Page 1 of 1
Posted: Thu Jan 07, 2010 8:29 am
We have several systems here in the company and each has several modules.
There is a form in Word which tells which modules in the User has access.
This form is signed by the manager of the employee area and the area of IT.
I need to turn this form printed on electronic information. I am considering using the CMDB, but not sure if it would be correct in view of ITIL.
If anyone can help me! If they need more clarity let me know.
Posted: Thu Jan 07, 2010 8:38 am
why for one ?
Do you have a CMDB for two ?
What is purpose of this form ? If it relates to individual roles / responsibilities / capabilities / access, it is really not part of the CMDB as it is NOT a configuration item per se
It should be in a document repository but the CMDB I think is over kill / design creep
Posted: Thu Jan 07, 2010 8:45 am
I also believe that there is a configuration item. Because it is a document printed and signed.
I think it best to put it on the intranet scanned and give access to managers for consultation.
It would be a good solution?
Posted: Thu Jan 07, 2010 11:04 am
ITIL defines a Configuration Item as
Any Component that needs to be managed in order to deliver an IT Service. Information about each CI is recorded in a Configuration Record within the Configuration Management System and is maintained throughout its Lifecycle by Configuration Management. CIs are under the control of Change Management. CIs typically include IT Services, hardware, software, buildings, people, and formal documentation such as Process documentation and SLAs.
You are asking the question should this go in the CMDB and stating that this is a CI in the same breath. This is contradictory
More than one CMDB
Posted: Fri May 20, 2011 9:09 am
In our organization the CMDB isn't unified under one tool.
The service desk uses Infra for incident logging and configuration management.
The system engineer team (Network/Wintel/Unix) use their own CMDB application.
There is no connection between both CMDB's and even the process ownership/methodologies used differ.
No budget has been foreseen to unify and link these Databases.
I myself am the new Change and Request Manager under the Service desk department. My objective however is to implement a problem management process. Our current existing processes are incident, configuration, request and change management.
Release management exists in some form, but again is handled by the System engineer team and again this process isn't aligned with the other processes.
So far I have been able to review and correct/improve our current processes (mainly IM and Service desk Function) as a prepararation phase for problem management. I have designed the process and set up communication methods for the service desk department. But how can I connect this process to the System engineer team on one hand and to the bussiness solutions team (devellopers) on the other?
And my second question, related to this forum topic, how can I set up a KEDB that will be efficiently used througout our organization knowing that mutliple single databases are already used.
On the bright side, we started using SharePoint as our central communications tool, so there is an understanding of the need to centralise information and communication.
My first idea is to start with a KEDB as a Sharepoint list.
I don't see the benefits of implementing a process that will not be used...
Thank you for reading all this and helping me out!