Tag Archives: ITSM

AI, ITSM

Three AI truths with IT Service Management

Leave a comment
Share twitterlinkedinmail

There’s no question that introducing AI capabilities can have a dramatic impact on IT Service Management (ITSM). Done well, AI adoption will free up ITSM professionals to do the work for which humans are uniquely qualified, like critical thinking, contextual understanding, and creative problem-solving. Furthermore, AI will enable organizations to realize many of the theoretical benefits of ITSM. For example, the use of AI and machine learning can leverage comprehensive in-depth data, not just a small recent sampling, for cause analysis, problem detection, and impact determination of problems. Another example is the use of AI can increase the data of the IT environment and automate the remediation of incidents.

But AI is not a “magic wand” for ITSM.

Before introducing AI capabilities into ITSM, organizations must first consider these three AI truths.

Truth #1 – AI needs good data

For the use of AI to be effective, it needs data. Lots of data. But, if that data is inaccurate, lacks integrity, or is not trustworthy, then the use of AI will only produce inaccurate or poor results.

Data quality is an issue that many organizations will have to tackle before realizing the complete benefits of introducing AI to their ITSM implementations. These means that organizations will have to step up their technology and data governance posture. According to this recent Privacera article, a fundamental principle of data governance is having a high-quality, trusted data source.  Having trusted data sources enables capabilities like ITSM to make accurate and reliable decisions regarding service management issues. But if the data sources used by ITSM tools contain data that is unregulated, the ability to automate responses is significantly hindered.

Truth #2 – AI doesn’t mean process design goes away

The need for effective ITSM processes and procedures doesn’t go away with AI adoption. Machine learning can be used to detect data patterns to understand what was done to resolve an issue. But what machine learning doesn’t do is determine if what is being done is the best approach. Machine learning doesn’t consider organizational goals and objectives with the adoption of ITSM. Machine learning cannot determine what processes are missing or need improvement to gain needed effectiveness and efficiency with ITSM.

Truth #3 – AI doesn’t replace knowledge

“Reducing cost”, often in the form of headcount reductions,  is frequently used as the justification for AI investment, as the use of AI will enable ITSM activities to be automated. And it’s true – many of the ITSM activities currently performed by humans can and should be replaced with AI-enabled capabilities, such as the automated fulfilment of service requests, automated response to incidents, and problem data analysis. But one of the hidden costs of using AI to justify headcount reductions is the form of knowledge loss – the knowledge inside people’s heads walks out the door when their positions are eliminated. And this is the knowledge that is critical for training the chatbots, developing the LLMs needed, and to the continual improvement of AI and ITSM.

While AI can provide the “how” for “what” needs to be done, it cannot answer the “why” it needs to be done.

Good Governance facilitates AI-enabled ITSM

Without governance,  AI can do some serious damage, not just with ITSM, but to the organization. As the role of IT organizations shifts from being data owners (often by default) to being data custodians, having well defined and enforced policies regarding data governance is critical. This means that the frequently found approach to governance consisting of an IT track and a corporate track is becoming untenable. As organizational processes and workflows become increasingly automated, enabled by AI capabilities, governance must become cross-functional[i] , with sales, marketing, HR, IT, and other organizational functions all involved. Organizations must consider and address data-related issues such as compliance with data privacy laws, ethical data use,  data security,  data management, and more.

An effective approach to governance enables organizations to define their digital strategy[ii] to maximize the business benefits of data assets and technology-focused initiatives. A digital strategy produces a blueprint for building the next version of the business, creating a bigger, broader picture of available options and down-line benefits.[iii] Creating a successful digital strategy requires an organization to carefully evaluate its systems and processes, including ITSM processes. And as ITSM processes are re-imagined for use across the enterprise in support of organizational value streams, effective governance becomes essential.

Getting ready for AI-enabled ITSM

What are some of the first steps organizations should take to get ready for AI-enabled ITSM?

  • Formalize continual improvement. One of the most important practices of an effective ITSM implementation is continual improvement. As organizations are continually evolving and changing, continual improvement ensures that ITSM practices evolve right alongside those business changes. And just like service management, AI adoption is not an “implement and forget”; in fact, AI will absolutely fail without formal continual improvement.
  • Answer the “why”. To say that there is so much hype around the use of AI within ITSM would be an understatement. Before jumping into AI, first develop and gain approval of the business case for using AI within ITSM. How will success be determined and measured? What opportunities for innovation will emerge by relieving people from performing those tedious and monotonous tasks associated with the current ITSM environment? What returns will the organization realize from the use of AI within ITSM? What new business or IT opportunities may be available because of the use of AI within ITSM? A good business case establishes good expectations for the organization regarding AI and ITSM.
  • Begin thinking about how AI can be leveraged by ITSM process designs. As discussed in this recent HBR.org article, AI will bring new capabilities to business (and ITSM) processes. With these new capabilities, organizations will need to rethink what tasks are needed, who will do those tasks, and the frequency that those tasks will be performed. The use of AI will enable organizations to rethink their ITSM processes from an end-to-end perspective, considering what tasks should be performed by people and what tasks should be performed by machines.

The concept of augmenting ITSM with AI is a “no-brainer”.  However, success with AI in an ITSM environment requires a lot of up-front thought, good process design, solid business justification, and considering these three AI truths.

[i] https://2021.ai/ai-governance-impact-on-business-functions

[ii] https://www.techtarget.com/searchcio/definition/digital-strategy

[iii] Ibid.

Share twitterlinkedinmail
AI, ITSM

The 3 Pillars of Success for AI-enabled Service Management

Leave a comment
Share twitterlinkedinmail

In her book[i], Dr. Kavita Ganesan suggests that any AI adoption be evaluated using three pillars:

  • Model success – Is the AI model performing at an acceptable level in development and production? (In other words, the model performs at the required levels of accuracy, execution time, and other factors.)
  • Business success – Is AI meeting organizational objectives?
  • User success – Are users satisfied with the AI solution and perceive it to be a valid solution?

Many organizations are rushing to incorporate AI-enabled technologies to improve their service management capabilities. AI technologies, such as AI-assistants, chatbots, intelligent process automation, generative AI, and more, can provide a next-level set of capabilities for service management. But are these organizations’ service management practices positioned to fully take advantage of these new capabilities?

Let’s be clear – AI is not a “magic wand.”  AI is a technology. And like any other technology, there are factors that must be addressed if an organization is to realize the benefits that AI can bring to service management.

First, AI needs data – and lots of it. The effectiveness of AI depends on the quantity, quality, relevancy, and timeliness of the data being used by the AI models and algorithms. Any limitations in the data being used by AI will be reflected in the outputs produced by AI – and the use of those outputs by service management processes. The old axiom remains true – garbage in will result in garbage out.

AI cannot be a solution looking for a problem. Just because AI is a “hot topic” now doesn’t mean that it is the solution for every business challenge – especially service management issues. If issues like ineffective workflows, undefined services, poorly defined measures, lack of continual improvement practices, or the absence of high-quality data already exist within the service management environment, the introduction of AI will only exasperate those issues.

Lastly, the use of  good organizational change management practices is critical. There is a lot of FUD (Fear, Uncertainty, and Doubt) surrounding the introduction of AI[ii] within organizations. Yes, there will be impacts to how humans work and interact with technology, but for whatever reason, there is a heightened fear associated with AI-adoption within service management.

Applying the 3 pillars for AI success to AI-enabled Service Management

Before rushing into incorporating an AI solution with a service management environment, let’s adapt and apply Ganesan’s three pillars for success with AI-enabled service management.

The first pillar is business success. How do current service management capabilities support business outcomes and enable value realization? How will the introduction of AI capabilities further enhance the realization of the outcomes and value delivered by service management? If the answers to the above questions aren’t clear, revisiting some foundational elements of service management is in order. Consider the following:

  • Have IT services been defined, agreed, documented, and measured in terms of business value, business outcomes, and the costs and risks associated with the delivery of services? Many IT organizations have defined what they call “services” in terms of
    • what goods and products (like laptops and smart devices) are provided
    • the service actions (like password resets) a service desk will perform, and
    • procedures for gaining access to digital resources (like a cloud-based resource or a shared drive).

Not only does this approach inhibit a mutual understanding of the vital role of technology in business success, but it also commoditizes what IT does. Secondly, this approach fails to establish business-oriented measures regarding results and value.

  • Are non-IT colleagues named as service owners? Are these non-IT colleagues actively involved in the delivery and support of services? This is a significant issue for many service management implementations. In many organizations, IT personnel, not non-IT colleagues, have taken on the role of service owner – the person that is accountable for a service meeting its objectives and delivering the required business outcomes and value. The service owner is critical to understanding what is needed and importantly, how business outcomes and value are realized and should be measured.
  • How might AI adoption enable organizations to consider service management practices that would enhance their business? For example, better service portfolio management would enable better utilization of and data-driven investments in services and technology.

The next pillar is employee success. Frequently (and counterintuitively!), service management practices have been designed and implemented with IT and not the IT service consumer in mind. As a result, interacting with the service desk or a self-service portal can be an exercise in frustration due to the over-technical nature of those interactions. Consider:

  • How might the introduction of AI result in friction-free interactions with services and the fulfillment of service requests? How might AI personalize end-user interactions with service management practices? Consider how AI could shift the burden of interacting with service management practices from the end-user to a personalized and proactive AI-enabled capability.
  • How might the introduction of the AI model result in friction-free interactions with supporting IT services? If consuming IT services present challenges to end-users, it can also be challenging for those that deliver and support those services. Will AI-capabilities enable service management practices to shift from a reactive to proactive stance by identifying and eliminating causes of incidents before they occur? Will AI-capabilities enable better issue resolution by suggesting potential solutions to IT technicians?
  • How might the introduction of AI enable employees to make better, data-driven decisions based on relevant, timely, and accurate knowledge? Knowledge management is among the most significant challenges of a service management implementation, as knowledge is ever evolving and continually being created, revised, and applied. AI may provide a solution – this blog explores how Generative AI could provide organizations (not just IT) with the capability of harnessing its collective knowledge.

The final pillar is AI / service management model success. Frankly, many service management challenges can be resolved through continual improvement activities. Some issues may be resolved through the application of effective and efficient automation. Questions to consider include:

  • How might AI adoption result in better and proactive detection and resolution of issues before those issues impact the organization? How might AI adoption result in improved change implementations through better testing or confirmation of positive business results?
  • Is there sufficient, good-quality data to enable AI-driven service management actions? If AI models are not supplied with sufficient, good-quality data, the results from the model will be suboptimal at best – or worse, just flat-out wrong.
  • What is the required level of accuracy for the model? A “100% accurate” model may be too costly to achieve and maintain; a “75% accurate” model may be perceived as a failure.

Get ready for AI-enabled service management

The introduction of AI to a service management environment can be a game-changer on many levels. Here are four steps to get ready:

  • Make the business case for introducing AI to service management. Think strategically about AI , service management, and how the combination of AI and service management will help the organization achieve its mission, vision, and goals.
  • Communicate, communicate, communicate. The mention of AI adoption may cause concerns among employees. Start open conversations regarding AI-enhanced service management capabilities, incorporate feedback, and proactively address concerns.
  • Identify and define success measures. The mere implementation of AI capabilities within service management is not an indicator of success. Define how the benefits articulated in the business case will be captured, measured, and reported.
  • Begin data governance now. The success of any AI initiative depends on the availability of good quality data. If service management is to leverage AI capabilities, the data being captured must be of good quality. Define and publicize data quality standards for service management practices and ensure compliance through periodic audits.

The introduction of good AI capabilities will not fix bad service management. Applying the three pillars described above will ensure successful introduction of AI capabilities resulting in next-level service management practices for any organization.

Is your service management approach “AI-ready”? An assessment by Tedder Consulting will identify any foundational gaps so your service management environment is “AI-ready”.  Contact Tedder Consulting today for more information!

[i] Ganesan, Dr. Kavita. “The Business Case for AI: A Leader’s Guide to AI Strategies, Best Practices & Real-World Applications”.  Opinois Analytics Publishing, 2002.

[ii] https://www.forbes.com/sites/jenniferfolsom/2024/03/28/meet-your-newest-co-worker-ai  Retrieved April 2024.

Share twitterlinkedinmail
EX, ITSM, XLA

Why your SLAs aren’t helping your XLAs

Leave a comment
Share twitterlinkedinmail

It may be hard to believe, but the term “experience economy” is nothing new. The term was first mentioned in this 1998 Harvard Business Review article.  In the article, the authors posited that an experience occurs when a company intentionally uses services as the stage, and goods as props, to engage individual customers in a way that creates a memorable event. In other words, it’s not enough to have great products and services; it’s the experience of the customer that differentiates companies from their competition.

Fast forward to today, and these “memorable events” have become a significant factor in today’s employee-employer relationship, broadly known as employee experience (EX).  Companies providing a good EX can attract and retain top talent, deliver better experiences to their customers, and have employees who are more committed to the company.

What is the experience like when employees are interacting with technologies and services within your company? Is your organization actively measuring and improving those experiences? Is your company committed to a great employee experience?

These are answers that an XLA, or Experience Level Agreement, will reveal.

XLAs provide a different perspective

In IT, there is a tendency to focus on and measure things like technology performance and process execution. Often there is little attention given to how end users perceive the quality and effectiveness of technologies, apart from when an end user reports an incident or makes a service request.

An XLA provides a different perspective. An XLA provides focus to end-users’ experience and needs, by measuring the outcomes and the value of services provided. An XLA seeks to understand how end users feel about their interactions with technology and with those with whom they interact during those interactions.

By understanding the experience, organizations can identify where measures reported by IT do not reflect the end user experience. Understanding the experience also helps identify potential areas for improvement, whether that be with a service, a product, a process, or any other aspect that the end user leverages to get their jobs done.

XLAs are becoming increasingly popular as employers realize that good EX is essential for business success. ” This article from reworked.co discusses the impact of a positive EX:

  • 23% higher profitability
  • 28% reduction in theft
  • 81% reduction in absenteeism
  • 41% reduction in quality defects
  • 64% reduction in safety incidents

Clearly, good EX is good business.

XLA vs. SLA

So, what’s the difference between an XLA and an SLA, or Service Level Agreement?

An XLA focuses on happiness and productivity metrics from the end-user perspective.[i]  XLAs focuses on measuring the quality of the user experience, rather than just technical metrics like uptime or response times.

An SLA is an artifact of many ITSM (IT Service Management) adoptions. An SLA, as described by ITIL®[ii], is a documented agreement between a service provider (typically IT) and a customer that identifies both services required and the expected level of service.[iii] SLAs are intended to manage expectations and ensure both IT and non-IT parts of the organization understand their responsibilities. SLAs should also provide a framework for measuring performance and holding the provider (IT) accountable if they fail to meet their commitments.

SLAs are managed by the service level management practice, which is typically found within IT departments. The purpose of service level management is to set clear, business-based targets for service levels, and ensure that delivery of services is properly assessed, monitored, and managed against these targets. [iv] The SLAs produced should relate to defined business outcomes and not simply operational metrics.

An XLA is not meant to replace an SLA but work alongside SLAs to ensure a holistic view of value and results from the use of IT services.

But wait, isn’t quantifying, reviewing, and discussing business value and results part of SLAs and service level management?

Well, yes. But most organizations that claim to have SLAs, really don’t have SLAs.

The problem with most SLAs

What many companies are calling “SLAs” fall far short of being a service level agreement. Why?

  • Services are not defined and agreed. What and how IT services enable or facilitate business results and business value have not been defined and agreed between IT and non-IT senior managers. Furthering the confusion, what many IT organizations call a “service catalog” only describes technologies and service actions that consumers can request, not business value and outcomes.
  • The so-called “SLA” discusses IT, not the organization. SLAs discuss IT operational performance – typically related to only the service desk – and not business performance. Indeed, many of the issues related to SLAs (for example, the Watermelon Effect) are as a direct result of ITSM tools using the term “service level agreement” as a misnomer for business performance target
  • IT arbitrarily decides its own performance and success metrics. And these metrics are either measures that an ITSM platform administrator used in her last job, or metrics pre-configured within the ITSM platform, or metrics that a senior IT leader picked. Regardless, these performance measures are usually not relevant to anyone in the organization outside of IT.
  • Organizations (including both IT and non-IT leaders) take the wrong approach to SLA. Neither service providers (IT) nor service customers (non-IT managers) invest the time and effort to define services, the relationship and expectations between IT and the non-IT parts of the organization, and agree on business-relevant terms and performance measures. As a result, there is no shared, mutual understanding established regarding the use and importance of technology within the organization.

Close the gaps between SLA and XLA

Understanding how technologies and processes enable business outcomes, as well as what the organization – and the employee – truly value, is critical for a good EX within today’s organizations.

If XLA adoption reveals EX challenges, closing the gaps between SLAs and XLAs will help. Here are some things to try.

  • Define services – in business, not IT terms. Clearly defining and agreeing IT services between IT and non-IT leaders, including service-specific performance measures. Mutual understanding of business value and outcomes from the use of services is foundational for good EX.
  •  Apply Design Thinking. Design thinking is a human-focused method of problem-solving that prioritizes the solution instead of the problem. Identify where EX is falling short, then apply design thinking techniques to redesign the experience to meet both the employee’s and employer’s needs.
  • Are your SLAs really SLAs? If SLAs aren’t documented or agreed with non-IT leaders, or SLAs do not identify clear, business-based measures for quantifying success, then you don’t have SLAs. Treat this as an opportunity to build good business relationships and establish true SLAs, resulting in better business outcomes and EX.

While XLA adoption can be a real revelation for an organization,  it is not a magic wand for instantly improving EX. Like SLAs, XLAs can only be effective through collaboration, leadership, and having a continual improvement mindset across the entire organization. Resolving the gaps between SLAs and XLAs will help.

 

 

[i] https://www.happysignals.com/the-practical-guide-to-experience-level-agreements-xlas

[ii] ITIL is a registered trademark of AXELOS Limited.

[iii] ITIL Foundation: ITIL 4 Edition. Norwich: TSO (2019)

[iv] Ibid.

Share twitterlinkedinmail
AI, GenAI, ITSM, Knowledge Management

AI-enabled Knowledge Management might be low hanging fruit…if we can only reach it

1 Comment
Share twitterlinkedinmail

AI-enabled technologies have captured the imagination of every organization. Organizations (both solution providers and buyers) are rushing to jump on the wave of adopting and integrating AI.

Indeed, AI-enabled technologies have already found their way into IT support. An AI-enabled chatbot of today makes its predecessor chatbot of just a few years ago look… well, archaic. AIOps solutions have increased the IT support organization’s observability capabilities by bringing disparate sources of real-time operational data into a single view, facilitating more proactive actions and automated responses when predefined conditions are met.

But one of the challenges exposed by this initial wave of AI adoption within IT support organizations is the inadequacy of its approach to knowledge management. AI-enabled chatbots and AIOps solutions need both data (lots of it!) and organizational knowledge (lots of this too!) to be effective for use.

Knowledge Management (KM) is a key factor in an organization’s capability for being responsive, for driving efficiency and effectiveness, and for making the best use of limited and precious human resources. I believe that effective KM provides organizations with the capability to adapt, shift, change, and respond appropriately, especially in today’s unpredictable and ever-changing business and technology environment.

But many organizations have found that their KM practices aren’t enabling such a capability. Contributing to this situation are a few factors.

  • Knowledge becomes stale very quickly – if not maintained. The business and technology environment are continually changing. Stale knowledge is not just “stale” – it can be just flat-out wrong, making it unreliable and worthless.
  • In many organizations, it is the IT department that is trying to capture, develop, manage, and use knowledge. Even worse, in many IT departments, it is just the service desk that is investing effort into knowledge management. And many of those service desks, knowledge articles are just a defense mechanism, developed in response to (irate) user demands.
  • IT-authored knowledge articles are usually written in “geek-speak” and often read like a technical manual. Such articles are not helpful with enabling consumers to self-service or self-resolve any technology-related issues.
  • We (IT) just aren’t that good at writing – not just knowledge articles, but anything that doesn’t resemble application code or scripts.

Enter GenAI

Could the use of GenAI as part of an organization’s KM practices be the low-hanging fruit that delivers the transformational return that organizations need?

Generative AI, or GenAI, are algorithms that can be used to create new content.[i]

GenAI adoption has huge potential to address both the challenges in current approaches to KM, as well as enable organizations (not just IT or the service desk) to better capture, manage, and use its collective knowledge. How could GenAI address the challenges organizations have with KM?

  • Overcome that writer’s block. Writing knowledge articles is often viewed as “extra work.” Moreover, those that feel that they are not good writers tend to avoid documenting knowledge in the moment. Using GenAI capabilities and its use of LLMs (Large Language Models), first drafts of knowledge articles can be developed, based on what is entered into systems of record, prior LLM training, and prior curated knowledge articles.[ii] This draft can then be reviewed by experts before being published for use.
  • Finally, self-service! The conversational capabilities of GenAI can replace the cumbersome “search and try it” approach with a conversation-like interaction for self-service. Conversation like responses create a compelling pull for the customer; when it works how they expect it to and gets them back to doing their work more quickly, they will return to using self-service.[iii]
  • Keeping knowledge fresh. Perhaps the most significant challenge of KM is keeping knowledge relevant and current, regardless of where knowledge is created. Frankly, organizations cannot afford to appropriately hire enough staff to perform this critical, yet often tedious, work. Using the machine learning capabilities of GenAI, new knowledge can be created by combining and synthesizing information from various sources.[iv]
  • Making KM an organizational capability. Organizations have long emphasized creating and maintaining documentation, from topics ranging from processes, policies, governance requirements, security, products, applications, and more. There is a wealth of information in different formats for specific needs. LLMs excel at transforming data from one state into another. In the knowledge management use case, this means enabling any knowledge worker to be a knowledge-creation expert.[v]

Warning – challenges ahead

With all the hype and early success around GenAI, it is understandable that an organization may develop a bit of FOMO (Fear Of Missing Out) if they’ve not started adoption. However, FOMO-driven initiatives rarely return any of the expected benefits, and often become money-pits. What challenges do organizations need to address before considering GenAI adoption?

  • Ethics and Integrity. Successful implementation will require a focus on ethics, privacy, and security. Guardrails within services and tools as well as ground rules for acceptable use will separate enterprise success from low-level experimentation. From the IT service desk to the software development pipeline and even outside of IT, generative AI is positioned to impact the way work gets done.[vi]
  • Data Governance. Organizations must realize that when it comes to GenAI and its use of LLM that “Garbage In” results in “Garbage Out” (GIGO). GenAI responses will only be as good as the data that is used to train the AI. Most organizations lack actively defined and enforced data governance policies.
  • Infrastructure impact. The algorithms behind AI are quite complex. LLMs require more computer power and larger volumes of data. The more data available, the better the training of the AI and its associated models. The more parameters defined within a model means the more computer power required. [vii] Investments in infrastructure will be required. AI complexity – LLM require more computer power
  • It’s not just about ROI or cost-cutting. It can be extremely easy to look at the introduction of AI-enabled technologies simply as a way to cut costs, reduce headcount, or increase ROI. AI-adoption requires investment, training, and competent people to have success, so view GenAI-adoption success in terms of reduced costs or reduced headcount. Increasing ROI sounds good but measuring ROI (as with most things technology-related) is often difficult. Success metrics such as scalability, ease of use, quality of response, accuracy of response, explainability, and total cost of ownership[viii] should also be considered.

Get ready for GenAI-enabled KM

As with any emerging technology, GenAI presents potential opportunities and capabilities for many organizations. Here are some suggestions for getting ready for GenAI.

  • Learn. Most every GenAI solution provider offers no-cost learning opportunities through webinars and publications.
  • Review current KM-enabling policies and strategy. What is working well in the current approach to KM? Where are there gaps and resistance? What are knowledge consumers saying about their interactions with knowledge bases? Answers to these questions provide a base for evaluating GenAI solutions for KM.
  • Identify areas where improved KM can impact organizational objectives. Identifying how improved KM capabilities can have a positive impact on organizational strategy and objectives is a critical first step in developing a strong business case for GenAI.

GenAI can provide a means for addressing many of the challenges organizations (not just IT) face with its KM practices. It may just be the key to success for the modern organization in the ever-changing digital world.

[i] https://www.mckinsey.com/featured-insights/mckinsey-explainers/what-is-generative-ai , retrieved January 27, 2024.

[ii] https://www.forrester.com/blogs/knowledge-management-id-like-to-introduce-my-new-friend-generative-ai/, retrieved January 22, 2024.

[iii] Ibid.

[iv] Ibid.

[v] Ibid.

[vi] https://www.ciodive.com/trendline/generative-ai/404/?utm_source=CIO&utm_medium=1-2BlastJan18&utm_campaign=GeneralAssembly, retrieved January 22, 2024.

[vii] https://www.ml-science.com/exponential-growth, retrieved January 23, 2024.

[viii] https://ciodive.com/trendline/generative-ai/404/?utm_source=CIO&utm_medium=1-2BlastJan18&utm_campaign=GeneralAssembly, retrieved January 23, 2024.

 

Share twitterlinkedinmail
Digital Transformation

You Can’t Automate What You Don’t Understand

Leave a comment
Share twitterlinkedinmail

The case for automating workflows is a strong one. There are plenty of reasons why organizations are looking for the right automation tools, including but not limited to:

  • Frees staff from performing tedious, high-volume, low-value tasks
  • Creates cheaper and faster process execution
  • Improves customer experience
  • Makes it easier to scale

I’m not here to argue the case of automation. When done correctly, it can achieve all those benefits above. And many organizations see success when they automate simple, one-step tasks, like password resets.

However, automation can start to feel like a catch-22, especially for those organizations who realize initial success with their simple automated tasks. That’s because they start the automation initiative by looking for the right tools. Many automation conversations in organizations are about the various tool vendors and weighing the features of each tool. And for simple automations, perhaps that’s not a bad way to make decisions.

But if you want to automate multi-step, complex workflows, the tool is the last thing you need to identify. Let’s explore how to make sure you get these multi-step automations correct.

Principles of Good Automation

1. Automation often means orchestration
The term “automation” is often used to describe things that are actually service orchestration. Automation is the act of automating a single task, like password resets. Orchestration refers to automating multi-step processes to create streamlined, end-to-end (and often inter-departmental) workflows. When determining your automation needs, be clear on whether your goal is only to automate or orchestrate.

2.Don’t automate or orchestrate “just because you can”
Every organization has plenty of workflows and tasks from which to choose to automate. But just because you can automate something doesn’t mean that you should, especially in the first stage of your automation initiatives. You want to focus your initial efforts on the tasks that:

    • Are performed on a high-frequency basis, are tedious for people to perform, but are well-defined and produce predictable results.
    • Consume a disproportionate amount of a team’s time. This may indicate that the process is not well-defined to begin with! In this case, be prepared to first invest time into process design.
    • Drive the most ROI for your business. It doesn’t make sense to spend hours and hours defining and automating a task that is only performed on an infrequent basis.

3. Everyone involved must be ready for orchestration for it to work
Creating multi-step, complex workflows almost always involve more than one team or person. You have to have everyone involved in the entire process involved and that requires a level of transparency from everyone in the organization.

Too many organizations begin automation initiatives despite having little insight into the actual steps involved in a workflow—and therein lies the problem. Those organizations are trying to automate work that they don’t understand.

Gaining Transparency is key

The solution for avoiding automation and orchestration missteps is to start by gaining transparency into the work currently being performed – before you start to automate. Here’s how:

  • Get the whole team involved. Automation and service orchestration has to be a collaborative project, or it will never work. People are often resistant to automation initiatives because they do not understand the objectives of the initiative or were not provided with an opportunity to provide feedback. To help overcome this resistance, illustrate how orchestration and automation will not only improve productivity, quality, and efficiency, but will also improve the employee experience by removing toil from daily work.
  • Identify needed business outcomes. Business outcomes are king to all else. You’re going to burn precious resources spending so much time automating tasks and orchestrating procedures that don’t result in measurable and valuable business outcomes. Before automating, first evaluate how a particular workflow achieves business outcomes
  • Understand end-to-end workflows. Does everyone on the team have a shared understanding of each step in a workflow? Is there a clear understanding of how each team contributes to that workflow? Many organizations don’t have this type of insight and it causes massive breakdowns during the execution of a process. Getting insight into the steps involved enables automation. Otherwise, attempts to automate will only result in frustration.

Once you’ve gained transparency into the current work, now you’re ready to evaluate tools. While this may require more time at the outset, doing this foundational work is key to long term success with automation.

Good automation and good service management go together

To be clear, good automation will not fix bad service management. When you try to use automation to address poor service management issues, all that happens is that you screw up faster – and automatically. And your end-users and customers immediately feel the impact of bad service management.

But when good automation is combined with good service management, watch out. Good service management helps you do more with your resources, helps you get everyone on the same page – both from the technology and the business outcomes perspectives, and helps you deliver that differentiated experience. Good service management ensures that you’re taking a holistic approach to delivering IT products and services. And when you start automation efforts by understanding how value is delivered through IT products and services – you’ll automate the things that both make sense and deliver the most value for both the organization and the user.

Tedder’s Takeaway: Why it matters

Tools alone will not make automation work. Automation is only successful when there is a shared and agreed understanding of the resulting business outcomes, combined with having transparency into how work is being done. Augmenting good service management with good automation delivers the differentiated experience for both the organization and the end-user.

Are your automation efforts stuck? Are you not realizing the benefits of service orchestration? Let Tedder Consulting help! From value stream mapping to process design and improvement, Tedder Consulting can enable automation that is both impactful and delivers a great customer experience. To learn more, schedule a free, 30-minute meeting with Tedder Consulting today!

Share twitterlinkedinmail
ITSM

What’s The ROI of Service Management?

Leave a comment
Share twitterlinkedinmail

IT service management has typically been seen as yet another cost inside of what is perceived to be a cost center known as “IT”. Why? Because many IT organizations still view service management as operating overhead…and nothing else. The potential business value of good ITSM is ignored.

Many IT organizations could start becoming a strategic organizational partner if they understood the ROI of their work. ROI, or Return on Investment, is an important financial metric that most value centers use to measure success. Unfortunately,  90% of all technical support organizations fail to measure ROI. 

But, a simple shift in thinking about service management and ROI will create major opportunities for IT.

Why is ROI important to IT?

Why should IT leaders care about ROI? Simply put, ROI is the language of the business. Everyone in the C-Suite understands ROI and how important it is in making business decisions. When IT leaders start discussing ROI with peers, they are taking the “techno-speak” out of the discussion.  As a result, ROI makes IT more relatable and understandable to the rest of the business.

Relating IT in terms of ROI within the organization can lead to bigger budgets, better staffing, and improved service relationships. Data shows that top performing IT support organizations produce a ROI of 500% or greater on an annual basis!

Understanding the ROI of Service Management

Measuring the ROI of service management starts with quantifying work. But not in the ways that many typically think, like counting closed tickets or tracking time to resolution. Rather, quantify service management in terms that truly demonstrate business value—measures like savings (or “costs avoided” as an early CFO of mine schooled me about) through better processes, improved productivity, or investments in innovation.  These are the kinds of topics business colleagues care about – not IT operational measures. 

Here are three examples where you can illustrate a business-relevant ROI of good service management. 

ROI Area #1 — Time is Money

According to estimates, the global impact of unplanned downtime is 14.3 billion and employees lose an entire day of productivity due to unplanned downtime. 

Many ITSM leaders measure IT productivity in terms of number of incidents resolved and time to incident resolution. This is a flawed approach.  An incident is not a “value-add”. While there is (limited) value in resolving an incident, the real business value is not having incidents at all. 

So how might good service management practices produce an ROI?  Let’s take an example. Company XYZ implemented service management improvements during quarter two. These changes included improving change enablement practices and developing and publishing self-help knowledge articles regarding the most-frequently encountered issues. 

Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4
12,792 12,374 10,556 9,843

Because of these changes, XYZ saw over 4,700 fewer tickets in Q3 & Q4 than they had in Q1 & Q2. 

Now let’s apply money to the scenario.  Let’s say every ticket costs the company $10 in productivity loss (of course, it’s much more than this!).  By implementing these improvements, IT helped the organization avoid nearly $50,000 of lost productivity. That’s where the real value and the ROI of service management begins to show itself. 

ROI Area #2 — Avoid unnecessary cost with self service 

Another ROI-enhancing area for service management is the concept of “shift left.” Shift left means moving support and enablement activities closer to those doing the actual work.  For example, moving incident resolution or request fulfillment from a desktop support team to the service desk or from the service desk to Level 0 (self-help), can help an organization avoid unnecessary escalation-related costs. Unnecessary escalations result in support costs that are not directly reflected in performance measures.  Because these escalations appear to be just ‘business as usual’, the cost associated with those escalations go unnoticed. 

How many tickets are unnecessarily escalated that could have been solved by Level 1 or by self-help? According to TechBeacon, a typical service desk ticket can cost around $22. But escalating a ticket can cost an additional $69, making the total cost of the ticket $91. If you are handling tens of thousands of tickets, these costs add up quickly.

But when self service offerings are provided for those repeatable and predictable support and enablement activities, your organization avoids the costs associated with ticket escalation.   

ROI Area #3 — Spend on innovation, not support

This last area is perhaps the most important but often the most forgotten. It’s where poor IT service management practices drain resources from innovation.

To understand how good service management facilitates innovation, let’s start by understanding the basis of IT budgets. Generally speaking, IT budgets have three categories of costs:

  • Fixed costs, like salaries, support contracts, and other operating expenses. These costs typically do not change dramatically year over year. 
  • Innovation, in the form of new projects and improvement initiatives.  These costs represent outcomes that the organization would like to realize through investments in technology. 
  • Maintenance and support, which includes application and software updates, responding to incidents and requests, security monitoring and patching, and other day-to-day activities needed to maintain reliability and availability. 

Again, let’s use some easy numbers for illustration. If an IT budget is $1000, then typically fixed costs make up $500.  Innovation is budgeted at $300, and maintenance and support is budgeted at $200. The organization is optimistic about realizing new value through innovation.  Support costs are acknowledged and seem reasonable. 

Until the impact of poor IT service management practices become evident. Poor IT service management practices result in poor change implementations.  Lots of fire-fighting.  Too many meetings to discuss and decide what should be simple requests.  Automation that just doesn’t work well. Confusion regarding how technology enables current organizational outcomes.  Duplicative products and services. 

And suddenly, the IT organization is spending more time in maintenance and support, and less time innovating. And what part of the IT budget absorbs that additional cost?  The budget allocated for Innovation. Innovation is sacrificed to cover the (unnecessarily excessive) cost of simply keeping the lights on.

Good service management preserves that innovation budget, by doing the right things well when it comes to maintenance and support. 

What is the simple shift in thinking that enables service management ROI? 

How is it possible to realize ROI with service management, rather than looking at it as cost? 

The answer is simple.

It starts with a shift in thinking.  Rather than viewing service management as a means of control, begin viewing service management as a business enabler.  

While the IT operational aspects of service management are important, it is not why organizations need to practice good service management.  

Good service management enables organizations to achieve business outcomes.  Good service management enables organizations to realize value from its investments in and use of technology.  And one of the key ways to enable this shift in thinking is to talk about service management in terms of ROI.  

Tedder’s Takeaway – Why It Matters

Shifting how the organization views service management is a critical enabler for discussing the ROI of service management.  Moving the conversation from cost to results, then attaching ROI to those results.  Having the ability to discuss ROI with organizational peers not only makes IT more relatable, it also repositions IT as a strategic enabler, with a tangible way to understand the impact of good service management. 

Is it time to shift your thinking about service management?  Are you reporting operational measures instead of business outcomes?  What would be possible for your organization if you could illustrate the ROI of service management? Let Tedder Consulting help!  For more information, contact Tedder Consulting today.

Share twitterlinkedinmail
Digital Transformation, ITSM

You’re Talking About Value Wrong

Leave a comment
Share twitterlinkedinmail

“Value” is one of the most overused and misunderstood terms in business today.

It is often thrown around in meetings and on company websites but while many organizations talk about value, very few get it right.

Why is that? What is the problem with value? For starters, value is a perception. What is valuable to one organization -or one person – may not be as valuable to another. And many organizations don’t define value at an enterprise level. As a result, company initiatives are fractured and less impactful because everyone within the organization is using their own value measuring stick.

The second problem with value is that too many organizations equate value only with cost savings. This is a misconception that can cost organizations a lot of money and time with little to show for it. Fact is that organizations, just like people, are happy to pay for things that they perceive as being valuable – cost is secondary.

If you’re talking about value wrong or worse, not talking about it at all, here are three points that will help you reframe the value conversation.

Value does not equal cost savings.

When thinking about value, it’s easy to just think in terms of dollars and cents. It’s straightforward and unlike value, everyone knows exactly how much dollars and cents are worth.

Now, cost is a factor in value but it should not be the leading factor of value. Because in addition to a price tag, there are intangible costs with any transaction. These intangible costs include things like time to make the purchase, the ease of making a purchase, the time to get set up with a product or service, etc. These intangible costs factor into the value and depending on the end-user, they could mean much more than a specific dollar amount.

When you’re discussing value — whether it’s the value of your product or service, a new technology, or your own IT services, don’t forget the intangibles and factor those into the value.

Outcomes by themselves don’t deliver value.

In an article for SysAid, I explained the difference between outcomes and outputs in reference to ordering a pizza. The outputs are the operational measures, like when you order a pizza and it arrives on time and at the agreed upon price. The outcomes are the results that show the value of that pizza delivery, such as did you get the pizza you ordered, was it hot and fresh, did it taste good and so on.

More IT professionals are beginning to focus on outcomes instead of outputs, which is very important! However, outcomes alone don’t get the job done when it comes to value. Competition is too intense these days and consumers have a lot of options, and high expectations.

So what combines with outcomes to create value? The experience of the transaction.

Part of value is experience.

If you don’t provide or enable a good experience, you’re not offering value. The experience is just as important today. In fact, Salesforce found in a survey that 80% of customers say the experience businesses provide is just as important as its products and services. And Gartner found that 81% of businesses compete primarily on customer experience.

Customer experience is more important than ever and if you want to deliver value through your products and services, you have to offer a seamless and personalized experience for your customers.

The Role of Service Management in Value

By this point, it’s clear that value isn’t just about a price tag. It’s a combination of understanding what’s important to your consumers and consistently delivering those results – along with a great experience. In short, someone finds value when they can say “I got the outcome I needed and expected and I had a good experience while doing it – at the price I was willing to pay.”

The connection between the experience and outcomes lives in your service management foundations. Service management is how you can monitor the experience and ensure you deliver the outcomes that a customer wants so they can recognize the value of your products and services.

Is your service management approach strong enough to deliver value? Have you done these things in the last 12 months?

  • Met with your key stakeholders to review and agree on a shared definition of value
  • Mapped your value streams with all stakeholders, not just IT
  • Audited your workflows to identify and implement improvements
  • Implemented continual improvement strategies

Service management is an ongoing initiative but it can — and will — help to deliver value if it’s done properly with buy-in from the entire team.

If you’ve been struggling with showing how IT delivers value to the bottom line and you want to elevate your IT organization, you need to be sure you’re talking about value correctly. Review your service management approach. Examine the customer experience. You may just find the areas where IT can fill any gaps and deliver the value your customer needs.

Share twitterlinkedinmail
Business Relationship Management

Business-IT Alignment isn’t a 50-50 Deal

Leave a comment
Share twitterlinkedinmail

More and more companies are transforming via digital transformation and discovering new lines of business or radically changing their existing business models through the use of technology.  What does this mean?  It means that IT and the business have no choice but to become aligned if they want to succeed.

It’s no longer just “nice to have” alignment between business and IT. If the IT organization isn’t aligned with the business, the business will go around IT to make their initiatives happen — and that can have catastrophic consequences for everyone. 

It’s one thing to have a meeting with both the business and IT in the room and claim that you’re aligned.  But the realities of what alignment looks like and what it really means for IT and the business is more complex than simply adding IT to meeting agendas. 

What does it mean for the business and IT to be aligned? Who’s responsible for creating that alignment?

From Service Provider to Solution Provider 

According to Tim Winders, Vice-Chancellor of Information Services at Purdue University Northwest, “IT is aligned with the business when IT moves from being a service organization to delivering business solutions.”

The subtle difference between providing business solutions and being a service provider requires a proactive approach. As Tim explains it, “In the reactive model, IT fixes problems but is outside of the decision-making process.”  Being proactive as an IT organization means being “a collaborative business partner delivering solutions that solve specific business problems. IT collaborates with the business to identify business problems to provide proactive solutions, improving products, customer experience, and business reputation.”

The days of IT just implementing the right technology are long gone. IT has to be an engaged part of every business strategy discussion because technology touches every piece of the business.  IT must be engaged from the beginning if that technology is to work to enable value to the business and its end users. 

Mike Gill, CIO at Marian, Inc, explains it this way, “You need to ensure your solution delivery provides value. The value is not if you have the best technology or it runs the most efficiently, the value is if it solves a problem the business has.” 

Of course, it’s easy to say that the IT organization is driving value and is aligned with the business. But what does ‘alignment’ actually look like?  How do you know if you’re aligned? 

What Does Business-IT Alignment Look Like?

If business-IT alignment is connected to driving business value, then you have to start there. Of course, as I’ve pointed out before, the problem with “value” is that it’s a perception. What’s valuable to IT might not be valuable to the business – and vice-versa.  So it’s important that value is identified and agreed by every stakeholder in the organization — customers, partners, suppliers and internal stakeholders. Defining and agreeing on the definition of value as an organization is the first step to getting IT and the business aligned. 

Once value is defined, you can refine your workflows and processes to ensure they are actually delivering business value, including the appropriate measures within those workflows to check for value. For example, Mike shared a way that he can determine if IT is aligned with the business. 

“We have an internally developed ERP system and have the freedom to implement workflows that provide maximum business value – it is a custom system tailored to our company. One sign that we are aligned is looking at transactions in the system,” explained Mike. “Are users doing all the steps in real-time or are they catching up transactions at the end of the day? Looking at the logs you can see if a process that should occur over a longer period (days, not minutes) is mirrored by a similar timeline of transactions in the system. If I see those transactions happening by different people over the course of a day or two then I know the system is aligned to the business (both function and usability). If I see all those transactions happen within minutes of each other then I know they are just catching up work into the system because they must – [which indicates that IT is] not aligned.”

The key here is that Mike made sure the technology fit and supported the workflows of the business, instead of the other way around – a key to business-IT alignment. This enables the technology to be instrumented or monitored to confirm business value – and therefore, better aligned with the organization. 

Additionally, to ensure you’re aligned, look to see if IT is being invited to new projects and initiatives at the kickoff meeting. According to Mike, “It is easy to invite IT leadership to monthly and annual executive status meetings and feel like you are giving them importance or that you are aligning business and IT. That does matter, but it matters more when the regular business projects and initiatives are inviting IT representation in the first steps. It means the business and IT are given the chance to stay aligned from the beginning rather than create the feeling that IT just does what the business says – that never leads to good outcomes.”

IT leaders must regularly check in with other company leaders to ensure that IT is involved with all upcoming initiatives.  If you do that, you’re on your way to business-IT alignment. 

What To Do About Business-IT Alignment?

Once some signs of business-IT alignment begin to appear within an organization, you have to ask yourself one thing: “What am I going to do with this opportunity?”

I believe that IT organizations struggling with business-IT alignment fall into one of two camps. The first group doesn’t know how to achieve business-IT alignment. For that organization, they need to collaborate across the organization to define and agree on value, co-create workflows and solutions to achieve that value, and work together to monitor and continually optimize those solutions.

The other camp consists of organizations that believe that they have business-IT alignment – but they don’t. This is a much larger number of companies than the number of organizations that just can’t figure out alignment.  For these companies, the IT organization is in danger of losing its influence in the company – if it has any influence at all.

Business-IT alignment can often become performative in organizations. It’s easy to have meetings, to gain an agreement on a definition of value, and to create workflows that should enable the realization of value. It’s another thing to ensure that everyone in the organization – both from the business and from IT- is following through and living that definition of value. 

The important thing every IT leader must do is identify what happens after the big discussions, after the kickoff meetings,  and understand what is really going on in the day-to-day running of the organization. Is your team clear on the value it delivers and how it delivers it? Are you enabling your team to work across departments and proactively identify and promote the value you’re delivering? Are you enabling the rest of the organization to have input in how IT is operating and to provide feedback and suggestions for what needs to be done from a business perspective?

Business-IT alignment isn’t a 50-50 split. To achieve and maintain alignment, both IT and the business have to give 100 percent to make alignment work. But before they can both commit 100%, one team has to be the one to step up and put all the effort in first. I believe that team is the IT organization.  IT has to start giving 100% toward business-IT alignment,  even before the business commits to alignment. It’s work to get into alignment and the onus will fall on IT, especially in the beginning – but it’s work that pays off.. 

And remember, business-IT alignment isn’t a one-and-done activity. It’s a continual process that has to be monitored, mapped and measured on a regular basis. 

My challenge to you is to share: how are you staying aligned in your organization? What are your methods for checking and measuring business-IT alignment? Where are the gaps in business-IT alignment that you need to fill?

Share twitterlinkedinmail
ITSM

How to Master the Art of IT Partnerships

Leave a comment
Share twitterlinkedinmail

As businesses continue to become more reliant on technology, more and more organizations have formed partnership ecosystems. Bringing in and working with multiple partners is a smart way to deliver better experiences with optimized costs and capabilities. 

While there are many pros to working with partners — there are some drawbacks as well. Operations become increasingly complex as a partnership ecosystem grows. Regardless, end users will still expect a seamless experience, and the more partners you work with, the harder it could become to maintain that smooth experience. 

This article will address how CIOs can effectively manage those IT partnerships and set up their organizations for success in a partnership ecosystem.   

Partners vs. Suppliers and Vendors

You’ll notice that I refer to “partners” and not “suppliers” or “vendors”. That’s intentional verbiage. In order to succeed in this new paradigm, CIOs need to evolve from working with vendors and suppliers in a strictly transactional sense. Strategic partners are vendors that have go above and beyond effective delivery of systems and services – they commit to helping the CIO achieve the organizational goals of the company. 

The difference between “partner” and “supplier” has become increasingly noticeable due to COVID-19. Many CIOs saw partners be more proactive in their relationships by reaching out to see how they could better assist organizations during the pandemic. 

The best partners recognize that a business relationship is about more than making a sale. It’s about building a relationship where they understand the customer’s business models and the inner workings of the company. They don’t just execute on the customer’s demands, they work with the customer to find mutually beneficial solutions. 

When Badly Managed Partnerships Happen to Good Organizations

Why should you care about managing your partnerships? When does a vendor need to be a partner? 

Silo mentality has been a frequent roadblock within many organizations –  and IT is no stranger to them. Internal silos can wreak havoc on workflows and efficiencies. When IT isn’t looped into the full scope of projects and how the rest of the organization is driving value, they are often left to catch up — and end-users always suffer. And that’s just with internal silos! 

Compound that with the fact that more organizations are reducing staffing yet increasing demand for technology. This means more outsourcing and external support.  But without a shared and agreed approach to delivering that support, IT organizations could easily find themselves in a chaotic situation.  

Finding the Right Partners

Of course, there are many vendors simply parading as partners –  so how do you know what to look for in a partner? The most important thing is not to rush into a relationship or make a decision based solely on price. Yes, it can be time-consuming to get referrals and do your due diligence when evaluating potential partners. Start off with your trusted circle of IT leaders. Other leaders are often the best source of knowledge of who is a great partner and who simply delivers a product. 

Once you have your shortlist of partners from your own research and recommendations from peers, it’s time to start establishing connections. Remember that the right partner doesn’t start the conversation about themselves or their product – they will want to first talk about your goals and objectives.

Perhaps more importantly though, you have to view a potential partnership for what it is — a partnership, not a vendor-client relationship. It’s important to not view the potential partner as just a fulfiller of work. During those initial discussions, you have the responsibility of clearly defining expectations, challenges, organizational dynamics, and the goals of your organization. Don’t limit your conversations to specifically IT or the initiatives for a particular tool or product. IT is crucial to the success of any business so any IT partner needs to have a clear picture of that business. 

This will give the partner the opportunity to create a better strategy for delivering the right products and services for helping you achieve your goals. 

How to Better Manage Your Partners 

The best partnerships happen because they’re built on trust, respect, and mutual understanding. So there is a level of “people-work” that has to go into any of these relationships. But there are some ways you can better structure your organization so your partnerships will be more successful. 

  • Keep the lines of communication open. 

 

Far too often, supplier check-ins are just quick reviews of operational metrics or updates on the tasks completed during a timeframe. These types of communications aren’t sufficient in a partner relationship – in fact, this is a disadvantage to you and your partners! You want your team to be actively communicating with your partners about what’s happening in your organization so they can continue to get a clear vision of the overall picture of your organization.

 

  • Establish transparent workflows for all your partners.

 

This might be difficult because your partners likely have their own workflows. But working with them to establish a shared process that all partners follow makes for a smoother experience for your entire organization. Again, this might be a difficult ask and could take some time to develop, but the right partners will be willing to engage in defining workflows that work for your organization.

 

  • Get your internal teams and stakeholders to see partners as part of the team

 

Silo mentality doesn’t work — even when those silos are made up of full-time employees and contractors. Your internal departments and teams should feel empowered to be a part of the partner-IT relationship. You want everyone in your organization to know and trust your partners. This might mean bringing other departments to meetings with external partners or looping your external partners into existing initiatives with other departments.  

Introducing Service Integration and Management 

If you are looking for a better way to integrate your partnerships, Service Integration and Management (SIAM) might be the best option for you. SIAM is a management methodology that is growing in popularity. SIAM will provide an organization with governance, coordination, assurance, and integration for working with outside partners by introducing a “service integrator” role. If you’re working with multiple vendors, suppliers, and partners, SIAM can enhance the experience for everyone within your organization and for suppliers and partners working with your organization.  

If you’re curious about introducing SIAM or improving your partner relationships, I’d love to discuss how to prepare your organization to thrive in a multi-partner ecosystem.

Share twitterlinkedinmail
ITSM

Don’t Believe These 6 Service Management Myths

Leave a comment
Share twitterlinkedinmail

I have said before that service management has gotten a bad reputation. But that bad reputation is somewhat deserved because the service management of the past failed a lot of companies. I’ve heard from many IT professionals that they have tried service management and it just didn’t work or worse, they have current service management initiatives but they’re not sure if it’s working.

Service management has evolved over the years and many of the beliefs out there are just plain wrong. What if I told you that service management is a secret weapon that can solve many of the challenges facing a modern organization – if only more professionals understood the true power of service management?

It’s time to bust some service management myths.

Service management means fitting into a strict framework

This idea of adhering to an inflexible, strict framework is one of the biggest service management misconceptions. Many people view service management as being overly restrictive and that in order for it to work, you have to fit your organization and workstreams into exact, inflexible parameters. This couldn’t be further from the truth. Good service management is first understanding how the organization wants to derive value and outcomes from its use of technology, then applying the right methodologies to enable the realization of that value and outcomes.

This means that you should first identify your organization’s specific challenges and goals, then adopt and adapt approaches that best leverage people, capabilities, and technology in such a way that will address those challenges. You can drop in different aspects of service management best practices without forcing your team to adopt every single best practice. Good service management is customized to meet the needs of the organization, not the other way around.

Implementing service management requires a new tool

Another common myth of service management is that it’s all about the tool. Often, when I ask a prospect about their service management environment, they’ll start talking about the tools they are using, and not the business challenge they’re trying to address. This tool-first mentality around service management is problematic – it means many organizations go straight to investing in a tool before understanding what they are trying to achieve with service management. And because tools are never “magic bullets”, implementations of tools without understanding the why behind adoption of service management rarely delivers the outcomes that the organization needs.

Good service management isn’t an out-of-the-box solution. You can’t just fire up a new tool and expect everything to magically start working correctly. Instead, you need to start with the groundwork of mapping where you are currently. Map value streams, get clear on who is responsible for what and identify where you’re experiencing gaps in service. You need to get a clear picture of how your organization is currently delivering services before you can even start to think about a tool.

If you skip this step and go straight to investing in a tool, you’ll end up with an expensive tool that still doesn’t solve your problems. Or you’ll have a tool that is fully featured but your team can’t even use half of the features.

The bottom line is, if you want to properly implement service management, don’t start the conversation by discussing tools.

SM is only for large enterprises

To some, service management is a bureaucratic mess of processes that is only necessary in a company of thousands of people. But small and mid-sized companies need service management just as much as the bigger guys.

Good service management means:

  • Reliable, consistent, and relatable services
  • A measurable contribution to business value
  • Efficient, data-driven, defined, and documented processes

If you’ll notice, there’s nothing that says that good service management requires a big team. Service management is simply about delivering great service as efficiently and effectively as possible. This is so important in small and mid-sized companies! You’re getting just as much accomplished with smaller teams so everyone needs to work smart and find the workflows that will keep the team operating as efficiently as possible!

There’s no “minimum employee count” for organizations wanting to implement service management. It can make a positive difference in any size organization.

Service management is just about the Service Desk

Many people think service management is just something that the service desk does. Sure, the service desk is important and it will benefit from service management initiatives. But the goal of the service desk is to deliver a smooth experience for users. It doesn’t represent a holistic view of how value and services flow through the organization. And the service desk by itself cannot deliver good service management; rather, it relies on being integrated with all other parts of the organization to deliver good service management.

Service management is about providing and managing the right combination of people, processes and technology to enable a business to meet its objectives and deliver measurable value. The service desk is part of this but it’s just one piece of the overall puzzle. True service management extends far beyond the service desk.

Service management is just ITIL

I’ve noticed many people use “service management” and ITIL®1 interchangeably which contributes to much of the confusion around service management.

Service management is about the holistic view of a business and its IT capabilities. It can act like an operating model for the business of IT. It’s an overarching view of how IT operates within the context of the business and how IT helps the overall business achieve its goals.

On the other hand, ITIL is a collection of guidance and advice for implementing service management practices. Using a sports analogy, service management is the playbook for the season while ITIL may be a specific play executed on gameday.

Service management is only about IT

Finally, we have one of the most pervasive myths about service management: that it’s only about IT. Of course, for a long time it was known as “IT Service Management”, so it’s no wonder that this is a belief.

For service management to be truly effective, it must reflect and support entire organizational value streams, not just the IT portions. Technology is no longer department-specific. Technology connects entire value streams in nearly all organizations. If you don’t have enterprise-wide workflows that support value all the way to the customer, you likely have a bunch of disjointed pieces that result in a poor customer experience.

This idea of service management being used across the business is more commonly referred to as “Enterprise Service Management” and it’s becoming more prevalent. Limiting service management practices and views to only IT is severely limiting the organization’s ability to grow, scale, and meet the ever-evolving expectations of their customers.

Service Management: A Secret Weapon

Service management is often viewed as being old-school, restrictive, and too basic. However, if you look at service management with fresh eyes and recognize the difference between quality service management versus the myths of service management, you may end up seeing that it is the solution you’ve been trying to find all along.

Interested in learning how service management can improve your organization? Has your organization fallen victim to one or more of these service management myths? Let’s talk – book a free 30-minute consultation here.

*ITIL is a registered trademark of AXELOS Limited.
Share twitterlinkedinmail