1
2
3
4
5
6
7
LOB – Line of Business
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
CSF – Critical Success Factor, KPI – Key Performance Indicator
SLA – Service Level Agreemnt, OLA – Operation Level Agreement
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
2
27
28
29
30
The SIAM framework covers the 6 major dimensions of Service Integration and
Management. It sets out different levels of maturity for the service integration
function and the corresponding capabilities required. It provides a structure to
understand capabilities needed and to plan their development, implementation and
continuous improvement.
1. Process: The set of common processes that define the interactions
among the Client Agents in the ecosystem.
In any Multi-Sourcing Ecosystem, the need for clearly defined interfaces is critically
important.
Two key aspects to consider are:
The interfaces between different processes
Process interfaces are the items of information which relate different
processes;
Typically they are defined as inputs, outputs or controls within each
individual process definition document; and
It is also of high value to illustrate such interfaces in an overall
“process context diagram”.
Organizational interfaces:
Organizational interfaces indicate who is responsible for doing what;
31
and
Typically they are defined as process-specific roles, each with a list of
associated responsibilities.
2. Tooling: The tools, which support the execution of the operating
model.
The SIAM Tools Domain has three major components:
A SIAM ITSM toolset;
An Integration Layer to enable integration to the ITSM Toolsets of the
different Client Agents; and
A SIAM Reporting Engine and Dashboard.
3. Organization: The structures, enablers and behaviors that are put in
place so that each Client Agent knows its contribution and is properly equipped to
deliver it.
A key enabler for the alignment of the SIAM and the Client Agents is the Operational
Level Agreement, which is described in more detail later.
4. Governance: The definition of the decision-making and control
structure in the ecosystem.
The governance model is based on the agreed principles of vested sourcing:
Customer will retain overall control and gain relationship, technology innovation and
cost advantages through Customer’s and Supplier’s joint organizational and
governance approach.
The proper governance model includes:
A clearly articulated decision framework on how and by whom
decisions will be made and clear responsibility for executing against decisions; and
A shared vision for the type of relationship the parties aspire to have
and how they will manage the relationship.
Next to this governance model which will be implemented between Supplier and
Customer we will also respect the existing outsourcing governance commitments,
which are in place for the external business contracts. We will review these
commitments and optimize where possible, without jeopardizing the existing
relationships.
5. Information: The collection of data with regard to measuring service
quality and process performance that is needed to control and report on the
performance of the ecosystem.
6. Business: Positioning Service Integration as a ‘business within a
business’ aligns business demand with the service catalog and capacity.
This capability defines the way the service delivery is structured. In what way
demand for service is captured and how the scope of service delivery is divided
between Customer’s retained groups, SIAM and the Client Agents.
31
32
33
34
Let’s be clear: ITIL is important. Around two million people have been trained in it,
and as the closest thing to an industry standard for IT management that currently
exists, it has global reach. Lots of people read the ITIL volumes as guidance to their
IT organizations. Throughout all its versions, ITIL has been framed as a complete
approach to managing the IT function, with the specific exceptions of project
methodology and systems architecture. Plus, it’s worth noting that ITIL also informs
the product directions of vendors selling IT management tools; in fact, they often
market their IT service management tools as “supporting” the ITIL processes.
35
36
37
- ITSM is still seen by many as purely ITIL-focused or relevant only to internal IT
operations.
- ITSM needs to grow up. In the past this has been too narrowly focussed on internal
IT functions, projects and costs.
- ITIL has been the ‘de facto’ training and development approach for the last 10 to 15
years, yet those involved in delivering it know that ITIL is not enough – success
requires much more than knowledge of a process framework. In reality ITIL currently
offers little in terms of practical guidance around successful ‘implementation’. IT and
ITSM also need to be viewed and appreciated more in a business broker role, more
able to react quickly and be a solution provider rather than a ‘blocker’ - or the guys
who always say ‘no’. Without a significant change in speed of delivery, quality and
perception of service and demonstrable value, many IT internal departments and
external IT companies will become more and more exposed as obsolete and,
ultimately, redundant. The ITSM industry itself also needs a make-over, with fresh
and accessible content, some new and contemporary framing and messaging, in
order to remain attractive and relevant.
- There is a large gap in the body of knowledge around ITSM – ITIL is primarily
focussed on process, whereas successful ITSM requires a much wider portfolio of
skills and capabilities. ITIL does not define organisational change, human interaction
or customer experience, all essential for success. Many organisations have expected
38
ITIL to deliver results way beyond its capability or remit, seeing ITIL itself as the
solution and ignoring these other factors. The result has been a lot of failed or
incomplete ‘ITIL projects’ – these have burned cash and resources with few positive
results, leaving the brand names associated with ITIL and ITSM damaged. Without a
central body to manage these issues, each area of the industry has continued
unilaterally to deliver point solutions with limited success and restricted commercial
penetration. ITSM is therefore not a properly codified discipline. In its current form it
will not be sustainable, and the industry needs a new and wider definition, vision
and structure. This should include, for example, a broader definition and portfolio of
skills and capabilities, body of knowledge, and organisational standards, plus clear
career development paths, higher education qualifications and a code of conduct.
ITSM needs to be clearly positioned and presented as a business approach both
within and beyond IT organisations. This is a growth area as many organisations are
now using ITSM processes and tools to deliver wider collaboration and work
management functions. C-level value propositions must be universally promoted
around ITSM as an enabler, broker, orchestrator, rather than administrator. All
stakeholders need to engage and play their part in the delivery of Service
Management - it’s a team game. We need to move away from thinking that ITSM is
‘just what the Service Desk do.’ In other words, in order to survive, the IT and ITSM
industry has to move to the next level of maturity - we collectively need to grow up.
38
39