Agreement on Service Catalogue definition

Forum to discuss ITIL issues and disciplines covering Service Delivery.
Post Reply
User avatar
rrudeanu
Newbie
Newbie
Posts: 2
Joined: Mon Oct 11, 2010 8:00 pm

Agreement on Service Catalogue definition

Post by rrudeanu » Tue Oct 12, 2010 11:45 am

Hello,

One of the Service Catalogue Management (SCM) activities is: "Agreeing and documenting a service definition with all relevant parties " (SCM process, ITIL v3).

Question 1: Is "service definition" seen as general or is it seen more specific toward the instances of services (entries in Service Catalogue)?

Question 2: If the customer is internal, does it make any sense to include in the SCM workflow a formal agreement/approval of service requirements by the (representatives of) customer? Or you just involve the internal customer (and all relevant parties) in definition of service requirements, but you don't require any formal approval?

In the second option, you let the "internal market" speak (through Service Portfolio Mgmt, SL Mgmt, reports on consumption, gathered feedback etc.) to what extent your service was defined ok. In other words: you are the only one responsible for defining your offer and then you run contracts (SLA/OLA) and also make sure that your offer remains competitive.

Thanks.

Regards,
Razvan



User avatar
Diarmid
ITIL Expert
ITIL Expert
Posts: 1894
Joined: Mon Mar 03, 2008 7:00 pm
Location: Helensburgh

Post by Diarmid » Wed Oct 13, 2010 3:35 am

Razvan,

welcome to the forum.

I'm not sure I understand your first question. Service definition must always be to an appropriate level for the requirements of the context. ITIL does not rule on such things; it guides. You need to work out for your own organization what level of definition is needed in order to achieve your objectives.

As to your second question: I'm not sure that the distinction between internal and external services is relevant here. The only drawback to having a formal agreement for service requirements internally might be if your organization's management system lacks the maturity to expect this as a matter of course. In that case the work to develop the agreement is harder, but the rewards can be greater as you establish a baseline for your management system.

Without formal agreement the service provision becomes a hostage to fortune as every change in circumstance and every problem that arises will alter how people perceive and interpret that which is not well defined. Where expectations rule without definition, they will be dashed by every storm that blows up.
"Method goes far to prevent trouble in business: for it makes the task easy, hinders confusion, saves abundance of time, and instructs those that have business depending, both what to do and what to hope."
William Penn 1644-1718

User avatar
rrudeanu
Newbie
Newbie
Posts: 2
Joined: Mon Oct 11, 2010 8:00 pm

Post by rrudeanu » Wed Oct 13, 2010 4:22 am

Thanks for your answers!

Q1: Fortunately, it is the answer I expected :)

Q2: I understand the reason for a formal agreement when it comes to provision of services and here comes the role of SL Mgmt. But my question was:

Does it make any sense to have 2 formal agreements:
one for service requirements (or service definition) AND one for service provision (SLA)?

The reason I made a distinction between internal and external is the following:
When you create the Service Catalogue (which is prior to service provision) there are less chances to know your external customers, but more chances if they are internal. Also you don't know yet the terms of your future contract/SLA. Therefore you don't have a clear counterpart for a formal agreement on service requirements. When it comes to SLA (or contract) you have clear parties for signing it.

Regards,
Razvan

User avatar
UpritS
Itiler
Itiler
Posts: 5
Joined: Sun Jun 07, 2015 8:00 pm

Post by UpritS » Mon Jun 08, 2015 6:36 pm

rrudeanu wrote:Thanks for your answers!

Q1: Fortunately, it is the answer I expected :)

Q2: I understand the reason for a formal agreement when it comes to provision of services and here comes the role of SL Mgmt. But my question was:

Does it make any sense to have 2 formal agreements:
one for service requirements (or service definition) AND one for service provision (SLA)?

The reason I made a distinction between internal and external is the following:
When you create the Service Catalogue (which is prior to service provision) there are less chances to know your external customers, but more chances if they are internal. Also you don't know yet the terms of your future contract/SLA. Therefore you don't have a clear counterpart for a formal agreement on service requirements. When it comes to SLA (or contract) you have clear parties for signing it.

Regards,
Razvan
Not having a service requirement signed off will result in aimless service catalog, Infact it plays a crucial role in drawing baseline for SLA document. The only challenge with internal customers is to identify key stakeholders out of user community and bring them all to a common platform to sign SLA contract. To answer your query , yes it's recommended to have both formally signed off regardless to whether they are internal/ external.

User avatar
Kranti
Senior Itiler
Senior Itiler
Posts: 59
Joined: Thu Jun 04, 2015 8:00 pm
Location: Hyderabad ,India

Post by Kranti » Fri Jun 12, 2015 4:59 am

Like other friends in this community have already replied ,we need to have negotiated and Agreed for each and every Document irrespective of Internal of External Stake holders .
All the Best
Kranti Kiran Kumar Gedela

Project Manager - SAP

ITIL® Expert
Prince2®
CSM® CSPO® CSP®
PMI® SAP®
Lean Six Sigma Black Belt ®

Post Reply