The way companies implement IT Service Management (ITSM) is quite intriguing. I’ve come across a couple of different approaches. Those focused on “doing” ITSM, those on “governing” and the ones that take a “hybrid” approach.
As long as you use the frameworks and methods to manage technology effectively there isn’t a right or wrong way.
Now, I don’t want to downplay the importance of “governing” ITSM. Following industry standards and frameworks is an absolute must. Just look at any regulatory framework in this day and age. Fundamentally, ITSM is designed to address and support two main areas of technology: strategic and operational.
The following models cover these, but in very different ways. Ultimately, lest we forget that the goal is to deliver value to the business or its customers through technology.
The “Do” Model
When most think of ITSM, they almost immediately think of operational processes like incident, problem, change, and knowledge management. That’s where the rubber meets the road.
Often overlooked or least invested in, are the strategic processes. Practices like IT Asset Management, Configuration Management, Service portfolio management, service catalog, service level management, and so on. These aren’t directly operational in the day-to-day trenches of reacting or proactively avoiding disruptions. However, they do provide enhanced support and capabilities to the operational processes.
Designing ITSM processes aligned with industry practices, policies controls and standards is crucial. In this model, each area is responsible for aligning to industry standards and frameworks. From both implementing and designing their processes, and then executing on them.
This has always been a method I’ve grown up in. Building knowledge and skills within those areas that cover both understanding of operations and governance. They effectively become experts in their domains, strategically and operationally.
If you have the opportunity to establish this model, you also enable individuals to rotate among process areas. Expanding their skills across multiple processes. Which comes with additional benefits in career development.
Now, let’s talk about the “Govern” Model
This is more of what could be described as a distributed model. There is an “ITSM Center of Excellence,” but it doesn’t directly manage the ITSM processes within the SMO. Instead, the processes are distributed and embedded into the Technology functions to run themselves.
For instance, let’s say we have an Incident Management Process. It’s designed and implemented by the central Governance body or SMO. Then it’s passed on to the Infrastructure teams, who manage their own Incidents or Major Incidents following the established process.
At the heart of it all is the Governance function. They’re the ones who keep an eye on and measure how well the processes are operating in production. Their focus is more on the elements of Governance, Risk, and Compliance over the technology teams.
This method requires a lot of internal interaction with technology stakeholders to understand how to put these processes into action. This means you need a strong Organizational Change Management (OCM) skillset. Necessary to roll out the processes or Continuous Improvement Initiatives into the operational teams.
Then there’s the Hybrid Approach.
I’ve managed a Service Management Office (SMO) that blended both approaches. We kept the ITSM Platform, ITSM Process Governance, and the Strategic process. The Application Portfolio, Service Portfolio, Service Catalog, Asset, and Configuration Management remained in the SMO. These all fit into the core practices that supported operations.
The operational ITSM Processes for Incident, Problem, and Change were run outside the SMO. They were run within the operations organization, but were governed by the SMO. Metrics, service performance reviews and Asset/Config attestations tested the operational effectiveness of the processes. The SMO worked with the operational teams to identify continual improvement opportunities.
Again, there’s no right or wrong way to do this. It depends on your organization and how leadership sets up their operating model. It also depends on how mature your ITSM program is. Smaller organizations might go with the “Do” Model. Larger, more complex environments might choose the “Governance” or “Hybrid” models.
If you’re thinking of making a career of ITSM, any of these are ways to grow your skills and knowledge. It’s pretty much how I built my career. Although, my go-to’s are the “Do” and “Hybrid” models. Sometimes getting your hands a little dirty is the best way to understand what the method behind the madness.
Leave a Reply