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: EttaSymons
New Today: 56
New Yesterday: 73
Overall: 150106

People Online:
Visitors: 63
Members: 2
Total: 65 .

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 - Confusing OLAs with SLAs
 Forum FAQForum FAQ   SearchSearch   UsergroupsUsergroups   ProfileProfile   Log in to check your private messagesLog in to check your private messages   Log inLog in 

Confusing OLAs with SLAs

 
Post new topic   Reply to topic    ITIL Forum Index -> ITIL Discussion
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
ouette
Newbie
Newbie


Joined: Nov 16, 2012
Posts: 2

PostPosted: Fri Nov 16, 2012 11:46 pm    Post subject: Confusing OLAs with SLAs Reply with quote

I have come across two organisations who have outsourced their IT services calling the service agreements with their internal business users 'OLAs', and those service agreements with their supppliers 'SLAs'. Both types of documents are SLAs; in the first case the IT department needs to deliver the agreed service to their own organisation, and in the second case, they need to ensure that their external suppliers are meeting the targets agreed with them.

These organisations did not have any OLA agreements which fitted the true intention of an OLA.

Is this confusion common?

It irritates me when I see this, but does it really matter what the organisation calls it's documents, so long as the contents state what they need to so that business needs are met?

What argument could be used to convince the organisation to stop calling their internal SLAs documents OLAs?
Back to top
View user's profile
UKVIKING
Senior Itiler


Joined: Sep 16, 2006
Posts: 3321
Location: London, UK

PostPosted: Sat Nov 17, 2012 12:02 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

First

Is the internal team a customer, a user or a part of the service

If the internal org team / department is an group that interacts in order to provide a service, then they are using the correct terminology

If the group is customers.. they are using it in correctly

I will inform the ITIL TLA Police department immediately


A SLA is a Service level agreement - it is between service provider and service consumer. It is used both for internal / external customers / users of a service
An OLA is an Operations (al) Level Agreement between departments within the same organization that together provide a service
An UC is between a company / service provider and the external vendors that help provide the service

It is NOT the end of the world if people call it all agreements and not use the ITIL Terminology. The fact that they are there is more important than the frigging terminology
_________________
John Hardesty
ITSM Manager's Certificate (Red Badge)

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


Joined: Nov 03, 2012
Posts: 55
Location: Singapore

PostPosted: Sat Nov 17, 2012 6:10 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Agree with above, it's more important to have this in place rather than terminology.

In my organization, the OLA and SLA is exactly the same, as internally we also deliver the services to other partner systems. In order to make it easy, we use a single agreements for all interfaces.
_________________
Luo, Tian-Hong (Ken)
Regional Operation Lead

ITIL Expert Certified
Back to top
View user's profile
ouette
Newbie
Newbie


Joined: Nov 16, 2012
Posts: 2

PostPosted: Mon Nov 19, 2012 4:22 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

@ukviking. Thanks for the confirmation on termininology.

I agree that it is more important for agreements to be in place rather than what they are called....

So don't shoot me down for my next question Laughing

I also know that there is no such thing as ITIL certification for organisations. BUT sometimes an organisation wants an indication of whether or not they conform.

From the ITIL Official Introduction:

ITIL is a framework an organization conforms to, not complies with. There is a major difference between these two things and one that is often misunderstood. I understand this.

Conformity allows flexibility in the adaptation of practices within an organizational context while maintaining the overall structure of the framework. How do you understand 'maintaining the overall structure of the framework'? How does an organisation determine if they conform?

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


Joined: Sep 16, 2006
Posts: 3321
Location: London, UK

PostPosted: Tue Nov 20, 2012 12:44 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Ouette

No reason to shoot you

The Corporate certification is NOT ITIL

It is ISO20001. It is a recognized standard

There are 16 areas that have to be met which equate nicely with ITIL the curretn version

The trick / joke is that the ISO Certification is against a specific service so that if 1 service of 100 that you provide ... you will be able to attest ISO 20001 certification against that 1 service if you meet all of the 16 criteria

Check out ISO20001
_________________
John Hardesty
ITSM Manager's Certificate (Red Badge)

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


Joined: Sep 16, 2006
Posts: 3321
Location: London, UK

PostPosted: Tue Nov 20, 2012 4:44 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

ISO 20000 rather
_________________
John Hardesty
ITSM Manager's Certificate (Red Badge)

Change Management is POWER & CONTROL. /....evil laughter
Back to top
View user's profile
24sa
Itiler


Joined: Nov 27, 2012
Posts: 23
Location: Mumbai

PostPosted: Sun Dec 09, 2012 10:12 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Simply for any organization-
SLA is with your customer to whom you are providng the services ultimately.
OLA is agrrements of your internals team with each other.
and UC is with your supplier and vendore.

The reason for using the three different term is the difference in specification of the these three aggrements. further explaining it--- SLA is with the customer, who is not much interested in the Technical term and all, what he wants that his is taking service from you, and how you can create value to him. Considering these things in his mind he signs an aggrement with organization. this specification varies when two party involved are your internal teams only.
Back to top
View user's profile
Display posts from previous:   
Post new topic   Reply to topic    ITIL Forum Index -> ITIL Discussion 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.