problem record that is created is due to reactive PM - which is usually due to a Incident record (s) being veiew to determine if a PM record should be create because of the incidents, then yes the Incident record should be reference

If however, the PM Record is created because of PROACTIVE PM, then there was NO interupption of service (incident def)

As for V4.. it will be at least 10 years before V4. V2 - V3 was about ten years
_________________
John Hardesty
ITSM Manager's Certificate (Red Badge)

Change Management is POWER & CONTROL. /....evil laughter
Back to top
View user's profile
Display posts from previous:   
Post new topic   Reply to topic    ITIL Forum Index -> Problem 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.