Weblog

Fear and Loathing on the Road to ITSM Excellence

MyServiceMonitor's weblog is intended to foster discussion about the realities (and frustrations) of implementing Best Practice, whether that be ITIL, CobiT, ISO 20000, Six Sigma, TQM, et al. 

I wanted a place to rant about best practice frameworks and share some experiences with friends, peers and basically anyone who wants to listen and join the fray. As I tend to blog very late in the evening the postings are, well... pretty much midnight ramblings...

I believe that the real road to a quality culture has more to do with people than with process (which may make some ITIL fanatics scream in horror), since in the absence of process it is values that carry the day.

I am in awe of many IT professionals -- many much smarter than I -- who are literally killing themselves keeping the cars on the road as the business keeps its foot firmly on the accelerator (and in some cases on IT's neck). They have my admiration (and sympathy).     

Savage Journey small2

For those customers who lack both process and values, it was nice knowing you. The business and IT are simply getting too complex, the world is moving too fast, and big brother's getting much better at watching you for you to last much longer.

For those of you who know the difference between right and wrong, and are struggling to do the right thing (i.e., best practice), then consider this a place to vent, to rant and to share some humor as we continue down what we know is the Right Road.

A savage journey indeed, and what a strange trip it will be.

07E129A10C

KNOWledge is no laughing matter

While it may seem troublesome that I actually thought about work while on vacation, it really wasn't work...more of a carry over from some blogging I did before leaving. It got me thinking about ITSM On-Ramp's approach and in particular a recent Webinar I did for eG Innovations.

The post I'm referring to was about a vendor who announced a software product that leveraged that fully hyped ITIL term, the CMDB, in relation to new 'Web 2.0' and 'Wiki' like capabilities.

Of course when you title the post MyCMDB? What are they smokin' over at Managed Objects? it makes for some serious flaming and it did not disappoint. However I could not seem to stop thinking about this particular dialog... 

Having just read The Cult of the Amateur, I could see both where the IT Skeptic and the vendor were coming from. On the one hand, the vendor clearly wanted to leverage the market awareness of CMDB and promote what may be some interesting features of their product. On the other hand, the use of the term CMDB along with terms like 'Wiki' seemed to be at odds. After all, do you consider Wikipedia a single source of truth?

As luck would have it, I was just ready to get rid of this nagging thread in my head when I read Dilbert in the Sunday paper (see 7/13/08 strip in the new Dilbert Wiki in my blog's sidebar). 

The basis of ITIL's CMDB is a single, validated and audited, source of truth about the service infrastructure; particularly the relations between Configuration Items in the context of a service.

Don't get me wrong, I am a believer in the Web 2.0 world; but we can't simply 'collaborate' our way out of what is increasingly an n-tier, virtualized mess. The CMDB must form the basis of what we KNOW, and without real time service impact management (i.e., service monitoring intelligence) then it may be difficult to know when additional rigor is needed to ensure what you think you know is actually correct.

We often KNOW when it's broken (the user tells us). We don't always know WHY.

So by all means, go ahead and collaborate, but make sure your collaboration is based on accurate information. Basing your knowledge base purely on the knowledge of experts, without challenge or validation, may not lead to wisdom...and I'm not sure it really leads to rapid isolation either. 

Continuous improvement is a painful, savage journey, precisely because is challenges us to change. Challenging the status quo, such as the need to hang onto silo based processes and silo based monitoring, is essential to real and lasting change.

It is impossible to begin to learn that which one thinks one already knows.

- Epictetus

While a base of knowledge supported by a foundation of truth is a worthy objective, diagnosis in today's complex service infrastructures needs more than a room full of experts performing manual triage. 

Relying on the Cult of the Amateur may not be the best way to keep the lights on. Call it what you want --- Service Analytics, root-cause, automated triage, service monitoring intelligence, etc. --- will remain an important element of survival.

Having anything less is no laughing matter.


The Savage Journey continues...PMDBs

Now I'm not a complete idiot when it comes to technology, but I certainly have not earned 'geek' status yet (and after 30 years in IT probably never will).

I have been an ITIL Trainer and Consultant for about 4 years now, and like many other poor bastards have seen some of the wreckage on the savage journey to IT service management excellence.

By far, most of the carnage I've witnessed has more to do with people than processes or technology, but in this case I simply must  blather on about a recent Gartner research paper titled, Expect Performance Management Databases in the Future.

That's right, PMDBs. The CMDB, CDB, CMS, SKMS, Service Catalog, et al already lay fertile ground for serious confusion and weird scenes inside the data center. If you talk to a real geek, you can get a killer dose of future shock.

So I thought, as a certifiable 'non-geek' I would rant on about what I've seen (and what I think I'm seeing), in the desperate hope of getting some validation as to what's really happening "out there".

ITIL Version 2 defined two principal data bases; the Capacity Data Base (CDB) in the Service Delivery book and the Configuration Management Data Base (CMDB) in the Service Support book. When I blogged on the IT Skeptic a couple years ago (see CMDB Kool-Aid can result in a Bad Trip... )  I was simply offering a view that there was more than one path to  service excellence (and it didn't have to include an "ITIL-defined" CMDB.

As luck would have it, it seems that I just had my terminology wrong. I was really talking about a PMDB. Had I only known! In fact, it;s not just Gartner that leads me to see the light. Enterprise Management Associates also has published some papers describing a 'CMDB Evolution' as depicted below.

EMA White Paper: HP’s Universal CMDB: A Balanced Approach to
Unifying IT Operations, Service Desks, and Business Objectives

Look, I'm not the geek here. I understand that the vision for truly integrated ITSM management environment will take time (and money). 

However, while you're waiting for nirvana, you might want to get something done (and numb some of the pain) along the way. Look at your stakeholders and services, establish a simple Catalog matrix and begin Cross Silo base lines as you proceed with process improvement cycles. 

It will help get everyone on the same page and avoid some of the most challenging issues associated with your ITIL initiatives; People.

Understanding the inter-relationships between silos that make up end-to-end business services does not require a 'CMDB'. Ok, maybe a 'CDB', PMDB' or 'Real-Time CMDB'...

but what the hell do I know?


PMP Exam Lessons Learned

I recently sat for the PMP exam and passed on the first attempt. My journey roughly followed the path below:

May 2007 - Scheduling notice for exam
June 2007 - Ordered PMP Study Guide, Kim Heldman
July 2007 - Ordered the PMprepcast, Cornelius Fichtner
Sept 2007 - Created PMP MindMap
Nov 2007 - Began sample tests, forum, web surfing
Nov 2007 - Took Exam

Of course I ordered the PMBOK and as soon as I looked at it I ordered another book. The PMBOK is a fabulous reverence, but not very good reading (particularly early in the game).

The PMP Study Guide by Kim Heldman was very good. It was organized by process area, which to start I was more comfortable with than the PMBOK's knowledge areas. The CD included an exam that very closely simulated the online test-taking experience, which I also found helpful.

I found the PMprepcast an extremely useful tool in preparing for the PMP exam. With schedules often overloaded as it is, podcasts are a very effective way to maximize your time! (The PMprepcast is organized by knowledge areas, and more closely aligns with the way the PMBOK is structured.) While I won't be disappointed if I don't hear that music again, this was an invaluable resource.

I found using MindMap to review the processes quite useful. I had the processes organized by process group on right-hand side, with each process group coded with a particular shape. On the left-hand side I organized the processes by knowledge area, with each process coded by color. So regardless of how I was viewing the process, I could tell by shape or color where it belonged. I also found MindMap handy to place notes about the ITTO's, links to web resources and attachments.

Other resources I found quite nice included Head First PMP; they had some great stuff, very easy to read and had I found them earlier I may have used them more.

The sample exams I used included Kim Heldman's book/CD, Head First PMP, Oliver Lehman's exam, and a few other things I found on the web, etc. I also did some writing exercises to help me remember the formulas, but this was a day or 2 before the exam.

Lessons Learned & Comments:

The exam site did not allow me to take ANYTHING into the exam room, except what they gave me (calculator, pencils, paper). No food or drink.

I found some questions on leadership styles that threw me off a bit. I was not ready for cost/benefit, Point of total Assumption math at all and completely missed this I suspect. I thought I had the formulas pretty well down, but missed this one completely and really shouldn't have.

I had some medical procedures done the week before the exam, which I did not feel was taking much risk. This was VERY bad planning on my part! Between some unforeseen complications and the angst of pre-Thanksgiving preparation, it stressed me out way too much before the exam. (I'm ok)

Best advise I can give has probably been given before:

Begin your preparation well in advance, and be aware of gaps in your  prep time.

Save the intensive study of the formulas (memorization) for later, but be sure and take time to understand the math ahead of time.

You're scheduling the exam well ahead of time; be sure and consider everyone's calendar (family, school, etc.) and be wary of arranging other events while the exam is approaching (like a seemingly innocent checkup)

Time to continue to practice what we preach...

The Value of On-Demand Software in ITSM Implementations

Those of you who read this blog know I've ranted about this before (see Give your ITSM implementation a kick in the SaaS). If you have not considered 'On-Demand' or 'Software-as-a-Service (SaaS)' as a viable tool to adopting IT Service Management, think again! For those of you not familiar with SaaS and are on the 'ITIL journey' then this is a must read.


What is SaaS?

Software-as-a-Service (SaaS) or On-Demand software, is NOT the same as a managed service (MSP, ASP, etc.). The key difference is that SaaS software is specifically web-native software designed with multi-tenant capability. This means that customers run the same software but cannot see other customers data.


Hosting a legacy or 'web-enabled' application and charging a monthly fee is NOT Software-as-a-Service, and neither is hosting and managing an application on behalf of a customer.


This post will discuss how MyServiceMonitor is using SaaS affiliate relationships to enhance and accelerate adoption of IT service management (ITIL). In the coming months, MyServiceMonitorNEWS will provide Case Studies of customer engagements that leveraged many of these tools.


Assessment & Audit

Customers often look to outside consultants for assistance in helping them answer the question, "Where Are We Now?" in relation to ITIL best practice. Through our affiliate relationship with Systems Thinking, MyServiceMonitor provides role-based Enhanced Assessment Services and (more importantly) knowledge transfer to empower your improvement teams with the ability to self-assess progress as your journey evolves.


The preparation for self-assessment workshop can be very beneficial to helping staff understand inter-process relationships, process maturity vs. compliance and the difference between managing the project and tracking the 600+ OGC best practice metrics (and that's just for ITIL V2, but don't worry! we have services for ISO 20K and CobiT too!).


By combining self-assessment with independent verification from MyserviceMonitor, and storing assessment data in the SaaS software, customers can now provide very high levels of audit support as well. This can save time and money, particularly for ISO 20000 requirements.


How to Create Your Service Catalog in 6 Weeks


MyServiceMonitor can facilitate Service Catalog Workshops, through an affiliate relationship with Service Ramp


Customers face a dilemma when confronted with the challenge of defining and building the initial Service Catalog. Collecting data and getting everyone to agree on structure and service descriptions can result in 'spreadsheet hell', taking time away from other critical projects and/or grinding the improvement initiatives to a complete halt.


By bringing in a web-based catalog with pre-defined templates, customers can build out the initial catalog to gain consensus from critical stakeholders BEFORE investments in other tools and publication of the Catalog take place.


The end result is faster definition of services, a more accurate Service Catalog structure, and more effective automation decisions -- when YOU'RE ready.


Keeping Pace with Complexity


Whether it's n-tier infrastructures, thin-client, or virtualized environments, customers often simply do not have the ability to understand the actual performance of a service end-to-end.


Service Operation said it well, "Remote monitoring, control and management equipment and systems will be essential to manage a virtualized environment, as many services will not be linked to any one specific piece of equipment."                                                 - ITIL© Service Operation, pg 101.


MyServiceMonitor has had a long-standing relationship with eG Innovations, who provides a subscription-based monitor that has the ability to monitor ANY n-tier infrastructure end-to-end, learn the norms of all collected metrics and automatically isolate which layer of which component is the source of an anomaly.


The use of intelligent monitoring can also reduce the pressure to add staff (or outsource) by enhancing the effectiveness of key staff and improving proactive management. Cross domain intelligence is, and will remain, a key to improving effectiveness and efficiency and is a critical element of moving management’s paradigm up the food chain and closer to the business. 

This kind of automation is still not well understood --- even in the midst of all the ITIL/ITSM hype (or perhaps because of it). ITSM automation initiatives should strongly consider monitoring --- automated service monitoring to be precise --- as a key enabler.

With the use of multi-tier environments, applications no longer operate in isolation – e.g., a failure of the backend database can cause applications executing on an application server that uses the database to fail as well.  The interdependency between business service components poses interesting challenges for monitoring. 

MyServiceMonitor provides Cross-Silo Baselines of service performance, providing IT staff with an ability to understand critical dependencies before committing to SLA targets. This proactively establishes an agreed basis for the Service Improvement Program, rather than after the fact finger-pointing.


Perhaps the best part of SaaS in this case was the speed in which the target services were instrumented; less than 2 weeks for multiple services over about 15 servers (a sampling of the total infrastructure sufficient to meet the baselining requirements).


Kick Some SaaS


These are a few examples of how SaaS can help improve your ITSM implementation efforts. The costs of each of the examples shown above were less than $20,000 (some much less) and fit nicely into the customer's engagement requirements. I've seen (unfortunately) $20,000 spent on far less.


While SaaS is not for everyone, and each provider must be evaluated (just like any other purchase), not including these alternatives in your 'tool bag' can be a mistake. 


For more information on these and other SaaS products, contact MyServiceMonitor today!

jmw@myservicemonitor.com 


Coming to Terms with [ITIL Version 3]: Evolution & Organizational Change 

Those of us who have implemented, are implementing, or are planning to implement IT service management often ask about the best way to organize around the ITIL guidance.

The recent refresh of ITIL – Version 3 – has significantly expanded on this particular area.

Those familiar with ITIL’s Version 2 know that these volumes focus on establishing cross-functional processes based on proven industry guidance; and that addressing the ‘white space’ in the organization chart by implementing cross-functional processes is not that easy.

As V3’s Service Strategy states, [Functions are often mistaken for processes.], and perhaps more important [What Are Services?].

It is no accident that virtually every V3 volume contains guidance in these areas, but you need to understand some terms first.

Coming to Terms with V3

Service Management - [Service Management is a set of specialized organizational capabilities for providing value to customers in the form of services.]

Organizational capabilities combine processes and functions for managing services over a lifecycle. 

Services - [A service is a means of delivering value to customers by facilitating outcomes customers want to achieve without the ownership of specific costs and risks.]

Value - [Value consists of two primary elements: Utility or fitness for purpose ….Utility is what the customer gets, and Warranty or fitness for use… warranty is how it is delivered.]

Outcomes - [The result of carrying out an activity, following a process, or delivering an IT service. The term Outcome is used to refer to intended results, as well as to actual results.]

The concept of Outcomes is interesting. To quote V3:

[An outcome-based definition of service moves IT organizations beyond business-IT alignment towards business-IT integration...Requirements are generated for internal control only after customer outcomes are well understood.]

Customer - [Someone who buys goods or Services. The Customer of an IT Service Provider is the person or group that defines and agrees the Service Level Targets…]

This may be the most confusing word of all for many IT organizations. Who is the Customer of services that are ‘internal’? There may be no invoices, SLAs or any other documents that clearly indicate who the Customer is (or should be). Simply discussing these relationships often plants the seeds of organizational change.

[While the organization chart is a useful administrative tool, it is missing key components. It is missing the customers. It is missing the services provided to customers. And it is missing the workflow through which those services are provided.]

i_am_quality_textmedium


Understanding the complexity of Customers and Suppliers, as they relate to Processes and Services is likely to remain a challenge for many.



Organizational Capabilities

[Specialization is a necessary condition for developing organizational capabilities.]

Many organizations have established functional units that aggregate specialized knowledge based on technical domains, but it’s really the lack of coordination that creates those IT silos.

I suppose this is why V2 had a process focus; it centered on improving coordination between functional units by implementing proven support and delivery processes. V3 does not change that!

Functions – [Organizational units specialized to perform certain types of work.] They focus on the specialization principle.

Processes - [A set of coordinated activities in order to produce an outcome (or goal).] They focus on the coordination principle.

It’s important to note that both Processes and Services have Customers!

Resource – [A generic term that includes IT infrastructure, people, money or anything else that might help to deliver an IT Service. Resources are considered to be Assets of an organization.]

Human resources have Roles to play in both Functions and Processes in the various Lifecycle stages of delivering services, and so:

Roles - [A set of responsibilities, activities and authorities granted to a person or team. A Role is defined in a process. One person or team may have multiple Roles…]

From V2 to V3 – The Evolution of Language

We had a bad dose of Kool-Aid in V2, in the form of way too much enthusiasm over the Configuration Management Data Base (CMDB). This resulted in some bad trips; coming out of your Foundation class, putting 90 pounds of air in the tires, and stepping on the accelerator is still not the safest path to enlightenment.

CMDB’s must evolve over time, cannot be bought, and many felt (and still feel) that a true ITIL defined CMDB cannot be done at all. Few would argue however, that one must get a handle on critical dependency data and establish ‘trusted sources’ of information and that takes time.

Configuration Management System (CMS) – [A set of tools and databases that are used to manage an IT Service Provider’s Configuration data. The CMS also includes information about Incidents, Problems, Known Errors, Changes and Releases; and may contain data about employees, Suppliers, locations, business units, Customers and Users. The CMS includes tools for collecting, storing, managing, updating, and presenting data about all Configuration Items and their Relationships. The CMS is maintained by Configuration Management and is used by all IT Service Management processes.]

The addition of the term CMS to V2’s CMDB is evidence of an evolution in terminology that brings us much closer to reality. I don’t think V2 ever really intended a big bang for the CMDB anyway, an evolutionary theory seems much more reasonable.

Unfortunately, one of the most common mistakes many folks made when pursuing CMDB nirvana was not defining services first; it is a service that gives perspective and context to the CI relationships defined in the CMDB (now supplemented with a CMS in V3).

This is an area where V3 can help significantly.

V3 describes a

Service Portfolio – [The complete set of Services that are managed by a Service Provider. The Service Portfolio is managed by a Service Provider. The Service Portfolio is used to manage the entire Lifecycle of all Services, and includes three Categories: Service Pipeline (proposed or in Development); Service Catalog (Live or available for Deployment); and Retired Services.]

Service Portfolio Management is defined in Service Strategy (see below). As far as putting 90 pounds of air in the tires and stepping on the accelerator, see the following from V3’s Service Strategy:

[Armed with a conceptual understanding of services, organizations frequently rush to industrialize service outcomes. The impulse is to launch initiatives in organizational change or process redesign…there is an order worth noting. While this order is not absolute, it does serve two purposes. First, it warns against missteps such as performing organizational design before knowing what services to offer, or performing tool selection before optimizing processes. Second, it signals the early need for a Service Portfolio, one of the most vital and yet often missing constructs for driving service strategies and managing service investments.]

Beware the V3 Kool-Aid is potentially just as dangerous as the V2 was:

Service Catalog – [A database or structured document with information about all live IT Services, including those available for Deployment. The Service Catalog is the only part of the Service Portfolio published to Customers, and is used to support the sale and delivery of IT Services. The Service Catalog includes information about deliverables, prices, contact points, ordering and request Processes.]

Don't get me wrong, I'm a believer in ITIL and feel everyone needs to get on the Right Road and building a Service Catalog is part of that. However, understand that the Catalog is based on the Service Portfolio and that is defined in Service Strategy; know yourself first...

Evolution & organizational change with V3

The new Good Books provide a wealth of information about organizational theory and change based on proven practice. I have been using the term Stakeholder & Services targeting that (happily) maps quite well to the V3 guidance.

Stakeholder & Services targeting is really about agreeing on a high-level Service Portfolio, and targeting improvement efforts based on need and organizational realities. It establishes a service-oriented approach to implementation.

In fact, V3 provides a process for

Service Portfolio Management (SPM) – [The Process responsible for managing the Service Portfolio. Service Portfolio Management considers Services in terms of the business value that they provide.]

SPM must be driven by steering and can establish an ongoing program for evolving the organization. The Service Portfolio can highlight targets for improvement in several ways.

By looking at Stakeholders (including internal and external Customers) and Services, organizational issues can be targeted for action as part of the improvement program.

[Goal setting and reporting are done in silos…This approach prevents cross-silo issues from being resolved at low levels. Instead, the issues are escalated to functional managers who then address the issues with other functional managers…Cross-functional issues frequently do not get addressed, often falling through the organizational cracks. The opportunity for improving an organization often lies in these organizational cracks: the white space of the organization chart.]

So, lack of cross-functional process maturity will still be a primary focus for many.

However, V3’s new processes – including Service Portfolio Management – as well as the wealth of information on organizational development and new role descriptions can help target the improvement efforts in ways that make sense for YOU.

For example, as services are chartered via SPM (Service Targeting) the stakeholders related to the service targets can be clearly identified and process improvement efforts can be concentrated on those stakeholders (Customers and Suppliers) that are relevant to that service.

Service Targeting also improves critical inputs to core processes, such as clear priority setting and identification of dependency data including Configuration Items, Operational Level Agreements and relevant Contracts.

Service Targeting also clearly establishes resources directly from Steering/management, ensuring that proper support is given to the initiative(s).

The gradual development of a robust Service Portfolio and Catalog enables the organization to evolve as well:

[The process for major organizational change involves many events and can be a matter of years rather than months…A service strategy then becomes an implicit blueprint for an organization’s design…The term evolution describes the quieter periods while the term revolution describes the upheaval of management practices.]

Through a constant cycle of ongoing stakeholder and services targeting, business case analysis, and communication organizations can take an evolutionary approach to organizational change. This can keep revolutionary steps to a safe and manageable level. Remember,

Inch by inch, life’s a cinch. Yard by yard, life is hard.

Good luck and drive safely.

ProgramMgt

Confusion 300: Better Luck Next Year


Thanks to my good friends at eG Innovations, I attended the recent itSMFusa FUSION 300 conference, so I thought I’d spew a few words about what I thought about the event. (Spew being the operative word here, as I left the event with a nasty stomach flue.)

clip_image003The highlight of the conference for me (by far) was listening to Erin Gruwell talk about the Freedom Writers. While I’ve not had to deal with Crypts and Bloods in any of my classes so far, there have been students who really had no interest in what I had to say...

All of us in the ‘ITIL community’ would do well to follow Erin’s philosophy (see below)…but let’s get back to the itSMF show.


[By fostering an educational philosophy that valued and promoted diversity, she transformed her students' lives.]

clip_image003


The event was well organized, had plenty of content, and provided an excellent opportunity to network; but I left with kind of an empty feeling, and I don’t think it was just from some bad barbeque.

The attendees were rigidly scheduled; you could either attend a breakout session or a vendor exhibit but only when permitted by the event organizers. I (and others) felt like this was not providing customers with the flexibility to set their own agenda and certainly minimized the time for any extensive dialog.

The ‘race’ theme was fun, but was focused on getting people in front of as many booths as possible, collecting stickers to ‘win’ and gain entry to a drawing for prizes. So we had not only the usual trinket hunters but sticker seekers too.

But what bothered me the most was standing in a booth and trying to explain the value of “data flow and dependency based event correlation” in ITSM implementations to hordes of trinket hunters and sticker seekers. Those that seemed to have a real need were mostly overloaded by the constant flow (spews) of information coming from speakers, vendors and consultants (like me) to have any patience left for this kind of conversation.

clip_image009Even more worrisome, according to a Simmons Market Research Bureau study, 91% of respondents ranked the trade show as "extremely useful" as a source for product purchasing information. This was higher than any other source, including on-site visits from reps.

But of course making your decision of ITSM tools based entirely on a demo at a trade show is a lot like buying a car without a test drive. Most people will want to validate the claims made in the booth by that man behind the curtain (right?).

So, if you want to SEE and UNDERSTAND HOW a product such as eG Innovations “can tell you that a backup running on a VM guest is choking up the disk on the host, slowing down other guests…” then for god’s sake leverage eG’s SaaS model and FIND OUT.

The eG product (I have not seen others) can also correlate issues across services as well as across a Virtual Machine; I’m just not at all sure the folks we talked to understood (or cared).

Products like these are likely to do much more for customers than five-year visions of ITSM nirvana and “out-of-the-box ITIL”.

If the product works, let me see it and don’t tell me “it’s in the next release” or, “it’s part of our ITSM vision”. I want you to show me real functionality NOW, and why it helps my ITSM objectives.

From a consulting perspective, it would have been nice to see more from other best practice disciplines such as CobiT, ISO (not just ISO 20K), PMI/PRINCE2, BPM and others.

While I understand the focus was on ITIL/ITSM, it should be increasingly apparent that unless ITIL guidance is increasingly integrated with other disciplines it’s likely to sit on a shelf.

1) As a supplier, the traditional zombie-like hordes we see at most trade shows just leave me dazed and confused.

2) As a customer, I’d like more direct comparisons, especially between the big gorillas and the ‘little guys’.  The traditional pitches give me a headache.

3) As a consultant, I’d like more breadth of coverage on how ITSM integrates with other disciplines. A 3 day (2 ½) dose of ITIL makes my head spin.

So while I'm being critical of the show --- (it was beneficial and both my client and eG Innovations felt it was worthwhile) --- I left feeling a bit sick. If you missed the itSMFusa show this year, get the slides off the web and be glad you did not eat the barbeque.

Better luck next year.

 

Service Lifecycle Solutions: The Blood's in the Water

I had a few precious moments to browse some research on what the big gorillas may have planned as ITIL V3 gets ready to storm the beaches, and I must say the hair on the back of my neck is standing up again.

Many clients are still wrestling with establishing cross-functional processes, and some have not even addressed IT service management best practice at all. After a ‘shock & awe’ campaign of CMDB bombardment, get ready for the next wave – ITIL V3.

One analyst sees the potential for “the categories of ITSM, business service management (BSM), application lifecycle management, service desk, and IT portfolio and asset management to blend into a single category which we are calling ‘service lifecycle management’.”

The blood’s in the water on this one. For many, the ‘shock & awe’ of CMDB madness has barely worn off and the water’s still rising. Before you reach for the ITIL V3 lifeboat, there may be some things to consider. 
jaws_textmedium
All the gorillas have been on a spending spree, loading their guns for the next campaign. Their marketing machines are ramping up into high gear, but it will be up to us (again) to see whether they’ve properly digested their meals or have regressed to their slovenly ways.

Before ITIL V3 is let loose on us, I thought I’d offer a few humble comments. We are sure to hear more new buzzwords, as well as the trusted old standbys like “correlation” and “root-cause”.

Yes, I’m going to talk about ‘monitoring’ (again). There is already a blurring of the lines between stress testing, optimization, monitoring, diagnosis and administrative tools. The pending blitzkrieg may obliterate any rational segmentation of these differences, and if you don’t want to be eaten alive pay attention…

There have been service oriented monitoring products for several years now that have taken a back seat to the CMDB madness. There are a few things you need to make sure of as the new bombardment begins:

1. Make sure that the monitor can automatically establish time-varying thresholds. Without this capability, the scope of what you’ll be able to monitor will be too limited to provide significant value.

2. Understand the licensing policy. Insist on a ‘universal’ license, not a per CPU, per platform or (worst of all) per application plugin model.

3. Beware of ‘root cause’ claims. Force suppliers to demonstrate this capability in your environment, and watch carefully how they set up the monitor. Too much time orchestrating, writing rules and limiting testing alternatives should raise some red flags.

4. Don’t confuse ‘integration’ with effectiveness, ease of use and rapid deployment. SaaS alternatives can separate the men from the boys on this one.  If the monitor can be set up and proven as part of a SaaS engagement, now they’re walking the talk. Force this issue!

At the heart of this new wave of V3 goodness is a need for intelligent service oriented monitoring. Leveraging the core ITIL Support and Delivery processes in a service lifecycle approach will be attractive; clearly customers have provided some input.

But as the hype increases don’t forget what you need to do, which may be much more down to earth than the pounding drumbeat that is coming. With blood already in the water, staying on top of the basics can keep you from being bitten.

What’r YOU lookin’ at?

The savage journey’s full of forks…

This ramble is a reflection on some thoughts after attending the itSMF’s NY LIG meeting yesterday morning…

Kudos go to the speakers who have been on the ITIL road for over 5 years with large, global enterprises. I thought it was interesting that even with this longevity there was still discussion about the level of management commitment; testimony that the savage journey rolls on…’continuous improvement’ sounds so much better, doesn’t it?

Anyway, the highlight of the morning for me was watching each speaker’s face at the end of the session as they were bombarded by a horde of consultants (me included), tool vendors and peers…

“Hi, I just wanted to give you a card and let you know if you ever need…” as their eyes got glassy I thought, “God, I remember…they have to go back to that rat hole and listen to IT SUCKS”…forgive me!

01lizardnine

Interesting that the #1 thing they’d do better was understand the business process…that says SLM to me. Only thing I don’t understand is that all the talk around SLM centers on the Service Catalog, when it is a service-oriented event monitoring and management umbrella that is likely to save more time & money.

The lack of focus on monitoring and event management, particularly application monitoring, just seems odd to me…I wish it were more a topic of discussion.

The lack of the ability to automatically isolate the source of anomalies across distributed network, system and application tiers inhibits a wide breadth of IT service management processes.

Business processes will ultimately drag you into transactions and data flows, and simple response time monitoring is a reactive approach to management. IT can no longer afford to be reactive.

Effective monitoring can also help address the ‘disconnect’ between SDLC (app dev) and infrastructure. I have worked with customers who have very effectively leveraged monitoring to enhance Incident, Problem, Release and Capacity Management with excellent results.

SLM will certainly require a Service Catalog, but let’s not do in Service Delivery what we did in Service Support (CMDB); focus so close on one element that we forget other (very important) ones. Like monitoring...integrated network, system and application layer monitoring.

So, what’r YOU lookin’ at?


CMDB Interoperability: waiting for nirvana

The 800-pound gorillas have formed an 'alliance' in order to provide interoperability between their respective CMDBs. Of course I thought OASIS~DCML has been working on that, but I admittedly couldn't tell you technical folks squat about OASIS~DCML or what the hell our 800 pound friends are up to...maybe somebody who can translate the geek-speak into a language we can all understand will help us...

as for me, I got some serious deja vu  going on....but perhaps more importantly, if you're implementing --- or want to implement --- IT service management best practice based on ITIL how does this impact your Road Map? Should you shout halleluia and just trust your 800 pound gorilla of choice to provide interoperability someday as promised? (If you do, I have a bridge I'd like to sell you)...

FB1CDBD789

no, there are other (safer) options available to you. You KNOW that you must start with an analysis of your current processes first, so don't even think about tools until you've completed this…

Give your ITSM implementation a kick in the SaaS

Give your ITSM implementation a kick in the SaaS

I’m a strong believer in the ‘On-Demand’ model of software, also called Software-as-a-Service’ (SaaS).  When I see articles titled “IT Execs To Vendors: Your Software Stinks”, it only increases my believe that ‘On-Demand’ might be a great way to give your traditional tool vendors a kick in the SaaS and accelerate your implementation of ITSM at the same time.

Everyone knows that tools will help automate processes, but when do you apply them and at what cost? Trying to wait until some process improvement cycles are completed is the best practice approach, but the pressure to automate is unrelenting and the big gorillas only crank up the pressure even more by offering Service Desks, CMDBs and visions of nirvana.

I’ve already spewed on about CMDB madness and the savage journey that can bring (see Avoiding a Savage Journey on the Road to ITSM Excellence) so I won’t continue that here, but trying to 'do it by the book' can be just as bad. The fact is, tools can help significantly!  

The sad reality is that automation is one way to help ‘do more with less’, but often customers are simply not ready to make large strategic investments in software early in the journey. Trying to go through process implementation without any tool investment can result in hitting the wall, and making investments before you’re really ready can significantly increase the risk of making a bad investment.

Leveraging SaaS tools is one way to bridge that gap. Traditional software products often result in lengthy implementation cycles -- which is why SaaS may not be an option for these products -- but there are products that have been designed to enable SaaS, which can be used very effectively in ITSM implementations.


I Pity the Fool who doesn’t use a Tool!
DD1275D1B0
Subscribing for a 90 day implementation can quickly provide value for the ITSM implementation, while offering a pilot to measure the value from the tool at the same time:

“One thing we do, which I think every customer should demand, is a pilot. The full implementation of a robust enterprise solution is up and running very quickly, they use it for 90 days, and if they are making money from it, they decide to subscribe for some longer period. If they haven't proven value to themselves before then, why do it?”           SaaS Skepticism is Predictable, IT Business Edge, 9/28/2006

So, don’t be ‘a fool with a tool’, but don’t be a fool without one either. Kick some Saas and get on the Right Road.
MySvcMon

SLM & The Looking Glass House - The real voyage of discovery

(adapted from Lewis Caroll’s Alice in Wonderland)

What reality does your Customer see?

(This entry was late in the evening after a rather long day...)

One thing was certain, that Server Ops had had nothing to do with it: -- it was Network Ops's fault entirely. For Server Ops had been having its middleware upgraded by the vendor for the last quarter of an hour (and bearing it pretty well, considering); so you see that it COULDN'T have had any hand in the mischief.

The way Server Manager organized the upgrade was this: first she froze all changes, and then she had the vendor perform the upgrade, (the wrong way), beginning at the end: and just now, as I said, she was hard at work in Server Ops, which was painfully bearing it all -- no doubt feeling that it was all meant for its good.

But Network Ops had been finished with their upgrade earlier in the afternoon, and so, while the Customer was waiting on service availability, half talking to herself and half asleep, the Department of Silos had been having a grand game of upgrade with the infrastructure the Customer had been trying to use, and had been tearing it up and down till it had all come undone again; and there it was, spread over the data center, all knots and tangles, with the Department of Silos running after its own tail in the middle.

`Oh, you wicked Department!' cried the Customer, catching up the Department of Silos, and giving it a little encouragement at the same time to make it understand that it was in disgrace. `Really, Server Manager ought to have taught you better manners! You OUGHT, Server Manager, you know you ought!' she added, looking reproachfully at Server Ops, and speaking in as cross a voice as she could manage -- and then she scrambled back into the Data Center, taking the Server and Network Ops and the infrastructure with her, and began triaging the Problem again. But she didn't get on very fast, as she was talking all the time, sometimes to the Department of Silos, and sometimes to herself. The Department of Server Ops sat very demurely in their cubicles, pretending to watch the progress of the triage, and now and then putting out one e-mail and gently suggesting “try this”, as if it would be glad to help, if it might.

`Do you know what to-morrow is?' the Customer began. `You'd have guessed if you'd been up in the Data Center with me -- only the Department of Silos was making you tidy, so you couldn't. I was watching the Techs getting trained for ITIL -- and they want plenty of training, Silos! Only it got so cold, and it snowed so, they had to leave off. Never mind, Silos, we'll go and see the training to-morrow.' Here the Customer wound two or three turns of the Ethernet cabling round the Department of Silo's neck, just to see how it would look: this led to a scramble, in which the Ethernet hub rolled down upon the floor, and yards and yards of it got unwound again.

`Do you know, I was so angry, Silos,' the Customer went on as soon as they were comfortably settled again, `when I saw all the mischief you had been doing, I was very nearly contacting an Outsourcer, and putting you out into the snow! And you'd have deserved it, you little mischievous darling! What have you got to say for yourself? Now don't interrupt me!' she went on, holding up one finger. `I'm going to tell you all your faults. Number one: you upgraded twice while Server Manager was not watching this morning. Now you can't deny it, Silos: I heard you! What that you say?' (pretending that the Silos was speaking.) `Her middleware went into your network infrastructure? Well, that's YOUR fault, for keeping your eyes open -- if you'd shut them tight up, it wouldn't have happened. Now don't make any more excuses, but listen! Number two: you pulled the network cable away just as I had put down the switch port before her! What, you were looking for bandwidth, were you?

How do you know she wasn't looking for bandwidth too? Now for number three: you upgraded two infrastructure segments while I wasn't looking!

`That's three faults, Silos, and you've not been punished for any of them yet. You know I'm saving up all your punishments for Wednesday week -- Suppose they had saved up all MY punishments!' she went on, talking more to herself than the Silos. `What WOULD they do at the end of a year? I should be sent to prison for a SOX violation, I suppose, when the day came. Or -- let me see -- suppose each punishment was to be going without service: then, when the miserable day came, I should have to go without all services at once! Well, I shouldn't mind THAT much! I'd far rather go without all of them than still be down because of one!

`Let's pretend that you're the CEO, Silos! Do you know, I think if you sat up and folded your arms, you'd look exactly like her. Now do try, there's a dear!' And the Customer got the CEO, and set it up before the Silos as a model for it to imitate: however, the thing didn't succeed, principally, the Customer said, because the Silos wouldn't fold its arms properly. So, to punish it, she held it up to the Data Center, that it might see how sulky it was -- `and if you're not good directly,' she added, `I'll put you through into the Data Center. How would you like THAT?'

`Now, if you'll only attend, Silos, and not talk so much, I'll tell you all my ideas about Data Center. First, there's the room you can see through the glass -- that's just the same as our drawing room, only the things go the other way. I can see all of it when I get upon a chair -- all but the bit behind the mainframe. Oh! I do so wish I could see THAT bit! I want so much to know whether they've an Incident: you never CAN tell, you know, unless our Incident smokes, and then smoke comes up in that room too -- but that may be only pretence, just to make it look as if they had an Incident. Well then, the documentation is something like our documentation, only the words go the wrong way; I know that, because I've held up one of our books to the glass, and then they hold up one in the other room.

`How would you like to live in Data Center, Silos? I wonder if they'd give you coffee in there? Perhaps Data Center coffee isn't good to drink -- But oh, Silos! now we come to the passage. You can just see a little PEEP of the passage in Data Center, if you leave the door of our room wide open: and it's very like our passage as far as you can see, only you know it may be quite different on beyond. Oh, Silos! how nice it would be if we could only get through into the Data Center! I'm sure it's got, oh! such beautiful things in it!

In another moment the Customer was through the glass, and had jumped lightly down into the Data Center room. The very first thing she did was to look whether there was an Incident in the queue, and she was quite pleased to find that there was a real one, blazing away as brightly as the one she had left behind. `So I shall be as helpless here as I was in the old room,' thought the Customer: `more helpless, in fact, because there'll be no one here to send me e-mails about the Incident. Oh, what fun it'll be, when they see me through the glass in here, and can't get at me!'

Then she began looking about, and noticed that what could be seen from the old room was quite common and uninteresting, but that all the rest was a different as possible.
`They don't keep this room so tidy as the other,' the Customer thought to herself, as she noticed several of the Operators down in the storage room among the cabling: but in another moment, with a little `Oh!' of surprise, she was down on her hands and knees watching them. The Operators were walking about, two and two!

`Here are the CIO and the CEO,' the Customer said (in a whisper, for fear of frightening them), `and there are the Manufacturing VP and the Finance VP sitting in their offices -- I don't think they can hear me,' she went on, as she put her head closer down, `and I'm nearly sure they can't see me. I feel somehow as if I were invisible -- '

She said afterwards that she had never seen in all her life such a face as the VP’s made, when they found themselves held hostage by a downed system: they were far too much astonished to cry out, but their eyes and mouths went on getting larger and larger, and rounder and rounder, till their hands shook so with crying that they nearly dropped upon the floor.

`Oh! PLEASE don't make such faces, my dear!' she cried out, quite forgetting that the VP’s couldn't hear her. `You make me laugh so that I can hardly look at you! And don't keep your mouth so wide open!

The Manufacturing VP immediately fell flat on his back, and lay perfectly still: and the Customer was a little alarmed at what she had done, and went round the room to see if she could find any water to throw over him. However, she could find nothing but a bottle of ink, and when she got back with it she found he had recovered, and he and the VP of Finance were talking together in a frightened whisper -- so low, that the Customer could hardly hear what they said.

`The horror of that moment,' the Manufacturing VP went on, `I shall never, NEVER forget!'
`You will, though,' the Finance VP said, `if you don't make a memorandum of it.'
The Customer looked on with great interest as the Manufacturing VP took an enormous memorandum-book out of his pocket, and began writing. A sudden thought struck her, and she took hold of the end of the pencil, which came some way over his shoulder, and began writing for him.

The poor VP look puzzled and unhappy, and struggled with the pencil for some time without saying anything; but the Customer was too strong for him, and at last he panted out, `My dear! I really MUST get a thinner pencil. I can't manage this one a bit; it writes all manner of things that I don't intend -- '

`What manner of things?' said the Finance VP, looking over the book (in which The Customer had put `THE CEO IS SLIDING DOWN THE POKER. HE BALANCES VERY BADLY') `That's not a memorandum of YOUR feelings!'

There was a book lying near the Customer on the table, and while she sat watching the Manufacturing VP (for she was still a little anxious about him, and had the ink all ready to throw over him, in case he fainted again), she turned over the leaves, to find some part that she could read, ` -- for it's all in some language I don't know,' she said to herself.
It was like this.

YKCOWREBBAJ

sevot yhtils eht dna ,gillirb sawT`
ebaw eht ni elbmig dna eryg diD
,sevogorob eht erew ysmim llA
.ebargtuo shtar emom eht dnA


She puzzled over this for some time, but at last a bright thought struck her. `Why, it's a Data Center book, of course! And if I hold it up to a glass, the words will all go the right way again."

This was the poem that The Customer read.

ITILWOCKY

`Twas SOA, and the BPM
Did Linux and open source in the OS;
All Incidnets were the RFCs,
And the PSA raths FSC.

`Beware the ITILwocky, my son!
The jaws that bite, the claws that catch!
Beware the Data Center, and shun
The virtual machine gun!'

He took his ITSM sword in hand:
Long time the IEEE foe he sought --
So rested he by the cable room,
And stood awhile in thought.

And as in Release thought he stood,
The JITwock, with eyes of flame,
Came whiffling through the server room,
And burbled as it came!

One, two! One, two! And through and through
The server blade went snicker-snack!
He left it dead, and with its head
He went galumphing back.

`And has thou slain the ITwock?
Come to my arms, my beamish boy!
O frabjous day! Help! Help!
He chortled in his joy.

`Twas unavailable, and the panic struck
Did Incidents and Problems in the wabe;
All efforts were the best of luck,
And the Change raths outgrabe.

`It seems very pretty,' she said when she had finished it, `but it's RATHER hard to understand!' (You see she didn't like to confess, ever to herself, that she couldn't make it out at all.) `Somehow it seems to fill my head with ideas -- only I don't exactly know what they are! However, SOMEBODY broke SOMETHING: that's clear, at any rate -- '
`But oh!' thought the Customer, suddenly jumping up, `if I don't make haste I shall have to go back through the Data Center!

She was getting a little giddy with so much floating in the air, and was rather glad to find herself back to work as the Outage had mysteriously disappeared and things were normal again…

Things are never as normal --- or as insane --- as they appear; but perception is always reality!

The real voyage of discovery consists not in seeking new landscapes
but in having new eyes.
In seeing the universe through the eyes of another,
of a hundred others --
in seeing the hundreds of universes
that each of them sees.

- M.Proust

07E129A10C

Have you ever been Experienced?

Somebody asked me about "Quality of Experience' (QoE) recently. While those in technical silos may offer a brilliant dissertation on abstract polymorphic interfaces in clients and servers (see Button, Button, Whose Got The Button? Patterns for breaking client/server relationships, by Robert Martin) or even Distributed QoE, my answer is quite a bit simpler.

In my experience users will (usually) let you know if their experience is poor. You don't like the program, you change the channel. You get bad response from a web site, you shop somewhere else. So, of course you want to know what your users are experiencing!

However, different IT tribes will want to measure QoE for different reasons. Many want to be warned of a storm brewing, and be well prepared to explain why thier tribe is not the source of the problem (or fix it before they call). I call this the "it's the other bastards fault" motivator.

jimi.0
QoE is absolutely consistent with best practice. However, when investing in QoE technologies one should be careful of who is defining QoE (i.e., QoE of what services?). It should be the customer (read business process).

Two things worth considering before putting your budget dollars on the line:

1) Defining 'end-to-end' - Citrix access services is NOT a business service. It may be a critical segment of an end-to-end business service, but it is rarely the entire service. So, having 'end-to-end' knowledge of the Citrix servers right to the desktop is great --- but most business service infrastructures have a dizzying array of network devices, web servers, application servers, data base servers and applications.

'End-to-end' means every layer of every component required to support a business process.

2) What are you prepared to do? - So you took the plunge and purchased a QoE tool. Now that you've been warned (pray that your investment will warn you of an impending storm; otherwise your user could have told you --- for free), how will you isolate and diagnose the problem? Nice to know it's not in the Citrix server or the client, but then where is it? This is where analytics come into the picture (see Analytics & IT Service Management on this blog), and things can get really complicated. However, it's good to focus on this objective:

The key to effective business service monitoring is the ability to monitor what is happening at each layer of the infrastructure --- across an array of distributed network, system and application components --- and automatically identify which component layer, in which domain, is the source of a problem.

QoE decisions, like many technology investments, can be tribally driven. This is particularly true if the organization has not invested in the time to understand and define 'what is a service' and performed some due diligence in analyzing processes.

Some IT tribes will display true leadership and go beyond thier comfort zones by incorporating other technical silos into the equation, but I suspect this is going to be difficult for many. Taking an approach driven by best practices (such as ITIL) can help avoid experiencing the angst associated with knowing with absolute certainty where the problem isn't, but not knowing where the problem is.
07E129A10C

Implementing a CMDB is Like Blogging Alone: Why Products & Process won’t be enough to reconnect with the business

Starting your ITIL journey with a very complex, usually expensive, lengthy and often invasive technology-based initiative may only serve to increase the divide between IT silos and, more importantly, IT and the business. In a similar vein, too much focus on process may simply lead to more policy and procedure manuals that sit on a shelf.

The problem with Change, Configuration and CMDB implementations is they do not really enable a real-time connection between IT staff, and between IT and the business, which tends to perpetuate vicious cycles of tribal warfare.

“When people lack connection to others, they are unable to test the veracity of their own views, whether in the give or take of casual conversation or in more formal deliberation. Without such an opportunity, people are more likely to be swayed by their worse impulses….”

- Robert Putnam (2000) Bowling Alone: The collapse and revival of American community, New York: Simon and Schuster: 288-290

In the book Bowling Alone, by Robert Putnam, “Putnam warns that our stock of social capital - the very fabric of our connections with each other, has plummeted, impoverishing our lives and communities  …  we sign fewer petitions, belong to fewer organizations that meet, know our neighbors less, meet with friends less frequently, and even socialize with our families less often. We're even bowling alone.”

The focus on Process (BPM, ITIL, CobiT, et al) and Products (read CMDB, SOA, et al) by IT leads me to believe we’re talking more than ever – but sometimes communicating even less than ever before.

I like the concept of blogging so much I’ve found myself actually Blogging Alone! (Personally, I’d rather bowl alone than blog alone, so please visit my blog!) The hype around the CMDB can have a similar effect on your ITIL implementation.
 
It’s the People

It’s the social networks that really make things happen in most companies, not those dusty old policies and procedures. It is the network of people-to-people commitments that are often what make things go (or not go).
So, when looking to embark on a ‘quality journey’, remember at the end of the day it’s the people --- and that intricate social network of commitments – that are often the ‘current state process’ and that people may fiercly protect this tribal knowledge.

Process, Products and Paradigm Shifts

In a recent webinar more people were familiar with the CMDB than with ITIL (see EMA’s webinar: CMDB Adoption in the Real World - Just How Real Is It?), which was interesting considering that the CMDB is very much an ITIL term. Just shows you what market opportunity will do to reality.

Getting your IT staff to achieve the paradigm shift to a services orientation is going to require people skills more than anything else, and your selection of tools --- particularly early in the journey --- can significanlty impact how people react to the implementation of IT service management.

Services, Stakeholders and Real-Time Analytics

Stakeholders & Services targeting is a fundamental best practice that is often ignored or skipped as customers try and “accelerate” implementation. This often means the implementation of ITIL considers the business from afar, rather than part of a cross-functional team.

While this may provide an easier path to get the ball rolling, at some point the business had better become part of the team. Process and commitment based stakeholder analysis leveraging both business and IT tracks can ensure that all stakeholders are included and services are understood from the customer’s perspective.

Starting with the end in mind assumes IT truly understands the business process, when sometimes that process is not that well understood even by the business! It also drives participatory decision techniques, which are successful more than 80% of the time.

In addition, Product-led ITIL implementations are likely to focus on the technology, particularly when the supplier is also driving pr