Posts Tagged ‘Service Manager’

Again, Why is Westbury unique?

September 9th, 2009

I can’t help myself for writing a more marketing/salesy kind of blog today. The reason is that I’m constantly looking for that golden egg that explains the uniqueness of Westbury SMI Suite. One of the answers is: Westbury SMI Suite solved all the data warehouse issues for HP Service Manager/Center of maintaining the environment.

Let me give you an example.

One of our customers has developed a complete data warehouse solution specifically for HP Service Management. With this solution they solved all the nasty database / data model issues of Service Manager and even made the data warehouse relational. However, they are still interested in Westbury’s SMI suite.

Why?

Because maintaining this ever changing data warehouse environment is extremely expensive for them. Individual experts like database engineers (to modify the database), BI developers (to modify the Universes or Cubes) and ETL specialists to modify and develop the ETL layer are all required for making Service Manager fields/objects available for reporting.

With Westbury SMI foundation, reports are created from data stored in the dedicated SMI Database, whose structure is fixed. This enables Westbury to offer a standardized reporting environment, regardless of the (changing) structure of the back-end HP ServiceCenter software / HP Service Manager software database. SMI Foundation has been created in such a way that administrators can maintain the solution through a GUI, hence there is no need for any programming.

Again, I apologize for being so salesy in this blog, but it is so important for me to make sure that people understand the uniqueness of our solution. If Service Center and Service Manager customer really grasp our architecture, they will see that there is no solution like it available in the market.

Floris

Post to Twitter

Luck or wisdom?

August 20th, 2009

luckImplementing a service management solution within a customer environment is an easy task.  Install the software, tell the customer to use it according to ITIL, import some employees, CI’s and Services and Bob’s your uncle. Nothing to it.

Alright, alright; it’s slightly more complex than that. You’ll have to try and gain insight into the processes that are in place, you’ll have to discuss the requirements and wishes of the customer and flawlessly translate them to the set up of the tool, you’ll have to train the user community and you’ll have to communicate with all of the stakeholders in the organization throughout the implementation process.

So, assuming you went through all these steps and made no major mistakes along the way; is success guaranteed? Unfortunately, no. Some of these projects will end in partial success at best and will live uneventful lives.

What then is the key to success? Tough question. It’s really a combination of knowledge, experience, patience, determination and, for a part at least, sheer luck. Let me focus on the latter, because the first four are obvious. To what extent does luck play a role?

Luck, or positive circumstances beyond our control, can make the difference between a project ending in success and a project just ending. Let me illustrate this with an example from a recent implementation I did at one of the biggest insurance companies in The Netherlands.

Due to circumstances, I was lucky enough to be involved in an implementation project for the Insurer for the fourth time in 13 years (or so). The previous three projects had all ended with a mild success; nothing fancy, just okay. This last project was somewhat different than the previous three, because this time it wasn’t a merger or an upgrade but a whole new implementation of Service Desk 4.5, SSP, Report Manager, Change Calendar and Service Desk Monitor. Why? Because 4 years ago the Insurer outsourced their IT department and switched over to ServiceCenter.

Roulette-Wheel_HRNow, the outsourcing contract had been terminated and a renewed Service Desk implementation was required. Enter Westbury. The luck factor starts here. Literally no-one within the Insurer had been satisfied with ServiceCenter and its functionality (due to the outsourcer’s implementation mainly, not due to the tool itself). The way this works psychologically is that you start to remember the good old days, when streets were paved with gold and the sky was all pink and fluffy. Their good old days were the Service Desk days. And now it was back. Praise Jesus.

This feeling, shared by most in the project group(s), meant that there was an enormous sense of positivity with everyone and a real drive to make the project a success. This really started off a chain reaction. Because everyone was positive, they were very flexible in accepting the limitations of the project and the tools, and because they were flexible we were able to move forward within the projected time frame and within the projected budget. This in turn lead to more positivity.

Added to that was a project manager who played a very active role in the project and really fought like a lion to get everyone on the same page and protect the scope of the project. Also lucky because you can never choose your project manager.

The result of all this: A project that ended on time within budget and with a happy customer.  And with an additional project and the purchase of 50 additional Service Desk users. And with this blog entry.

Is there a way to influence this luck factor? Yes, maybe. By making sure the customer is aware of this factor and by driving home the notion that enthusiasm for the tool implementation as well as a very active and dedicated Project Manager are just as important as the other factors that determine the outcome of a project. Still, the luck factor cannot be overlooked. Hopefully you are lucky enough to find it on your path.

Jack

Post to Twitter

The “red-headed step child” of a HP Service Manager implementation

July 2nd, 2009

Chances are that if your company is using HP Service Desk or HP ServiceCenter, that you are contemplating a move to HP Service Manager. Such an undertaking will undoubtedly be coupled with a review of existing IT Service Management processes and the way in which HP Service Manager will support these processes. Having learned from experience, most companies recognize that there is no need to reinvent the wheel and are therefore minimizing customization and sticking to the out of the box configuration as much as possible.  However, and this is a surprising industry trend, most companies are still paying little to no attention to the reporting requirements from HP Service Manager. Without a proper reporting solution and strategy in place, your HP Service Manager implementation cannot succeed as you will have no way to properly measure and communicate IT’s performance.

Common themes that accompany the (planning of the) implementation of HP Service Manager include the sensible improvement goals around:

  • Business and IT alignment
  • Quality of IT services
  • Transparency of IT services to IT customers

Given the above themes it is therefore surprising to see that getting the right information out of your HP Service Manager implementation is often an afterthought. Or as one seasoned ITSM consultant put it, ITSM reporting is often dealt with as the ‘red-headed step child’ of any ITSM implementation. “We’ll deal with that when we get to it” however by the time you ‘get to it’ you’ve got your hands too full to properly address the issue.

At Westbury we are constantly running into customer scenarios where all the focus is aimed at getting HP Service Manager up and running and yet reporting often seems to be an afterthought. Interestingly enough, that same ‘red headed step child’ suddenly becomes of utmost importance the moment HP Service Manager’s live date approaches . The reasons are obvious:

  • At a minimum IT wants to provide at least the same reports as existed before the move to Service Manager
  • Additionally IT managers & supervisors need insight to better oversee, drive and improve the performance of the various support teams and services they provide
  • Going forward the IT department would like to prove its value by objectively demonstrating improvement in the delivery of IT services
  • Customers  of IT will demand insight into the delivery of IT services and will require increasingly more in-depth reporting from IT

We in roles of ITSM are being asked to do more with less and to improve the delivery of IT services to our customers. This means we have to be smarter as to how we go about this. Let’s all agree that it is not about what we put into the ITSM processes and tools, rather it is about what we can get out of it.

Be smart, look at the overall picture.

David

Post to Twitter