University of Bristol Service Management Project

1. University of Bristol Service Management Project Ann Field 10 July 2008

2. Contents • Background • Objectives • Situation Assessment • Recommendations • Workshop • Appendices

3. Background • The University of Bristol’s IT Services Department has been running a ‘low key’ ITIL project since 2006 • Service Quality is high, with a clear, informative and easily navigable Computer Services webpage on the University’s Home Page. • This includes a Service Catalogue is available to all end users and is helpful at the point of delivery • Many IT services depend on bespoke applications, although it is unlikely that this situation will be perpetuated • The concept of Charging for IT Services is only in its infancy, and is probably counter to the general culture within Information Services • There is motivation within ISYS to harmonise Service Delivery activities and thereby improve the quality of service • Outside of ISYS, Service Support teams and personnel exist in ‘pockets’, particularly where Faculties and Departments have their ‘own’ staff who are dedicated to local needs • There is a Helpdesk toolset in use, but it is not well-regarded • a variety of additional tools (either freeware or in-house developed) are used within teams to manage and control their workload and the aspects of infrastructure for which they are responsible. • ISYS staff are enthusiastic about benefits that the introduction of some aspects of ITIL could bring, in particular: • Improved resolution of incidents/requests/queries by implementing an accepted ‘Incident Management’ process to support the Helpdesk • Introduction of Change Management to ensure that IT Changes undergo proper impact assessment ahead of approval, and that a Forward Schedule of Change becomes visible to all teams, including the Helpdesk who do not always have visibility of new or changed services • Formalising Configuration Management, and integrating it into other decision-making processes, such as Incident, Change and Release Mgt.

4. Objectives • This two-day consultancy exercise will drive out a Service Management routemap which ISYS can use in support of their business case to invest in an effective implementation of a (new or revitalised) IT Service Management toolset with supporting ‘best practice’ processes

5. As-is situation – background • The University of Bristol is becoming a 24*7 organisation – summer courses and seminars filling up the traditional ‘vacation’ time when there was previously some capability to undertake maintenance projects • IT is responding to this – systems and services are becoming more resiliant, and an out of hours help desk service is bought from the University of Northumbria. • ITIL is becoming recognised as a framework whereby a more cohesive IT service can be provided, and, in at least some peoples’ view, the IT teams are becoming receptive to the need for a query tracking system across all of IT, enabling a consistent view and predictable response once a query or issue is raised. • ISYS does not have formal Service Level Agreements with their user departments, but has created Service Level Statements and a Service Level Catalogue which could be used to build an agreed view of the priority of services to the University community.

6. ‘As-is’ situation assessment – HelpDesk, Incident Mgt, SLM • Helpdesk Toolset – not well-configured and ‘Resolving groups’ typically disregard the notifications they receive via this method. Helpdesk is set up as ‘log and refer’ and only chase resolving teams if the user contacts the desk again to enquire about progress with their issue. • There is a view that the only way forward is to start again by purchasing a new Toolset rather than re-configuring and re-launching • There are no formal SLAs • This does not mean a poor or unresponsive service, as individuals appear to have a high degree of commitment • It is accepted that the requirement to formalise service levels may develop in the future • IT Service is very people dependent – high quality service, depends on peoples’ very evident high levels of motivation and commitment. This dependency on personal contacts is harder to maintain as the department grows, underlining the need for more effective process. • Many single points of failure • No acceptance within the broader university that there should be one IT Service Desk – there are at least 3: • ISYS • Arts Faculty • Estates IT (which has a different IT portfolio) • It appears that the current toolset implementation did not include the formal introduction of ‘Incident Management’ i.e. the acceptance amongst the IT support teams that they will receive parcels of work via this method, and that they have a responsibility to investigate, if possible to resolve and document, and to then inform either the Help Desk & / or the end user of the outcome.

7. As-is situation – Configuration, Change & Knowledge Management • Configuration and Change Management processes exist as islands within teams, and data are not centrally recorded or accessible using the Helpdesk ITSM tool. • Configuration data items are collected at a fairly detailed level, defined to support the workload of each team and no consolidated or integrated system exists • The teams develop/customise their toolsets in order to effectively manage and control their area of IT. • NB – this is a fairly typical situation! • ISYS interested to learn how Configuration Management methodology/tools are developing in response to Virtualisation. • Change Management • An in-house workflow system is used within the Application Development teams; does require approvals and keeps an audit of people assigned • No linkage into any related Incident record • The Application team can do Impact Analysis using their Configuration Mgt tool. • Knowledge Management • Acknowledged as lacking in the current toolset is a key requirement for the Help Desk tool replacement project, underpinning a drive to providing a more effective Help Desk, and enabling Problem Mgt.

8. Situation Assessment – Service Support Process maturity Assessment based on Office of Government & Commerce – ITIL assessment • Although this may appear to present a picture of a very ‘reactive’ service, the lack of consistent ‘end-to-end’ process is currently counterbalanced by the working ethos of the team managers. • Once management buy-in is gained to an investment in a set of Service management processes (including training & commitment across all resolving groups), process capability should rapidly develop

9. TO Clients Outward Looking Process Focus Rationalised Processes Proactive Service Manager Measured, Accountable Processes Integrated End-to-End Listening skills FROM Users Inward Looking Technology Focus Ad-hoc Processes Reactive Operations Manager Best Efforts Fragmented silos System Skills Situation Assessment Summary • There is no defined process model underpinning the University’s IT Service provision • Any investment in new tools or processes will not return any value to the organisation without a supporting cultural change programme which enables all IT staff to recognise the efficiencies that cross-team working can bring, if enabled by appropriate tools and supporting process

10. Recommendations – to develop during workshop on Tues 15th and updated here to reflect that discussion • Use the existing Business Case drivers to gather support for an Improvement project with the following priorities: • Acceptance that Service Management introduces an effective Governance model that supports good quality IT service delivery NEW – not in the current draft of the business case • Including the introduction of a ‘Service Level Management’ concept and culture, to aid prioritisation • Formalises some aspects of the existing management structures, and invests them in the responsibility for driving service strategy and policy changes • Introduce Change Management – a process has been defined, although not implemented • Introduction of an effective Incident Management process to support the HelpDesk in tandem with revised Call Handling function – a decision is needed (governance) regarding the management policy change this implies • Introduce Service Level Management • Revamp or replace the HelpDesk tool – Requirements capture is mostly complete • Project to define & prioritise requirements for the tool, including: • Incident Mgt • Problem Mgt • Change Mgt • Configuration Mgt • Reporting (supports SLM) • Tool selection & implementation • Agree on the level of integration and definition that is required for Configuration Management at a University Level – agreed that it is important to define this scope and then to progress the project in stages. • Define Configuration Management objectives and phases • Business Case for Phase 1

11. Business Case drivers (1)This project directly addresses Aim 8 of the IT Strategy: “Service: to provide excellent, responsive and resilient IT services for all members of the University” In particular, by providing capability to ensure that: • Services are reliable and effective • Changes and developments of services must be well managed and communicated and achieve objectives. • Although IT services are currently delivered in a devolved way (through IT staff in departments and faculties as well as through Information Services), this should be transparent to those who need the services

12. Business Case drivers (2) :In particular, the following IT Strategy objectives are addressed • 8.1 Develop Service Level Statements for IT Services, starting from initiatives currently going on in Information Services, but to extend this to cover all IT services. • In identifying IT Services, “core” services must be clearly defined, as should additional (possibly chargeable) services. The relationship to local (eg departmental) IT must also be clear. • 8.2 Implement ITIL (IT Infrastructure Library) best practice service management processes, building on the ITIL project which is already underway in Information Services but to extend this across the whole University. • 8.3 As part of Service Level Statements, there should be a well defined set of standards, which is maintained and kept up to date with organisational needs and with technological developments. • 8.4 Provide IT infrastructure which is well designed and managed and fit for purpose. • Critical IT Infrastructure should be robust and resilient and risks of systems failure must be assessed, with appropriate (tried and tested) Disaster Recovery/Business Continuity plans in place and kept up to date. • 8.5 Service performance will be monitored as general good practice and to enable early detection and resolution of problems.

13. Other drivers to consider that may amplify or extend the business case • IT Service Continuity – University expectations versus ISYS confidence & preparedness • 2nd data centre project • Timescale and options • Dependency on the ITIL initiative? • Risk Management of the setup and replication • ITIL3 • Consolidates IT Security as a key function within IT Service Management • ‘Access Management’ appears as a process in its own right (really a specialised Incident or Request) • Implementing Carbon Management policies

14. Workshop • Review this document • Issues and Blockers brainstorm • Local versus cross-university priorities • Build t-Map of desired ITIL project deliverables • Proposed T-Map themes • Key dependencies • Communication, buy-in and education • Toolset requirements, selection, implementation • Improving the HelpDesk service – Call Handling, formalising Incident Mgt • Introducing Change Management • Developing Configuration Management • Other process initiatives identified • Prioritisation of initiatives

15. This is an example T-Map – not based on University of Bristol 23rd May 9th June 23rd June September December Customer responsibilities e.g. authorisation New System Introduction Solution Roadmap Temporary Fujitsu hosting at TOLTEC Torex Hosting at TOLTEC User Satisfaction Survey ‘To Be’ Key Dependencies Serving customers to add value ‘Stable Measurable Service’ Service Desk Go-Live Service Desk go-live comms. Business Continuity Planning De-branding of WHSmith News PC Services Service Desk. Familiarisation of WHS business Single Version of the Truth Get the basics right DR Recovery Tests Agree CSFs Communications Plan Major Incident Management Helpdesk – helpdesk implementation Manage User Expectations of Service Communications & Training Proactive management sustaining availability Quarterly Governance Meeting Desk Only Capacity Monitoring Commences Re-align roles with new service model Branding Quarterly Governance Meeting Visible burst of new energy Availability Monitoring Commences Re-training & on-boarding No Surprises On Service Accommodation and access for Capgemini Training for Change Users Documentation Cutover to New Tools Manage Expectations of all stakeholders Software Licence Management CSIP Reporting Business Improvements Enabled by New Service and Technology Change Management Invoicing Cutover to live ITSM for Incident Management Procurement Process Improvement ITSM Awareness Session (Lee Elliott) Web, Phone & email Anti-Virus Prevention & Reporting Risk & Issues Management New Starter Process Publish Service Catalogue & significance Access Control of User Authorities People Implement Operational Improvements Kbase Web Access Monthly Service Reporting Commences NET Desk Replacement KBase Data Transfer Reactive Problem Management E2E Testing of New Tools No Surprises on Invoice ITSM for Inventory Weekly Operational Meetings Commence Infrastructure Test Revised service aligned to current business needs Asset Discovery Daily ‘prayers’ and Change Meeting Service Desk Processes Accessible via Sharepoint Request for Service Process Improvement Identify Operational Constraints Publish Security Policy Inventory Management Process OTACE Users’ Interface to Service Cutover ITSM for Incidents SLA Baseline Impact Assessment on Current Desktops Baseline Current Delivery Implement Service Controls Write Governance Plan & SQP Tools & Infrastructure Client data capture for ITSM Clarify What’s in / out of Scope Contractual Obligations & Changes Define SLAs Service Level Management Process Define BAU versus Project OTACE for Transition Supplier Management Data Governance Projects Architecture Service Support ‘As Is’

16. Appendices & attachments • Estimated effort to develop and implement: (I will bring these Tuesday) • Call Handling and Incident Management • Change Management • Process development targets • Interviewees Attachments • The ‘One-team’ ITIL awareness team game • Forrester White Paper - The “Just Enough” CMDB

17. 6 months 12 Months Level 1 Prerequisites Level 1.5 Management Intent Level 2 Process Capability Level 2.5 Internal Integration Level 3 Products Level 3.5 Quality Control Level 4 Management Information Level 4.5 External Integration Level 5 Customer Interface Service Support processes:Straw man targets & timescales for consideration

18. Interviewees – 8 July 2008 • John Richards • Lucy Shepherd-Hucker • Henryk Glogowski • Bob Walker • Paul Buttner • Luke Taylor