chg in pm report 07162009 final scrubbed

8/13/2019 Chg in PM Report 07162009 FINAL Scrubbed

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/chg-in-pm-report-07162009-final-scrubbed 1/93

Change, Incident and Problem Management

Assessment Report - DRAFT

Confidential IBM & Client

July 2, 2009



2 ChgM, IM, PM Assessment Report | July 2009 |

Global Technology Services

Confidential IBM

Version Control Statement

Changes to the IBM Change, Incident, and Problem Management assessment report for

Client will be documented in the document revision history section below. The purpose

of the revision history is to document the progress and enhancements to the IBM

Change, Incident, and Problem Management Assessment report.

Document Revision History

Version Control

Revision # Date Revision Author Description of Change

DRAFT 07/02009 Stanley Rozdeba Initial Report presented to Client

Final 1.0 07/10/2009 Stanley Rozdeba Updated report for feedback received during 7/2 presentation and corrected

formatting errors

Final 1.1 07/16/2009 Stanley Rozdeba Added revision page





Confidential IBM

Contents

Summary – Current / Future

– FFIEC GAP Closure

Looking forward

Approach

Current state overview

Vision

Detailed Assessment

Gaps & recommendations

Initiatives

Global migration considerations

Roadmap

Appendices





Confidential IBM

Change Management drives FFIEC Compliance

FFIEC Gaps that will be solved by and/or IT Asset Management but will break on“Day-2” without Change Management:

– Number 9 – “SDP provides minimal coverage for requirements, testing,

development and conversion; Does not integrate effectively with supporting

processes, and capability not known for in sourced”

– Number 33 - “No central repository or inventory of enterprise assets. Assets are

tracked internally using multiple lists/databases and in some cases by performingsuppliers”

FFIEC Gaps will be impacted by or impact and/or Asset Mgmt efforts would also

fail without an improved Change Management solution

– Number 8 – “No documented enterprise IT architecture that addresses business

process, application, and system interdependencies”

– Number 14 “Footprint of unmanaged applications is not known”

Additional FFIEC failures would occur wherever processes are dependent on the

CMDB like Business Continuity Planning , Information Security or IT Governance.

Summary


http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/chg-in-pm-report-07162009-final-scrubbed 7/937 ChgM, IM, PM Assessment Report | July 2009 |


Confidential IBM

Contents

Summary

Looking forward

– Sustainability

– Recommendations

– Solution Method

Approach Current state overview

Vision

Detailed Assessment


Initiatives


Roadmap

Appendices




Confidential IBM

Looking Forward

– Recommendations

Our top priority recommendations are:

Consolidate the multiple Change and Incident Management processes into single

global processes

Reduce multiple Change and Incident Management tools present in the

environment to a single tool for each process

Tightly integrate Change Management and Configuration Management to

preserve the CMDB data integrity in order to:

– Close the identified FFIEC gaps

– Ensure the value of the Configuration and Asset Management data integrity is maintained

Tightly integrate Incident Management, Change Management and theConfiguration Management processes to:

– Reduce the number of incidents that result from the introduction of changes

– Reduce durations of service disruptions to minimize revenue loss

– Improve incident reporting to include all severity 1 and lower severity incidents

– Improve service availability

Looking Forward




Confidential IBM

Looking Forward

- Solution method

Change management and Incident management initiatives can be implementedwithout impacting the current ITSM project timelines by leveraging:

– , IT Asset Management and Capacity Management to reduce the effort required to

implement ChgM and IM

− Discovery for Chg and IM has been completed as part of the assessment effort

− Managed elements have already been defined

− Existing project management and governance is in place

− Requirements for integration will be defined in the and IT Asset Management projects

– Known process foundation to compress process design efforts

The Financial Services Change and Incident Management processes

ITIL (Information Technology Infrastructure Library ) best practices as Derive tool

Information requirements from Financial Services Change Management process and ITIL best practices

– -ITSM proof of concept (POC) efforts to reduce the effort in the Change Management POC

Looking Forward




Confidential IBM

Contents

Summary Looking forward

Approach


Vision

Detailed Assessment


Initiatives


Roadmap

Appendices




Confidential IBM

This assessment examined the Change, Incident and Problem

Management processes across several organizations

Approach

ResCap

Corporate

IO

NAO

MIC

Aba Seguros

Commercial Finance (CF)Process

GMO

Provident

CCP (DP&S)

ResCap BCG & IBG

The assessment was limited to a duration of 5 weeks.

Furthermore, the scope of the assessment was limited to

the information provided by the Client organization

Financial Services

B u s i

n e s s U n i t s

Change Management

Incident Management

Problem Management P r o c e s s D o m a i n s





Confidential IBM

The approach of this assessment was to review Client’s

Change, Incident and Problem Management processes

Approach

Conduct an assessment of processes across the multiple Clientorganizations for the:

− Change Management Process

− Incident Management Process

− Problem Management Process

Analyze gaps and develop recommendations into a solution in a final

assessment report

Create a solution roadmap that will:

− Maximize the value of the CMDB to achieve greater operational efficiency

− Help Client implement global Change, Incident and Problem Managementprocesses across all business units

− Help standardize the tools required to support service management processes





Confidential IBM

IBM completed its assessment of the in-scope processes by

analyzing documentation and interviewing Client personnel

Documentation for the purpose of understanding current maturity ofChange, Incident and Problem Management (if available) in the form of:

− Process Guides

− Service Management Architecture / Tool Guides

− Service Level / Operational Level Agreements

− Any existing service management strategy guide / roadmaps

Workshops, individual interviews and questionnaires to understand

current functionality and execution of the processes

Approach





Confidential IBM

Data was also requested and obtained from several

business units within Client

Approach

In-sourced and Outsourced

In-sourced

Outsourced

FS

ResCap

CorporateIO NAO MIC

Aba Seguros

Commercial

Finance

GMO

Provident CCP (DP&S)

BCG IBG

All requested data was provided

Requested data was partially

provided

No requested data was provided





Confidential IBM

IBM interviewed several key representatives from various

organizations within Client

Name Organization Role

Kim Herbert FS & ResCapIncident and Problem Management

Lead

Kevin Gialloreti FS & ResCap Change Management Lead

Craig Viney FS & ResCap Overall ITSM Lead

Roger Laing IOGlobal Incident and Problem

Management Lead

Ed Christiansen Commercial Finance Change Management Lead

Felipe Mora Valdez Aba SegurosChange, Incident and Problem

Management Lead

Connie Busz Global Incident and Problem Global Service Desk Lead

Leo Givental FS & ResCap Change Management Analyst

Michelle Richards ResCap Change Management Analyst

Christopher Kuffner Application Development DeveloperJim Geoffrey Application Development Developer

Graeme Martin IT Director for ResCap international IT Director

Phil Stead CCP CCP Change Management Lead

Yetin Prezan Commercial FinanceIncident and Problem Management

Lead

John Albor Global Incident and Problem Global Service Desk Owner

Approach





Confidential IBM

Contents


Approach


Vision

Detailed Assessment


Initiatives


Roadmap

Appendices





Confidential IBM

Currently, Client uses a disparate set of tools and

processes across business units

CCP Change and Incident Management

Unique Change and Incident Management Processes

FS IO MIC GMO Corp NAO

Provident

CF

ResCap

Aba

Seguros

(CM)

ResCap

BCG

ResCap

IBG

Change Management

System

Remedy OpenView PCRW WebWerks

CA

ServiceDesk

ITSM Front

Range

LandDesk

Peregrine

ServiceCenter

Remedy

ServiceCenter

Lotus Notes Application

Unknown

ServiceDesk+

Change Management

System

Sostenuto

Change Management Tool

Incident Management Tool

Remedy

Footprints

CA

ServiceDesk

Current State

OpenSerECM Managed Now PCR.DM PCR.DM

ServiceCenter

CCP

Currently migrating to Financial Services Process

Aba

Seguros

(IM)

Financial Services

Global Change and Incident Management





Confidential IBM

The in-scope processes were rated utilizing a best

practices maturity model

Level 1 – UNFOCUSED

Process is documented

and controlled

Level 2 – AWARE

Weakness are identified

TECHNOLOGY

There are few stable processes in evidence, and

performance can be predicted only by individual

rather than organizational capability - "Hero-based

success."

PRODUCT / SERVICE

The weaknesses of the process have beenidentified and the basics of quality management

for the process are being worked on

Level 3 – CAPABLE

Process meet requirements

CUSTOMER SATISFACTION FOCUS

The process is producing the desired results and is

meeting customer requirements

Level 4 – MATURE

Process is competitive

BUSINESS FOCUS

The process is both effective and efficient.

The process is adaptable to business

direction changes

Level 5 – WORLD CLASS

Process has become

ingraine and adaptable

VALUE CHAIN FOCUSThe process is defect-free with no significant

operational inefficiencies and is continuously

improved

Level 1.5

Level 2.5

Level 3.5

Level 4.5

I n f l u e n c e

o n

t h e

b u s i n e

s s

L o w

H i g h Level 5

Current State





Confidential IBM

The average maturity of Client’s Change Management

process was found to be below a Capable maturity level

Assessment

Focus areas

Unfocused

(1)

Aware

(2)

Capable

(3)

Mature

(4)

World Class

(5)

Process

Foundation

No mission defined.

No agreement or

understanding of

objectives

General awareness

of mission and

performance criteria

Mission and

objectives defined

and understood

by most

Mission and

objectives defined

and understood

by all

Mission promoted

by all and created

together with users,

objectives promoted

by all

Process

Execution

Not done or

occasionally in a

reactive mode

Some activities

done only during

major events

Some activities

planned on a

regular basis

Many activities

done, some

measurement and

reporting

All activities done

with involvement

of all key players

Process

Integration

No linkages Occasional

interfaces as

necessary

Usually considered,

some definition

Generally defined

and followed

All interfaces well

defined and well

established

Organizational

ClarityNo owner no role

definitions few skills

Multiple owners,

no agreed to

roles, skills limited

Assigned Process Owner

and roles,

skills cover some

technologies

Single owner,

roles documented,

and authority

understood, solid

skill sets

Owner does

continuous

improvement,

roles kept current

Tools NoneGeneral tools, low

usage, little

automation

Effective use ofsome tools, some

tool integration

Effective use ofmost tools with

some automation

and integration

Effective use ofa wide range of

tools and technology

basis

Measurement

& ControlNone

Focus on quantity,

not quality

Emphasis on

components routine

processes have

been optimized

Emphasis on end-

to-end, most

processes are

optimized

In line with business

objectives, all processes

optimized

FS ResCap CF CCP & Provident Aba Seguros ResCap IBG ResCap BCG

2.6 2.5 2.3 3.2 2.5 2.6 NA

Current State



G S





Confidential IBM

Contents


Approach


Vision

Detailed Assessment


Initiatives


Roadmap

Appendices

Gl b l T h l S iVi i





Confidential IBM

Client's vision shows its desire to move towards global

processes and a consolidated toolset

Vision

Global Change, Incident and Problem Management Processes

FS IO MIC

GMO Corp NAO CCP Provident

ResCap ResCap

BCG

ResCap

IBG

Global Change Management System

Global Incident Management System

Global Problem Management System

Gl b l T h l S iVi i





Confidential IBM

Client's strategic vision represents the end-state of the

Change, Incident and Problem Management processes

A capable Change, Incident and Problem Management processes will be rolled out to thefollowing Client subsidiaries:

− Financial Services

− ResCap

− Commercial Finance

− ResCap IBG & BCG

− MIC

− IO

Client's current set of tools will be standardized to support the newly designed processes for

Change, Incident and Problem Management and integrate with the CMDB and Asset

Management toolsets

− Change Management will use CMDB data to enhance decision making and improve risk calculation for changes

− Change histories will be tracked and maintained in a centralized repository

− The status of a Configuration Item (CI) within the CMDB will be updated when a change is executed

− Incident Management will leverage information from the CMDB to identify failing components and reduce time to

recovery from incidents

− Problem Management will leverage information from the CMDB to perform effective RCA’s

− Change, Incident, Problem and Configuration Management processes will be tightly integrated and information

will be easily shareable amongst the processes

− GMO

− NAO

− Provident

− CCP

− Aba Seguros

− Corporate

Vision

Gl b l T h l S i





Confidential IBM

Contents


Approach


Vision

Detailed Assessment


Initiatives


Roadmap

Appendices

Global Technolog Ser icesAssessment





Confidential IBM

Multiple business units within Client use similar processes

Financial Services and its subsidiaries follow a common process forChange, Problem and Incident Management. The subsidiaries are:

− Corporate

− NAO

− GMO

Car Care Plan (CCP) and Provident both follow a separate Change and

Incident Management processes

The following business units each follow a distinct Change and Incident

Management process:

− ResCap

− ResCap BCG & IBG

Assessment

− MIC

− IO

− Aba Seguros (Incident Management)

− Aba Seguros (Change Management)


Global Technology ServicesAssessment





Confidential IBM

Several key common gaps across all of Client business units

None of the business units examined formally execute a Problem Management processprimarily due to limited availability of resources to carry out the process

Lack of a common toolset impedes the ability to drive towards a singular global process with

common terminology in the areas of ChgM/IM

There is a lack of communication and visibility across Client business units for ChgM/IM

With the exception of the ResCap IBG, Provident and CCP business units who use a CMDB,

most business units assess risk for changes based on experience rather than concrete data

Lack of lack of automation impedes the ability of Client to enforce control and efficiently

execute ChgM/IM

In general, Change related Incidents are only tracked and identified for Severity 1 incidents.This practice is a gap, as several incidents with lower severity levels can be symptoms of a

larger impending incident

Lack of monitoring and correlation of alerts to spawn incidents and intelligent routing does

not allow Client to evolve out of a reactive fire fighting operational model

Assessment






Confidential IBM

IBM examined multiple functional aspects of each process

and represented their maturity rating utilizing a radar chart

The Process Framework – Mission - Is it clear what the process is supposed to

accomplish?

– Goals - Have goals been established? Are they

measurable?

Carrying out the Process Activities

– Effectiveness - How effective is the process?

– Communication - Is the process documented and

understood?

– Efficiency - Is the process efficient? – Adaptability - Is the process adaptable to the changing

needs of its customers?

– Reports - Are reports provided indicating the goals and

results?

Carrying Out the Process

– Interfaces - How effective are the interfaces with other

processes?

Organizational Clarity and Capability

– Ownership - Who is responsible for the overall effectiveness

of the process?

– Responsibilities - Does everyone know their roles and

responsibilities?

– Skills - Are all those involved equipped with the skills to

perform their roles?

Tools – Scope - How much of the process is addressed by the tools

used?

– Openness - Are the tools adaptable to multi-vendor

technologies? to future technology change?

– Integration - Are the tools able to share user interfaces?

data? function?

– Automation - Do the tools simply provide information for the

user, or automate tasks on behalf of the user?

– Usability - Are the tools easy to use, thereby helping ensure

productivity?

Measurement and Control

– Measurements - How are process effectiveness and

efficiency measured and reported?

– Successfulness - How successful is the process according

to these measurements?

– Alignment - What do the customers or users of the process

think about its usefulness or value?

– Continuous Improvement - Are incremental improvements

being undertaken to make a more-effective process?

0

0.5

1

1.5

2

2.5

3

3.5

4

4.5

5

The Process Framework

Tools

Carrying out the Process



Note: See Appendix D for detailed definitions

Assessment






Confidential IBM

Each process maturity level has a set of characteristics

associated with it

Assessment

Focus

General Maturity Concepts

GeneralCharacteristics Unfocused (1)

The capability is in its ini-tial stages.

The capability is not acurrent consideration.

There is not much evi-dence that it exists in anylogical, designed orplanned fashion.

There is really no organi-zational capability.

Success is dependant onindividual “heroic” efforts.

If this is an enterprise as-sessment, success isdependant on which or-ganizational unit is ex-ecuting the process, butthere is really no enter-prise capability.

There may be a focus oneducation, but not muchhas been implemented.

Basic tools are used aspoint solutions and arenot inytegrated

Aware (2)

There is a basic capabili-ty present but it is not yetreliable.

Some efforts have oc-curred but it is not yet ef-fective.

All of the elements typi-cally required for qualityare not present.

The process does not

consistently meeting re-quirements.

Some efforts have oc-curred in the past to im-plement or improve theprocess; however, manyessential elements of thecapability are still notfunctioning.

The focus is on devel-opment and implementa-tion of best practices.

Tools assist with storing

and maintaining informa-tion. There is little auto-mation and integration

Capable (3)

There is an effective ca-pability.

The process is reliableand achieves intendedand planned results.

The execution is not high-ly automated and is moreexpensive than is desiredbut it does perform its in-tended primary objective.

There is a defined andplanned capability that ITcan rely on.

There is a regular ex-change with all otherprocesses

The focus is on deliveringrequired organizational orprocess performance.

There is a strong focuson process metrics andprocess improvement.Many ITIL or COBIT

practices would be in-cluded at this level

Tools assist with informa-tion storage, sharing withother processes, basicanalysis, and assists inmost process functions.Key management toolsare integrated and pro-vide information for plan-ning, forecasting andtrending

Mature (4)

There is an efficient capability.

The process is regularly re-viewed and does use the mosteffective means of execution todeliver intended performance.

There have been actions tak-en, and are other improve-ments are currently planned toproactively enhance the valuedelivered from this process.

The process is highly auto-mated and the most efficientmeans are used to deliver theintended process based capa-bility.

This environment has routinelyapplied TCO like concepts toreduce the costs involved inprocess execution.

Typically this involves a highdegree of automation, but notautomation beyond a justifiedbusiness justification.

There is significant automationin all FTE heavy process activi-ties or activities where humanerror can add significant costs.

Tools effectively support allareas of the process appro-priately and are fully inte-grated. There is an effectiveand broad integration of man-agement information availablefor reporting.

World Class (5)

The capability is optimized andoptimizing. It is optimal giventhe current business strategyand environment. The ratingmight change if there was achange to the business for in-stance a merger or acquisition.

There are continuous efforts tooptimize the capability and thevalue delivered to the business.

This and all related or interfaced

processes are optimized andoptimizing (continually reviewedand updated as a whole in away that ensures continual con-tribution to the maximum valueto the business).

This level of maturity sustainsbusiness focused service andoperational excellence.

The focus is on a holistic ap-proach to provide maximumbusiness value.

Tool automation assists in all

phases of the process includingthe tracking of actions to resolveissues, integration with all sup-ported processes and links withsuppliers and vendors is re-quired. Integration of manage-ment information across mul-tiple departments and discip-lines is linked to a balancedscorecard. Well documentedoverall tool architecture withcomplete integration in allareas; people, process, andtechnology.

Assessment






Confidential IBM

Client Current State Client Desired State

The current volume of changes is

1,200 changes per month

Currently support approximately

11,000 users

Financial Services, Corporate, NAO,

GMO, MIC and IO follow a common

Change Management process

Financial Services and its subsidiaries

are primarily outsourced to 4 main

vendors, EDS, IBM, Wipro and AT&T

and must use their tools for Change

Management

Overview

Change Management: Financial Services; Corporate; NAO;

GMO; MIC; IO

0

0.5

1

1.5

2

2.5

3

3.5

4

4.5

5

Define the Mission

Establish the Objectives

Accept & classify changes

Review changes via change advisory board/Emergency

comittee

Authorize & Schedule changes

Manage & coordinate change implementation

Monitor & report

Review & close RFCs

Interface-Release Management

Interface-Configuration Management

Interface-Service DeskOwnership

Defined Roles and Re sponsibilities

Skills

Tools or M ethodology-Scope

Tools or Methodology-Usability

Tools or Methodology-Automation

Tools or M ethodology-Integration

Measurement and Control-Measurement

Measurement and Control-Understanding Customer

Satisfaction

Measurement and Control-Improving the Process

CM1-CM11, CM13, CM14, CM15, CM17,

CM18, CM19, CM20, CM21, CM24,

CM25, CM26, CM27, CM28, CM29,

CM30, CM32, CM33, CM34, CM35,

CM36, CM37

Supporting Findings

Assessment






Confidential IBM

Client Desired State

The current volume of changes is 550

changes per month

Currently support approximately 4300

users

Several operational tasks within

ResCap for Change Management

overlap with those of Financial

Services

ResCap accounts for approximately50% of Client’s IT environment

The ResCap process parallels the FS

process. FS has instituted several

controls and policy changes in within

the ResCap environment to ensure the

process is better controlled

The ResCap environment is completely

in-sourced and uses Service Center 6

to support its Change Management

process

Overview

Change Management: ResCap

Client Current State

0

0.5

1

1.5

2

2.5

3

3.5

4

4.5

5

Define the Mission



Review changes via change a dvisory board/Emergency

comittee



Monitor & report

Review & close RFCs


Interface-Configuration Manageme nt


Defined Roles and Responsibilities

Skills

Tools or Methodology-Scope



Tools or Methodology-Integration

Measurment and Control-Measurement

Measurment and Control-Understanding Customer Satisfaction

Measurment and Control-Improving the Process

CM1-CM11, CM13, CM14, CM15, CM17,

CM18, CM19, CM20, CM21, CM24,

CM25, CM26, CM28, CM29, CM30,

CM32, CM33, CM34, CM35, CM36,

CM37

Supporting Findings

Assessment





Confidential IBM

Change Management: CCP, Provident


The current volume of changes does

not exceed 60 changes per month

Approximately 700 users are supported

24.5 staff members are in charge of

organizations

CCP and provident are in the midst of

merging and functioning as a single

business unit

The two groups follow a common

Change Management process,however the tools used to support are

separate. CCP uses ServiceDesk+

while Provident uses Change

Management System (home grown) to

support its Change Management

process

Both groups are currently in the

process of outsourcing a portion of

their environment to EDC under

ESC32. This will involve the

outsourcing of print servers, exchangeservers and some support functions

Overview


0

0.5

1

1.5

2

2.5

3

3.5

4

4.5

5

Define the Mission



Review changes v ia change advisory board/Emergency

comittee



Monitor & report

Review & close RFCs





Skills

Tools or M ethodology-Scope







CM25, CM26, CM28, CM29, CM30

Supporting Findings

Assessment






Confidential IBM

Change Management – Aba Seguros


Aba Seguros processes approximately

30 changes per month


This business unit (BU) has network

management services with TELMEX &

Alestra and Servers & Desktops

Hardware Support with HP & DELL

The tool utilized by this group is a

homegrown tool called ChangeManagement System

Staff has familiarity with ITIL and some

staff is certified in ITIL v3

Currently they have an interface for a

CMDB, however they do not use it as it

is out of date and inaccurate. This

CMDB is in a spreadsheet and it is no

longer consulted for calculating change

risk

Overview


0

0.5

1

1.5

2

2.5

3

3.5

4

4.5

5

Define the Mission



Review changes v ia change advisory board/Emergency

comittee



Monitor & report

Review & close RFCs





Skills

Tools or Me thodology-Scope







CM1, CM4, CM22, CM25, CM26, CM28,

CM29, CM30

Supporting Findings

Assessment

Global Technology Services Assessment





Confidential IBM

Change Management: Commercial Finance (CF)


Processes approximately 20 changes

every month


Approximately 8 resources support the

core Change Management process

Currently a portion of their environment

is outsourced AT&T

This group uses a home grown lotus

notes workflow tool to support the


Overview


0

0.5

1

1.5

2

2.5

3

3.5

4

4.5

5

Define the Mission



Review changes via change advisory board/Emergency

comittee



Monitor & report

Review & close RFCs




Defined Roles and Responsibilities

Skills








CM1, CM4, CM6, CM16, CM22, CM23,

CM25, CM26, CM28, CM29, CM30,

CM36, CM38, CM39, CM40

Supporting Findings




G oba ec o ogy Se ces

Confidential IBM


Process approximately 13,000

incidents every month

Supports approximately 15,000-17,000

users

Incident and Problem Management are

performed as one process and no

Problem Management formally exists

Metrics for severity 1 and severity 2

incidents are rolled up into a report for

ResCap, Financial Services;

Corporate, NAO, GMO, MIC, IO

Accounts for approximately 50% of

Client's environment

ResCap follows a separate but similar

process to Financial Services.

However since ResCap is in-sourced,

and follows a staff augmentation model

Incident and Problem Management: ResCap

Overview


0

0.5

1

1.5

2

2.5

3

3.5

4

4.5

5

Define the Mission


Incident detection & recording

Classification & initial support

Investigation and Diagnosis

Resolution and recovery

Incident closure

Ownership, monitoring, tracking and communication

Interface-Change Management

Interface-Problem Management

Interface-Configuraton Management

Ownership


Organizational Clarity and Capability-Skills






Measurment and Control-Control



IMP1, IMP2, IMP4, IMP11, IMP13

Supporting Findings





gy

Confidential IBM

Incident and Problem Management: ResCap IBG


Overview


0

0.5

1

1.5

2

2.5

3

3.5

4

4.5

5

Define the Mission






Incident closure





Ownership









Measurment and C ontrol-Understanding Customer Satisfaction


IBG-UK currently process

approximately < 30 incidents per

month. No data available for IBG-CE

Currently support approximately 582

users


performed as one process

There are no dedicated support teams

permanently assigned to the incident

and problem processes

IBG-UK and CE supports all RESCAP-

IBG users in those locations

IMP1, IMP13, IMP19

Supporting Findings





gy

Confidential IBM

Incident and Problem Management: CCP, Provident


CCP and Provident currently process

approximately 1,800 incidents per

month

CCP and Provident support

approximately 800 users



Approximately 24.5 resources support

this process

CCP and Provident operate as a

singular business unit and share

resources

Both groups are currently in the

process of outsourcing a portion of

their environment to EDC under

ESC32. This will involve theoutsourcing of print servers, exchange

servers and some support functions

Overview


0

0.5

1

1.5

2

2.5

3

3.5

4

4.5

5

Define the Mission






Incident closure





Ownership









Measurment and C ontrol-Understanding Customer Satisfaction


IMP1, IMP13

Supporting Findings




gy

Confidential IBM

Incident and Problem Management: Commercial Finance


Processes approximately 500 incidents

per month




Approximately 14 resources support

the Incident and Problem Management

process

Currently a portion of their environment

is outsourced AT&T (network) and IBM

(hardware / servers)

Overview


0

0.5

1

1.5

2

2.5

3

3.5

4

4.5

5

Define the Mission






Incident closure




Interface-Configuraton ManagementOwnership










IMP1, IMP6, IMP7, IMP9, IMP11, IMP12,

IMP12, IMP13, IMP15, IMP16, IMP17,

IMP17, IMP20

Supporting Findings




42 ChgM, IM, PM Assessment Report | July 2009 | Confidential IBM

Contents

Summary

Looking forward

Approach


Vision

Detailed Assessment


Initiatives


Roadmap

Appendices

Global Technology ServicesGaps &

Recommendations




Gaps, implications and recommendations were organized

at three levels

IT process− Change Management

Business Unit

− Financial Services

− ResCap


− ResCap IBG

− MIC

− IO

Gap type− Organizational: O

− Process: P

Recommendations

Gaps, implications and recommendations were identified

and developed considering Client's vision and IT

operational best practices

− Incident and Problem Management

− GMO

− NAO− Provident

− CCP

− Aba Seguros

− Corporate

− Technology: T

− Information: I


Recommendations




Poor visibility into the IT environment impedes the ability of

IT to communicate the impacts of changes to effected BUs

C h an g eM an a g e

m en t

Gaps Implications Recommendations Business Unit

Communication of changes to

the business units and effected

users is inconsistent

Finding: CM1

Type: P

Users may not aware when their services are being

impacted

Incidents may be erroneously reported during a

change window due to lack of awareness

Changes should be communicated to

key business units and stakeholders

Attributes stored in the CMDB should

indicate the appropriate stakeholders

and affected users to enable better

communication

ResCap;

Financial

Services;

Corporate; NAO;

GMO; MIC; IO;

CF; Aba Seguros

Recommendations


Recommendations




Reduced change visibility and varying enforcement of change

policies impacts Client’s ability to control the IT environment

C h an g eM an a g em en t


The change process is

circumvented for some changes

through false emergency break fix

requests

Finding: CM2

Type: P

Risks and impacts of ad-hoc changes are not assessed,

allowing for the potential of unexpected user impact

The CMDB may not reflect accurate information if changesare made outside of the process

Reporting should be utilized to help identify

out-of-compliance changes. Furthermore,

policies should clearly state the penalties for

violating change policies and these penaltiesshould be enforced

When LUNAR is implemented, ensure all

business units that have information in

LUNAR have tightly integrated their change

processes and tools with LUNAR.

Furthermore, amend the change policy to

provide strict language around theprocedures and penalties for not updating

required CI records

ResCap; Financial

Services;

Corporate; NAO;

GMO; MIC; IO

Penalties for circumventing the

Change Management process are

ambiguous

Finding: CM3

Type: P

There are not any consistent repercussions for non-

compliance to the Change process, which may encourage

inconsistent process execution

Penalties should be implemented,

communicated and enforced to encourage

Change Management process compliance

ResCap; Financial

Services;

Corporate; NAO;

GMO; MIC; IO

Not all required reviewers are

included in Change Advisory Board

(CAB) meetings . Currently CAB

meetings are attendedinconsistently and not all required

reviewers are thoroughly aware of

upcoming changes that may effect

their environment

Finding: CM4

Type: P

Not including all required reviewers in the Change Advisory

Board meeting may result in changes that are approved

which may impact the unrepresented parties

Formally document and maintain a

stakeholder, application owner and area of

responsibility lists identify required personnel

and implement a notification mechanism(manual or automated) to inform potential

reviewers their participation is required at

CAB meetings

ResCap; Financial

Services;

Corporate; NAO;

GMO; MIC; IO;CF; ResCap-IBG;

Aba Seguros

Recommendations


Recommendations




The lack of flexibility in IT operating models limits process

improvement opportunities for Change Management

C h an g eM

an a g em en t


Process improvement

opportunities with suppliers are

limited due to contractual

obligations

Finding: CM5

Type: O

Process improvements may not be realized to support

new or changed priorities until contract negotiations

can take place

Supplier discussions should be

ongoing, and opportunities for

continuous improvement for both

internal and external organizations

should be considered in contract

negotiations when applicable

ResCap; Financial

Services;

Corporate; NAO;

GMO; MIC; IO

Funding is impacting the level of

process improvement activities

Finding: CM6

Type: O

Without additional funding, continuous improvement

opportunities may be somewhat limited.

Seek opportunities to streamline the

process and make improvements thatdo not require as much funding.

Additionally, with visible improvements

underway, it may help build the case

for additional resources.

This group should actively explore

opportunities to integrate with global

processes and global toolsets to

minimize cost burden and improve

operational effectiveness

CF

Recommendations




Recommendations




Poor or manual integration amongst change tools and processes

sometimes results in miscommunication or information loss


Gaps Implications RecommendationsBusiness

Unit

Lack of integration between Change

and Incident Management results in

Changes that are not always tied

back to incidents they cause

Finding: CM13

Type: P

Without mature integration between Incident and Change Management, it

is difficult to identify changes that either cause or resolve incidents

Requirements should be gathered for to implement

enterprise wide Change and Incident Management

systems. Once implemented, Change Management and

Incident Management processes and toolsets should be

integrated to increase data sharing and improve process

efficiency and effectives

ResCap;

Financial

Services;

Corporate;

NAO;

GMO; MIC;

IO

Lack of integration between Change

Management and Configuration

Management does not provide level

of information required to properly

assess risk for Change Management

Finding: CM14

Type: T

Without Configuration and Change Management integration, Change

Management does not have visibility into necessary information that

should be reviewed when assessing the risk and approving a planned

change

If Configuration and Change Management are not appropriately

integrated, the CMDB will not contain accurate data as changes to the

environment are implemented

Change Management and Configuration Management

processes and toolsets should be integrated to increase

data sharing and improve process efficiency and

effectives. The implementation of an enterprise wide

Change Management system should closely be tied tothe LUNAR Configuration Management deployment

timeline to ensure that LUNAR provide the intended

value to GMAC

ResCap;

Financial

Services;

Corporate;

NAO;GMO; MIC;

IO

Currently change information is

stored across multiple uninterested

tools for a single change

Finding: CM15

Type: T

Lack of integration between change toolsets may result in information

loss or miscommunication due to access restrictions when implementing

changes

Implement an enterprise wide Change Management

toolset which is transparent and incorporates the

requirements from all organizations

ResCap;

Financial

Services;

Corporate;

NAO;

GMO; MIC;

IO

No CMDB exists within the business

unit

Finding: CM16

Type: T

Without a CMDB, it is difficult to adequately support Change

Management. A CMDB can share information about a device, such thecustomer/user of the device, the critical hours of operation and approved

maintenance windows, and those that support the device. It is also

important to have Change and Configuration Management integration to

ensure that the CMDB is maintained and updated as the technology

environment is changed.

Implement an enterprise-wide CMDB, and ensure it is

integrated with the key IT Service Managementprocesses. Gather requirements from CF for

components they manage. Ensure the future global

processes and toolsets for Change Management

incorporate CF’s unique requirements

CF




Recommendations




Minimal automation and workflow capabilities impede the ability

of Client to efficiently execute Change Management (cont)



Tools are only for record keeping purposesand lack functionality to enforce control

over the change process

Finding: CM20

Type: T

There may be inconsistencies in ChangeManagement process execution if the tool

does not help enforce its execution.

A centralized Change Management tool should be used both forstoring key change information and for facilitating the Change

Management process execution through customized workflows to

support the process

ResCap; FinancialServices; Corporate;

NAO; GMO; MIC; IO

The Forward Schedule of Changes (FSC)

is manually recorded in a document and

loaded into a scheduler application, making

it difficult to populate and maintain.

Finding: CM21

Type: T

Populating the FSC is a very manual, labor-

intensive process, which is less efficient and

increases the change of scheduling errors

and conflicts

A standard, enterprise-wide Change Management tool should be

utilized to record and schedule all changes. This tool should have

the capability to track and schedule changes via a calendar tool to

facilitate the identification of potential conflicts

ResCap; Financial

Services; Corporate;

NAO; GMO; MIC; IO;

ResCap – IBG; CF;

CF; Aba Seguros

No formal FSC is maintained. Currently

changes are scheduled using

spreadsheets

Finding: CM22

Type: P


Recommendations




Lack of enterprise-wide reporting for Change Management

prohibits Client from understanding the health of the process

C h an g eM an a g em en

t


Change metrics are sometimes

skewed because of inaccurate

closure statuses

Finding: CM24

Type: I

Inaccurate information in a change record leads to

inaccurate reporting. This makes it difficult to

assess and measure the process to identify any

necessary improvements

Change Management information

should be reviewed in a change

record, particularly upon closure to

ensure the information accurately

displays the change activity

ResCap; Financial


NAO; GMO; MIC; IO

Currently there are no

enterprise-wide roll up reports

for Change Management

Finding: CM25

Type: I

Change reporting is limited because data exists in

multiple toolsets. This makes it difficult to display

an enterprise-wide view of Change Managementactivity

The Change Management toolsets

should be consolidated into a single

tool to enable increased informationsharing and enterprise-wide reporting

All business units

Change statistics do not always

include the metrics from all the

business units, skewing the

ability to know the true

performance of the Change

Management process

Finding: CM26

Type: I

Incomplete data and reporting does not allow for an

enterprise-wide view into the Change Management

process, which may lead to missed process

improvement opportunities

Standard, enterprise-wide reports

should be developed, and each

business unit should present the same

information to better evaluate the

overall Change Management process

All business units

The true status of a RFC is

unknown at times because

multiple Change Management

tools may hold different statuses

Finding: CM27

Type: I

With separate Change Management tools, multiple

statuses (and conflicting definitions of those

statuses) may exist. This may create confusion

when trying to understand the status of a change

Consolidate Change Management

tools with consistent statuses and

definitions

Financial Services;

Corporate; NAO;

GMO; MIC; IO


Recommendations




Non-standardized processes and technology for Change

Management result in an overly complex operational model



No standardization of tools or tool

architecture currently exists

Finding: CM28

Type: T

Lack of standardized tools create inconsistencies in

process execution and in reporting. This makes it

difficult to streamline the process and seek continuous

improvement opportunities for enterprise-wide Change

Management

Socialize the future vision of a global

Change Management process with GMAC

BUs and gather business unit specific

requirements to serve as input to select

and implement a Change Managementtoolset that will support an enterprise wide

Change Management Process

All business units

No visibility or common process

across the multiple business lines

of GMAC creates inefficiencies(e.g. each BU has a different

process, miscommunication

between business units, etc.)

Finding: CM29Type: P

Inconsistent processes and procedures create confusion

and may prohibit more efficient Change Management

process execution

Gather business unit specific requirements

to serve as input to select and design and

implement a global Change Managementprocess which has the flexibility required to

support all GMAC BUs

All business units

Process and procedure differences

across varying business units

creates confusion (e.g. terminology

differences, requirements for

change classification, etc)

Finding: CM30

Type: P

Allowing the tool to drive the process may limit the

flexibility of the process and inhibit its ability to align with

best practices


Recommendations




The current Change Management toolset makes it onerous

to track, document and audit changes

C h

an g eM an a g em en t


Not all Change Management tools arecapable of storing required documentation to

process an RFC (e.g. backout

documentation, test plans, etc.)

Finding: CM32

Type: T

If the tool does not store all relevant changeinformation, it makes it difficult to ensure all the

data is provided to adequately evaluate and

approve a change prior to implementation.

Change implementers may not have visibility

into documentation for previous changes that

may help them more effectively plan their

change

GMAC should move towards a single, centralized toolset. Theability to store or link to required documentation should be included

in the requirements of the new/adopted tool, so that all information

relevant to the change can be visible in or accessed from the record

ResCap;Financial

Services;

Corporate;

NAO; GMO;

MIC; IO

Approvals and signoffs for changes are not

captured centrally

Finding: CM33

Type: T

It is important to understand who has authorized

a change, as well as those who have not yet

provided their feedback. Without recording this

in a central place (i.e. the Change Management

tool), it makes it difficult to determine if any

approvals are outstanding

Required stakeholder approvals should be captured in a central

location, such as an enterprise-wide Change Management toolset.

This can help ensure that status of approvals is understood, and

further automation (such as reminders and/or escalation for

stakeholders that do not make an approval decision) should be

leveraged in the future if necessary.

Implement a single, enterprise-wide Change Management tool, with

integration to Configuration Management, which will allow for

increased understanding of key stakeholders and tracking of their

approvals. Integration between an enterprise-wide Configuration

and Change Management system should allow for stakeholders to

be associated with a CI. Approvals and signoffs should automatically

identify and notify stakeholders and track change approvals

ResCap;

Financial

Services;

Corporate;

NAO; GMO;

MIC; IO

Change plans in the tool are not always

updated in the Change Management toolsets

to reflect CAB feedback

Finding: CM34

Type: P

Not formally capturing the updates to changes

as a result of the CAB meeting in the Change

Management tool makes it difficult to holdparties accountable for changes

Review changes during CAB meetings and document updates and

agreements for changes in a centralized system that all members in

Change Management can access. Formal approvals should begranted in the tool once agreed terms from the CAB meetings have

been met

ResCap;

Financial

Services;Corporate;

NAO; GMO;

MIC; IO

Auditing of changes is difficult (highly manual

and time consuming) because of the lack of

a centralized change repository that stores

all required change information

Finding: CM35

Type: T

Without effective auditing, it is difficult to

understand process compliance and identify

opportunities for improvement. Furthermore

there is a risk of failing to meet FFIEC

guidelines in the event audit requirements can

not be satisfied

Implement a single, enterprise-wide Change Management tool,

which will enable more efficient process review and auditing as

necessary

ResCap;

Financial

Services;

Corporate;

NAO; GMO;

MIC; IO


Recommendations




Scattered knowledge of Change Management best practices in

vendor and Client organizations results in policy violations

C h an g eM an a g em en

t


Knowledge of best practices for

Change Management is limited

Finding: CM36

Type: P

Without Change Management training, users and

stakeholders may not understand the importance of

Change Management and give it the appropriate

level of consideration. Increased understanding

and awareness encourages consistent process

compliance

Implement an enterprise wide IT

initiative to educate staff and ensure

they understand the importance of IT

best practices

ResCap; Financial


NAO; GMO; MIC; IO

No standard onboarding

process currently exists for the

new users of the ChangeManagement Process

Finding: CM37

Type: P

When new users of the Change Management

process are not adequately trained, they may not

take advantage of the eff iciencies realized throughChange Management processes, and the

possibility for implementing non-compliant changes

increases

All current and any new users of the

Change Management process should

be required to take ChangeManagement training to understand

industry best practices and how they

are applied at GMAC

GMAC should request verification that

suppliers are also trained on the ITIL

framework and grant access to

supplier consultants only when they

have completed training

ResCap; Financial


NAO; GMO; MIC; IO

ITIL best practices are not beingleveraged within the business

unit

Finding: CM38

Type: P

The Change Management process may not be aseffective if it is not based on industry best practices

such as the ITIL framework

Improve the IT Service Managementprocesses (e.g. Change, Incident and

Problem Management) by aligning

them more closely with industry best

practices (such as ITIL) to increase

process effectiveness

CF


Recommendations




Some business units do not formally define Change

Management roles, resulting in informal process execution



There are no dedicated

resources assigned to the


Finding: CM40

Type: O

Dedicated change resources help maintain a focus

on Change Management, as they do not get

conflicting or competing priorities if they are

dedicated

Develop roles and responsibilities for

Change Management, and then ensure

dedicated resources are aligned where

appropriate to support those roles.

ResCap IBG

There is a gap in the process of

who is closing / marking

changes complete / successful

Finding: CM41

Type: P

Without clearly defined roles and responsibilities,

accountability and expectations are not clearly

understood

Ensure roles and responsibilities are

clearly defined in support of Change

Management

CF


Recommendations




Scattered knowledge of best practices and limited resources

impede Client’s ability formally execute support processes

I n c i d en t & P r o

b l em M an a g em en t


Business units do not engage in

a formal Problem Management

process

Finding: IMP1

Type: P

A lack of a formal Problem Management process

can result in rework to solve problems and future

service disruptions with similar causes

A global Problem Management

process should be developed.

Requirements from all GMAC business

units must be gathered in order to

ensure the process is flexible and can

accommodate these BU's.

Furthermore, this process definition

should drive a standardized tool design

to facilitate problem resolution

activities and knowledge capture andreuse

All business units

Most of the staff is familiar with

ITIL, however, further training is

necessary

Finding: IMP2

Type: O

Without training on industry frameworks such as

ITIL, it is diff icult to convey the importance and

obtain buy-in for processes that will help improve

the efficiency and effectiveness of IT Service

Management.

A training initiative should be

established to ensure that GMAC IT

employees are trained on ITIL best

practices.

GMAC should request verification that

suppliers are also trained on the ITIL

framework and grant access to

supplier consultants only when theyhave completed training

ResCap; Financial


NAO; GMO; MIC; IO;

Aba Seguros;

Global Technology ServicesGaps &Recommendations




Not tracking, reviewing and prioritizing all incidents

sometimes degrades service quality

I n c i d en

t & P r o b l em M an a g e

m en t


Only severity 1 and severity 2

incidents are tracked and

reviewed

Finding: IMP4

Type: P

If all incidents are not tracked, it is difficult to

have a complete picture of the environment.

Often times, trends are identified through

lower severity incidents

All incidents should be tracked and reviewed

to some degree. Higher severity incidents

should have a more thorough and

comprehensive review, but the lower

severity incidents should not be overlooked

ResCap, Financial


NAO; GMO; MIC; IO

Efficiency measurements are

tracked, and improvement

opportunities are sometimes

identified, however, due to pre-existing contracts with service

providers, it is difficult to drive

to a more efficient process

Finding: IMP5

Type: P

Process improvements may not be realized to

support new or changed priorities until

contract negotiations can take place

Supplier discussions should be ongoing, and

opportunities for continuous improvement for

both internal and external organizations

should be considered in contractnegotiations when applicable

Financial Services;

Corporate; NAO;

GMO; MIC; IO

Repeat incidents are not tracked

formally in an effort to minimize

rework by leveraging past

knowledge

Finding: IMP6

Type: P

Without tracking incidents and understanding

past recovery efforts, it may take more time to

find a recovery solution, which may

unnecessarily extend impact duration

Repeat incidents should be reviewed

regularly by the Problem Management

process, and recovery solutions should be

published and/or permanent fixes should beimplemented to remove risks and shorten or

eliminate impact duration

Integration between Configuration and

Incident Management should be leveraged

to ensure that the CI displays all incidents

recorded against it. This will allow past

incidents to be reviewed, and similar

solutions can possibly be applied

CF





Not tracking, reviewing and prioritizing all incidents

sometimes degrades service quality (cont)

I n c i d en t & P r o b

l em M an a g em en t


Incident tickets are not monitored to

ensure they are appropriately

escalated

Finding: IMP7

Type: P

Without proper monitoring and escalation,

incidents may not receive the appropriate level of

attention and support, which may cause increased

impact durations

A common escalation process by severity level

should be defined. Consider also leveraging a

standard Incident Management toolset that can

automate escalations as appropriate

CF

Lewisville DC does not have aservice desk tool. Currently theyuse email and 30 ticket queues to

manage incidents

Finding: IMP9

Type: P

With multiple queues or ticket repositories, it isdifficult to manage incidents, and there is a higherlikelihood of tickets being overlooked.

It takes more people to adequately monitor 30

ticket queues. If the queues were consolidated

into a central repository, resources could be more

appropriately aligned to addressing the incidents.

An enterprise-wide Incident ticketing systemshould be implemented at GMAC. This wouldincrease information sharing, as well as process

efficiency and effectiveness, particularly if the

incident system is integrated with other

processes as well.

CF




Lack of integration between processes makes it difficult to

share information and fully leverage it across the enterprise

I n c i d en t

& P r o b l em M an a g em en t


Currently the Incident and Problem

Management processes are


Finding: IMP13

Type: P

If Incident and Problem Management are not implemented as

separate processes, they will not yield separate results. The goal

of Incident Management is to recover incidents as quickly as

possible. The goal of Problem Management is to determine rootcause and develop workarounds or permanent fixes. While the

processes need to be integrated, they are in fact two very different

processes and need to be treated as such

Define and document the Incident

Management and the Problem

Management processes

All business units

Limited process integration exists

with other IT processes. e.g.

Change Management,

Configuration Management, etc.

Finding: IMP14

Type: P

Integration between all the ITIL-aligned processes is key to

realizing the true benefit of each individual process. Without the

process touch points and information sharing, each process can

only reach (but not exceed) a capable maturity level

IT Service Management processes

and tools need to be integrated with

one another to ensure process

efficiency

ResCap, Financial


NAO; GMO; MIC;

IO; CF

This business unit can not leverage

a CMDB to improve the

effectiveness of the Incident and

Problem Management Process

Finding: IMP15

Type: P

Without a CMDB, it is difficult to adequately support Incident

Management. A CMDB can share critical information about a

device and how it is supported, to include escalation information

and key recovery steps. It can also display information on users

that are impacted by the device failure, which helps understand the

severity of the incident. Additionally, incident history may also be

recorded in a CMDB, which may be leveraged to improve recovery

time of future recurrences

Implement an enterprise-wide

CMDB, and ensure it is integrated

with the key IT Service

Management processes

This group should actively explore

opportunities to integrate with

global processes and global

toolsets to improve operational

efficiency

CF

There is a lack of event correlation

and intelligent ticket creation in and

routing

Finding: IMP20

Type: T

Minimal monitoring and event correlation capabilities results in

excessive overhead to identify potential incidents. Furthermore,

potential incidents will go unnoticed and GMAC will continue

operating reactively

Review current environment

monitors and their effectiveness.

Furthermore, conduct a study to

identify an event management

strategy. Execute event

management strategy to foster a

proactive IT operating culture

All business units





Some BUs within Client do not leverage a best practices

framework to execute Incident and Problem Management

I n c i d en t

& P r o b l em M an a g em en t


The Incident Management

process is home grown and not

modeled after any industry

framework

Finding: IMP16

Type: P

Incident Management may not be as

efficient/effective and integrated to other processes

CF should adopt separate but

integrated Incident Management and

Problem Management processes to

enable consistency and increase

process efficiency and effectiveness.

Furthermore, CF should explore

opportunities to integrate with global

processes and global toolsets to

improve operational efficiency

CF

The value of migrating to acommon process is not

understood. Furthermore, there

are no initiatives underway to

standardize

Finding: IMP17

Type: O

Inconsistent or incomplete processes andprocedures create confusion and may prohibit

more efficient Incident and Problem Management

process execution

CF

There are no formal roles

defined for IncidentManagement or Problem

Management

Finding: IMP19

Type: O

Without appropriate role definition and clearly

assigned accountability, key Incident and ProblemManagement activities may be overlooked

Ensure that process documentation

includes formal roles andresponsibilities that clearly outline key

activities required to support Incident

and Problem Management

ResCap IBG





Contents


Approach


Vision

Detailed Assessment Gaps & recommendations

Initiatives


Roadmap

Appendices


Initiatives




Initiative 1 (I1): Create Global Process Framework for Change

ManagementDescriptionCreate a global Change Management process framework that leverages

the best of breed practices from FS, ResCap and ITIL. This framework will

be used to integrate all Client business units (BU) under a common ChangeManagement process

Time & Effort –

BenefitsEnables BUs not familiar with ITIL and best practices to leverage best

practices for Change Management

Reduces efforts expended for audits as there is a single master set ofdocuments to follow

Ensures all business units are leveraging to reduce risk of service

disruptions

Ensures value of is preserved by controlling updates to the CIs stored

with in the CMDB

Ensures all business units are able to interface with and other global

processes such as Incident and Problem Management

Resources –

High Level TasksReview Change Management process frameworks to select optimal

framework for Client

Select a Change Management process foundation

Gather Change Management process requirements from each BUGather measurement and reporting requirements for Change Management

Enhance the Change Management foundational process by incorporating

BU specific requirements

Solution risks Resistance to agree to adopt a global process

Ability to reach an agreement on a single process

Lack of participation from BUs

Skill Sets

1 Process Architect, 1 Process Consultant, 13 Engagement Managers (one

from each BU), 1 Process Owner

Priority: High

Dependency

None

Gaps Closed CM1, CM2, CM3, CM4, CM7, CM8, CM9, CM10, CM11, CM13, CM17,

CM18, CM24, CM25, CM26, CM29, CM30, CM38, CM40, CM41


Initiatives




Initiative 2 (I2): Create Global Process Framework for Incident

ManagementDescriptionCreate a global Incident Management process framework that leverages

the best of breed practices from FS, ResCap and ITIL. This framework will

be used to integrate all Client business units (BU) under a common IncidentManagement process

Time & Effort –

BenefitsEnables BUs not familiar with ITIL and best practices to leverage best

practices for Incident Management

Ensures all business units are able to interface with and other globalprocesses such as Change and Problem Management Ensures business

units fully leverage the capabilities of to improve operational efficiency

and effectiveness

Resources –

High Level TasksReview Incident Management process frameworks to select optimal

framework for Client

Select a Incident Management process foundation

Gather Incident Management process requirements from each BUGather measurement and reporting requirements for Incident Management

Enhance the Incident Management foundational process by incorporating

BU specific requirements

Solution risks Resistance to agree to adopt a global process

Ability to reach an agreement on a single process


Skill Sets

1 Process Architect, 1 Process Consultant, 13 Client Engagement

Managers (one from each BU), 1 Process Owner

Priority: Medium Dependency None

Gaps Closed IMP4, IMP7, IMP13, IMP14, IMP16, IMP17, IMP19




Initiatives




Initiative 4 (I4): Design and Implement Global Change

Management SystemDescriptionThe purpose of this initiative is to gather requirements for a global Change

Management System and implement. This Change Management System

will be used by all Client BUs. The system will be capable of integratingwith the chosen tool architecture. Furthermore, it will also integrate with the

CMDB and Asset Management systems

Time & Effort –

BenefitsProvides a mechanism for controlling the Change Management process

Increases the efficiency of the Change Management process by

automating manual tasksImproves visibility of changes throughout the organization

Minimize impact of unplanned service disruptions by identifying bad

changes through leveraging through change tracking capabilities

Helps ensure that Client is compliant with SOX requirements through

workflow tools capable of archiving change histories

Resources –

High Level TasksGather Change Management tool requirements from all BUs

Gather Change Management tool requirements for interfacing with

CMDB, Asset Management and any other critical software

Gather requirements derived from the Global Change ManagementProcess

Conduct Pilot of Change Management System to select optimal Change

Management tool

Select Change Management System

Customize Change Management System

Integrate Change Management System with , Asset Management and

existing toolsets that support IT processes

Test Change Management System

Solution risks Ability to reach an agreement on a single technology


Skill Sets

1 Process Consultant, 13 Client Change Owners, 2 Tool Specialists, 1 Tool

Architect, 1 Project Manager

Priority: High

Dependency A service management technology architecture must be in place

Global Change Management process must be defined (Initiative 1)

Gaps Closed CM14, CM15, CM16, CM19, CM20, CM21, CM22, CM27, CM28,

CM32, CM33, CM34, CM35


Initiatives




Initiative 5 (I5): Design and Implement Global Incident

Management toolsDescriptionThe purpose of this initiative is to gather requirements for a global Incident

Management tools. This consolidated Incident Management tools will be

used by all Client BUs. The tools will be capable of integrating with thechosen tool architecture. Furthermore, it will also integrate with the CMDB

and Asset Management systems and the Incident Management tools

Time & Effort –

Benefits Reduce duration of incidents through efficient and automated workflow

of Incident Management tools

Efficiently diagnose, document, and resolve, as well as prevent futureincidents

Tool and process integration with monitoring and event management

Increase first call resolution rates by leveraging searchable resolution

databases

Decrease call Service Desk volumes through improved self service

capabilities

Resources –

High Level TasksDefine detailed Incident Management tool requirements from all BUs

Gather Incident Management tool requirements for interfacing with


Gather requirements derived from the Global Incident ManagementProcess

Conduct Pilot of Incident Management tools to select optimal Incident

Management tools

Select Incident Management tools

Customize Incident Management tools

Integrate Incident Management System with , Asset Management and


Test Incident Management tools



project may not be at a state to be able to integrate

Skill Sets

1 Process Consultant, 13 Client Incident Management Owners, 2 Tool

Specialists, 1 Tool Architect, 1 Project Manager

Priority: Medium


Global Incident Management process must be defined (Initiative 2)

Gaps Closed IMP9, IMP15, IMP20


( ) G

Initiatives




Initiative 6 (I6): Design and Implement Global Problem

Management toolsDescriptionThe purpose of this initiative is to gather requirements for a global Problem

Management tools. This consolidated Problem Management tools will be

used by all Client BUs. The tools will be capable of integrating with thechosen tool architecture. Furthermore, it will also integrate with the CMDB

and Asset Management systems and the Problem Management tools

Time & Effort –

Benefits Tool and process integration with monitoring and event management

Reduce incident reoccurrences through effective root cause

identification and remediation via structured methodology andmonitoring tools

Increase first call resolution rates by leveraging searchable resolution

databases

Resources –

High Level TasksDefine detailed Problem Management tool requirements from all BUs

Gather Problem Management tool requirements for interfacing with


Gather requirements derived from the Global Problem ManagementProcess

Conduct Pilot of Problem Management tools to select optimal Problem

Management tools

Select Problem Management tools

Customize Problem Management tools

Integrate Problem Management System with , Asset Management and


Test Problem Management tools



project may not be at a state to be able to integrate

Skill Sets

1 Process Consultant, 13 Client Problem Management Owners, 2 Tool

Specialists, 1 Tool Architect, 1 Project Manager

Priority: Low


Global Problem Management process must be defined (Initiative 3)

Gaps Closed IMP9, IMP15, IMP20


I iti ti 7 (I7) T iti Ch M t

Initiatives




Initiative 7 (I7): Transition Change Management

DescriptionThe purpose of this initiative is to roll out the Global Change Management

Process and System to the BUs within Client and facilitate the adoption of

the Global Change Management process and tools

Time & Effort –

BenefitsEnsures global Change Management process is deployed to all Client

business units in an orderly manner

Facilitates the adoption of the Change Management process within eachbusiness unit

Ensures users of the new Change Management process are executing it

properly and as intended

Resources –

High Level Tasks Create Training curriculum

Create and socialize transition plan (e.g. big bang, phased)

Train users of Change Management system on the new tool and

process

Execute transition plan

Solution risksParticipation of business units

Predecessor activities may take longer than expected and delay the

adoption of this initiative so it does not coincide with

Possible fixes / additional customization requests by users during roll out

may not be fully operational and limit the value that can be provided by

the global Change Management process and toolsets

Skill Sets

2 Training Consultants, 13 Client Change Owners (one from each BU), 1

Tool Specialist, 1 Project Manager, 1 Organizational Change Consultant

Priority: High Dependency Change Management System (Initiative 4) must be complete

Gaps Closed CM1, CM2, CM3, CM4, CM7, CM8, CM9, CM10, CM11, CM13, CM17,

CM18, CM24, CM25, CM26, CM29, CM30, CM38, CM40, CM41,

CM14, CM15, CM16, CM19, CM20, CM21, CM22, CM27, CM28,

CM32, CM33, CM34, CM35


I iti ti 8 (I8) T iti I id t M t

Initiatives




Initiative 8 (I8): Transition Incident Management

DescriptionThe purpose of this initiative is to roll out the Global Incident Management

Process and tools to the BUs within Client and facilitate the adoption of the

Global Incident Management process and tools

Time & Effort –

BenefitsEnsures global Incident Management process is deployed to all Client


Facilitates the adoption of the Incident Management process within eachbusiness unit

Ensures users of the new Incident Management process are executing it


Resources –



Train users of Incident Management tools on the new tool and process





the global Incident Management process and toolset

Skill Sets

2 Training Consultants, 13 Client Incident Owners (one from each BU), 1


Priority: Medium Dependency Incident Management tools (Initiative 5) must be complete

Gaps Closed IMP4, IMP7, IMP13, IMP14, IMP16, IMP17, IMP19, IMP1, IMP6,

IMP13, IMP14, IMP17, IMP19, IMP9, IMP15, IMP20


I iti ti 9 (I9) T iti P bl M t

Initiatives




Initiative 9 (I9): Transition Problem Management

DescriptionThe purpose of this initiative is to roll out the Global Problem Management

Process and tools to the BUs within Client and facilitate the adoption of the

Global Problem Management process and tools

Time & Effort –

BenefitsEnsures global Problem Management process is deployed to all Client


Facilitates the adoption of the Problem Management process within eachbusiness unit

Ensures users of the new Problem Management process are executing it


Resources –



Train users of Problem Management tools on the new tool and process





the global Problem Management process and toolset

Skill Sets

2 Training Consultants, 13 Client Problem Owners (one from each BU), 1


Priority: Low Dependency Problem Management tools (Initiative 6) must be complete

Gaps Closed IMP4, IMP7, IMP13, IMP14, IMP16, IMP17, IMP19, IMP1, IMP6,

IMP13, IMP14, IMP17, IMP19, IMP9, IMP15, IMP20


I iti ti 10 (I10) T i i

Initiatives




Initiative 10 (I10): Training

DescriptionThe purpose of this initiative is to facilitate adoption of best practices within

the Client organization. Furthermore, this initiative is intended to foster a

best practices operational environment

Time & Effort –

Benefits Ensures all members using the IT environment are following best

practices

Minimize potential audit violations stemming from users circumventingthe Change Management Process

Provides IT staff with an understanding of best practices they can apply

to improve operations

Provides IT staff with a common model and language that will facilitate

communication

Resources –

High Level Tasks Select training approach (train the trainer, training consultants, etc.)

Create training curriculum

Establish education tracking system

Train staff

Assess skills and train as necessary

Update training curriculum as appropriate

Validate supplier training in ITIL

Solution risksIt may be difficult to agree on a best practices framework, as some Client

business units do not have not adopted a methodology or follow other

methodologies such as MOF

Vendors not willing to participate in certification process

Suppliers providing sufficient evidence their employees have had training

Skill Sets

2 Training Consultants, 1 Training Coordinator

Priority: Medium

Dependency Best practices framework selection / standardization

Gaps Closed CM26, CM37, IMP2


I iti ti 11 (I11) O ti i ti

Initiatives




Initiative 11 (I11): Optimization

DescriptionThe purpose of this initiative is to optimize IT processes and operations on

an ongoing basis to ensure IT operations are running effectively and

efficiently

Time & Effort –

Benefits Helps identify and correct potential gaps and deficiencies in processes

Ensures processes are being maintained and are evolving with

changing business needs Ensures processes continue to mature and maintain tight integration

Resources –

High Level Tasks Review process metrics and reports for IT processes

Identify opportunities for improvement

Create initiatives / projects to execute improvement activities

Solution risks No support or focus to continually improve processes

May lose priority over time

Skill Sets

13 Client Process Managers, 3 Client Process Lead

Priority: Medium Dependency None

Gaps Closed CM5, CM6, IMP5, IMP11, IMP12





Contents


Approach


Vision

Detailed Assessment Gaps & recommendations

Initiatives


Roadmap

Appendices

Global Technology ServicesGlobal Migration




Several considerations may need to be made to determine the

readiness of each business unit to migrate to global processes

The global process should recognize and preserve the level of service that

business users supported by smaller business units require

Training for the new process and tool must be provided in order for the solution

to be successful

During the pilot phase of the new process implementation, smaller organizations

with limited resources may need supplemental staffing to maintain currentoperating levels

− Two processes running in parallel prior to cutting over to a new process in order to maintain

process integrity (e.g. losing track of a Change requests or Incident tickets)

− Migrating from homegrown (e.g. Lotus System Change Management) to enterprise wide system

tool

Existing Release Management tools may need to integrate with the new globalChange Management system, or that functionality will need to be provided in the

new system

Some business units do not have all required roles to support role based process

execution





Global migration considerations: ResCap, Financial

Services (Corporate, NAO, GMO, MIC, IO)Considerations Workarounds Process Area

There are currently numerous integrations with 3rd

party vendors in the FS and ResCap environment

which could pose an issues during the integration

phase

If 3rd

party vendors are not willing to integrate with

the new Change Management tool or leverage the

process until after contract negotiations in 2011,

the value in the invest may not be realized until

then

The large size of FS and ResCap may result in in a

slower adoption of the new process and tools forChange and Incident Management

Due to the large volume of changes processed

through the current process and tools (1,200) there

is a potential issue for data loss when migrating to

the new process

Legacy data may be lost or hard to access after

switching to the new tool

Ensure the maintenance of the legacy

Change Management system in read

only mode once full cutover has

occurred

Change Management

There may be issues in reconciling and agreeing to

terminology used in the FS process and ITIL. E.g.Model change (FS & ResCap) and Pre-approved

(ITIL)

Conduct guiding principles workshop to

determine how decisions and changesto the process will make (e.g. we will

use ITIL terminology in all areas) to

minimize descent for this area

Change and Incident

Management

Start integration discussions with

vendors early. Include vendor in

discussions of tool and process

changes as early as possible to provide

them with the ability to either integrate

with the new process and tool or

migrate to the tool

Change Management

Establish a communication plan to

communicate changes to the newprocess and tools to users.

Furthermore, operate the two systems

in parallel for a short duration (1 month)

to ensure no information is lost prior to

full cutover

Change Management

and Incident

Management





Global migration considerations: ResCap IBG

Considerations Workarounds Process Area

There are multiple languages used in Central

Europe, a geography which is covered under

ResCap IBG. This may pose some languageissues and may hinder the rollout and adoption of

the process and toolsets

Ensure training material is developed in

multiple languages. Furthermore,

ensure the tool used to implement andsupport these processes are capable of

supporting multiple languages

Change Management

and Incident

Management

As there are no formal Change or Incident

Management resources, it may be difficult to

identify the target audience for the training for

Change and Incident Management

As part of rolling the Change and

Incident Management processes out to

this group, launch an education

program to ensure the group is clear on

the roles of Change and Incident

Management personnel and can

identify core supporters of the Change

and Incident Management process

Change Management

and Incident

Management

A centralized IT processes for Change and Incident

Management may be too onerous for anorganization their size

Ensure the tool provides flexibility and

sufficient automation to support smallerorganizations without impacting their

efficiency

Change and Incident

Management

The tight integration between change and release

management and the overlapping tasks may need

to be considered when delineating the Change

Management process from the Release

Management process and defining the tool

requirements

Ensure requirements are thoroughly

gathered for this group. Furthermore,

ensure the group understand the

differences between Change and

Release management prior to roll out of

the process and tools. Ensure the tool

can integrate with their existing tool

which is used for both Change and

Release Management

Change Management

The existing Change / Release Management toolmay not be able to be retired because of the

release activities supported through the tool and a

heavier overhead may result in trying to maintain

the two

Seamless integration and automationwith Release Management tools should

be part of the tool and process

requirements for this group for

designing the new process and toolsets

Change Management

Incident Management is supported through email in

some regions. Larger education efforts may be

required to migrate users from emailing to tool

based Incident Management system

Ensure the value and benefits of a

structured process and formal tool are

articulated to supported users prior to

rollout

Incident Management




Gl b l i ti id ti Ab S

Global Migration




Global migration considerations: Aba Seguros


Aba Seguros is primarily Spanishspeaking. This may pose some language

issues when may hinder the rollout and

adoption of the process and toolsets

Ensure training material is developed in multiplelanguages. Furthermore, ensure the tool used to

implement these processes are capable of supporting

multiple languages

Change Management

and IncidentManagement

Current difficulty in communicating the

importance of Change Management may

also impact future adoption of the new

global process and toolsets

Start an early awareness campaign of the corporate

direction to consolidate processes and tools.

Furthermore, articulate value proposition of Change

Management combined with a global process and

toolset

Change Management

Aba Seguros is currently well positioned to

migrate to a global Change and Incident

Management toolset as they leverage ITIL

best practices across their current

operational model

N/A Change and Incident

Management


Gl b l i ti id ti C i l Fi

Global Migration




Global migration considerations: Commercial Finance


This group currently has a level of service

expectation from the business. Moving to a

new process could potentially degrade the

level of service

Understand current SLAs / OLAs

and ensure the processes forChange and Incident Management

are streamlined and automated

enough to support these SLAs. If

no formal SLAs are in place with

certain supported customers,

establish them

Change and Incident

Management

The group believes they have very demanding

SLAs and unique customer requirements

which may impede the adoption of global

processes and tools for Change and IncidentManagement

Include CF in all requirements

gathering workshops and design

efforts to ensure their requirementsare accounted for

Change and Incident

Management

The staff required to support a global process

may not be available in this group

Define roles and responsibilities

required to support the new

process. Ensure sufficient

automation is in place to improve

the efficiency of the processes

Change and Incident

Management

Buy-in by senior management within CF is

required in order to move forward with the

vision of global processes and toolsets

Currently the corporate direction to migrate toa singular process is not fully communicated to

the group. Users not understanding this vision

will impede GMAC’s ability to effectively roll

out the global processes to this business unit

Change and Incident

Management

Initiate an awareness campaign of

the corporate direction that also

articulates the value proposition for

moving to a global Change andIncident Management process (e.g.

will improve service quality, etc.)


C t t




Contents

Summary

Looking forward

Approach


Vision

Detailed Assessment


Initiatives


Roadmap

Appendices


R d

Roadmap




Roadmap

7/13/2009 12/31/2010

10/13/2009 1/13/2010 4/13/2010 7/13/2010 10/13/2010

7/13/2009 10/30/2009

10/13/2009

Incident Management7/13/2009 10/30/2009

10/13/2009

Change Management

7/13/2009 10/30/2009

10/13/2009

Problem Management

8/3/2009 5/31/2010

10/1/2009 1/1/2010 4/1/2010

8/3/2009 5/31/2010

10/1/2009 1/1/2010 4/1/2010

8/3/2009 5/31/2010

10/1/2009 1/1/2010 4/1/2010

1/4/2010 12/31/2010

1/13/2010 4/13/2010 7/13/2010 10/13/2010

4/1/2010 12/31/2010

4/13/2010 7/13/2010 10/13/2010

8/2/2010 11/30/2010

10/13/2010

8/2/2010 11/30/2010

10/13/2010

8/2/2010 11/30/2010

10/13/2010

Global Change Management System

Global Incident Management System

Global Problem Management System

Transition ChgM

Transition IM

Transition PM

Training

Process Optimization

8/11/2009 10/4/2009

Vendor SelectionLUNAR

10/16/2009

POC

12/1/2009 1/15/2010

Tool Acquisition & Delivery

4/1/2010 4/30/2010

Prep for Data Load

4/30/2010

Tool Integration Begins

6/17/2010 8/16/2010

Limited Pilot

10/14/2010 12/31/2010

Post Go-Live Activities

10/13/2010

GO LIVE

Level of Importance

Medium

High

Low* Dates are tentative outlook dates

12/31/2010

All Systems Operational


C t t




Contents

Summary

Looking forward

Approach


Vision

Detailed Assessment


Initiatives


Roadmap

Appendices

Global Technology Services Appendix A




Appendix A


Glossary of Terms

Appendix A




Glossary of Terms

Terms Definition

CDM Common Data Model

CF Coupling Factor

CMDB Configuration Management Database

CoE Center of Excellence

CSC Computer Sciences Corporation

Connect Direct File exchange protocol

ESM Enterprise Systems Management

IM Incident Management

OAT Operational Acceptance Test

OLA Operational Level Agreement

PD Problem Determination

PLA Performance level agreement (this includes SLAs, UCs, OLAs)

PM Problem Management

QA Quality Assurance

RCA Root Cause Analysis

SIT Systems Integration Test

SLA Service Level Agreements

SPoF Single Point of Failure

UAT User Acceptance Test

UC Underpinning Contract

WAS WebSphere Application Server





Appendix B


Client uses a variety of tools across multiple business units

Appendix B




Client uses a variety of tools across multiple business units

to execute Incident and Problem ManagementApplication Name Vendor Business Unit Tool Type Purpose of Tool

BMC Patrol® BMC N/AIncident/Problem

Management

General purpose monitoring

CA Unicenter® TNG CA N/AIncident/Problem

ManagementSAP monitoring

Computer Center Management System (CCMS) SAP N/AIncident/Problem

ManagementStandard Application Package (SAP) component monitoring

EDS Enterprise Knowledge Management System (EKMS) N/AIncident/Problem

ManagementKnowledge management system

EDS Enterprise Oncall Notification (part of VCC –

automation core)N/A

Incident/Problem

ManagementIncident paging and notification

EDS SAP Basis SAP N/AIncident/Problem

ManagementProprietary SAP monitoring and management tooling

Hardware Platform Monitoring N/AIncident/Problem

Management

Platform-specific monitoring capability embedded within

hardware

NetQoS SuperAgent® N/AIncident/Problem

Management

End-to-end application transaction availability and response-

time monitoring (passive)

Oracle Oracle N/AIncident/Problem

ManagementSAP monitoring

Remedy BMC ResCapIncident/Problem

ManagementHelpdesk ticketing, work requests

Remedy BMC CorpIncident/Problem

ManagementHelpdesk ticketing, work requests

Syslog solution (based on Network Intelligence) N/AIncident/Problem

Management

Part of GDT/Renaissance deployments, log file analysis,

alerting, and reporting

Unicenter Service Desk (USD) ResCap

Incident/Problem

Management Helpdesk ticketing, work requests

VCC (Netcool® – part of automation core) N/AIncident/Problem

Management

Event correlation/consolidation/ notification and ticket work

flow integration

VERITAS Precise N/AIncident/Problem

ManagementSAP performance monitoring

Peregrine ServiceCenter (part of Global Workflow) HP N/AIncident/Problem

ManagementService desk/ticketing/workflow management

Sostenuto Sunrise ProvidentIncident/Problem

ManagementService desk / ticketing / workflow management

Total Tools: 17*Tools were listed multiple times to indicate unique implementations / instances


Additionally Client uses a variety of tools across its

Appendix B




Additionally, Client uses a variety of tools across its

organization to execute Chang Management

Application Name Vendor Business Unit Tool Type Purpose of Tool

Change Management In house MIC-ABA Seguros Chg Mgmt Change Management, ticket process.

FootPrints Numara IBG Chg Mgmt Change Management, ticket process. Tool has CMDB module but nodiscovery tool.

IBM Rational for Applications IBM Commercial Finance Chg Mgmt Change Management

IBM Storage Management

SoftwareIBM Commercial Finance Chg Mgmt Monitors the SAN environment/Change Management

Microsoft Operations Manager

2005Microsoft Commercial Finance Chg Mgmt

Windows 2003, 2008 environments

Uses Microsoft & 3rd party management pack solutions to monitor

servers/Change Management/Configuration management

Peregrine ServiceCenter HP ResCap Chg Mgmt Change Management

Provident - in house written

change systemProvident MIC-Provident Chg Mgmt In house system

ServiceDesk+ AdventNet MIC-CCP Chg Mgmt Total management of assets, changes, incidents

Webwerks FS, Corporate, NAO, GMO, MIC, IO Chg Mgmt Internal Change Management tool used by EDS outsourcers

PCR-D.M FS, Corporate, NAO, GMO, MIC, IO Chg Mgmt Internal Change Management tool used by EDS outsourcers

ECM FS, Corporate, NAO, GMO, MIC, IO Chg Mgmt Internal Change Management tool used by EDS outsourcers

PCR-W FS, Corporate, NAO, GMO, MIC, IO Chg Mgmt Internal Change Management tool used by HP and IBM outsourcers

Managed Now IBM FS, Corporate, NAO, GMO, MIC, IO Chg Mgmt Internal Change Management tool used by IBM outsourcer

Remedy IBM FS, Corporate, NAO, GMO, MIC, IO Chg Mgmt Internal Change Management tool used by IBM outsourcer

IBM IIM/OM Remedy FS, Corporate, NAO, GMO, MIC, IO Chg MgmtCentral Change Management tool shared with GM. Source of record for

Change tickets. All vendors integrate with this tool

Remedy AT&T FS, Corporate, NAO, GMO, MIC, IO Chg Mgmt AT&T internal Change Management tool

Service Center ResCap ResCap Chg Mgmt Internal Change Management tool used by ResCap

OpenView Wipro FS, Corporate, NAO, GMO, MIC, IO Chg Mgmt Internal Change Management tool used by Wipro

OpenView HP FS, Corporate, NAO, GMO, MIC, IO Chg Mgmt Internal Change Management tool used by HP

ServiceDesk+ CCPCCP Chg Mgmt

Internal change, incident, problem and configuration management tool used

at CCP

ITSM Frontrange ResCap IBG-UK Chg Mgmt Change Management tool used by ResCap IBG UK

Peregrine CE-US ResCap IBG-US,CE Chg Mgmt Change Management tool used by ResCap IBG US,CE

ServiceDesk+ CE-US ResCap IBG-US,CE Chg Mgmt Change Management tool used by ResCap IBG US,CE

Change Management System Aba Seguros Chg Mgmt Home grown Change Management tool used by Aba Seguros

LandDesk Provident Chg Mgmt Chg Mgmt tool used by Provident

Total Tools: 24

*Tools were listed multiple times to indicate unique implementations / instances





Appendix C


IBM recommends roles and responsibilities to consider

Appendix C




IBM recommends roles and responsibilities to consider

when designing and implementing ITIL-based processes

IBM Tivoli Unified Process (ITUP) Tool

– https://www14.software.ibm.com/webapp/iwm/web/preLogin.do?source=trc80&S_

PKG=dl3

– Site registration (free of charge) is required


https://www14.software.ibm.com/webapp/iwm/web/preLogin.do?source=trc80&S_PKG=dl3







Appendix D



Appendix D






Change Management

The Process Framework

Define the Mission

– The mission is primarily concerned with IT issues


– Process objectives are defined and understood



– Good enforcement of required information.

– Some RFC's are rejected early on if data is missing, or there are

obvious conflicts.

Review changes via change advisory board/Emergency committee

– Evaluation regularly includes standard risk and impact assessment.


– Most changes formally approved by the appropriate Change Authority


– Change activities and prerequisites are fully defined

Monitor & report

– Change process is monitored and is effective for major changes

Review & close RFCs

– Standard procedures require results for change implementation to be

documented


– Regular information ex-change between Change Management andRelease Management



– Regular information ex-change between Configuration Management

and Change Management

Interface-Service Desk

– Regular information exchange between the two processes.


Ownership Defined

– Single owner identified as focal point of the process.

Roles and Responsibilities

– Roles and responsibilities have been agreed to and documented


– IT Strategy skills very good and cover most aspects of the solution.

Tools

Tools


– Rigorous approach de-fined with methods and tools to understand

process execution.


– Basic functions of most methods and tools easy to use,


– Many of the process steps are automated, along with integrated

interfaces to other processes


– Key management tools are integrated



– Measured regularly, and measures are linked to process mission andobjectives

Measurement and Control-Control

– Most controls have been defined, documented established, and

compliance is regularly checked.

Measurement and Control-Understanding Customer Satisfaction

– Measured regularly, typically meets expected levels of satisfaction and

cost

Measurement and Control-Improving the Process

– Most parts of the process are regularly re-viewed and improved



Appendix D



p p p


Incident Management

The Process Framework Define the Mission

– The mission is primarily concerned with IT issues


– Process objectives are defined and understood



– Major incidents are recorded and/or passed to the Service Desk, which

stores them in a common incident database


– Incidents are classified and prioritization is based upon IT andsometimes business considerations through SLAs.


– Incidents are investigated and analyzed; workarounds usually advised

and/or found to minimize user impact


– Incident is resolved as soon as possible by appropriate staff and

passed on for closure. Resolution actions are documented.

Incident closure

– IT personnel and users usually get notified of incident closure, and

status is changed to “closed” in the system


– Service Desk oversees resolution for most incidents, prioritizes high-impact ones, and performs a degree of monitoring and communication

with the affected users


– Incident and Change Management data exchange happens

consistently


– Problem Management and Incident Management exchange hap-pens


Ownership Defined

– Single owner identified as focal point of the process.

Roles and Responsibilities

– Roles and responsibilities have been agreed to and documented


– IT Strategy skills very good and cover most aspects of the solution.

Tools


– Rigorous approach de-fined with methods and tools to understandprocess execution.


– Basic functions of most methods and tools easy to use,


– Many of the process steps are automated, along with integrated

interfaces to other processes


– Key management tools are integrated



– Measured regularly, and measures are linked to process mission and

objectives

Measurement and Control-Control

– Most controls have been defined, documented established, and compliance is

regularly checked.

Measurement and Control-Understanding Customer Satisfaction

– Measured regularly, typically meets expected levels of satisfaction and

cost

chg in pm report 07162009 final scrubbed

Documents