Page 1 of 1
Change Lead Times and CAB
Posted: Tue Nov 29, 2016 3:54 am
Suggestions or ideas needed?
I'm in a scenario where we have strict lead times for Minor, Major, significant changes. We have CAB on a Tuesday, so only 1 CAB a week. Lead times for changes are 1 day for Minor, 7 for Major and 14 for Significant. We have some major changes submitted on CAB day, so they wont be chaired at CAB until the following CAB (which is in 7 days). But we have had feedback that this is not giving people 7 days notices, even though they have been logged correctly. For customer notifications i.e change which may cause business impact, some of our customers require 5 days lead time.
The only way I can think of resolving this, would to have 2 CAB's a week to capture these?
I hope this makes sense?
Posted: Wed Dec 07, 2016 4:01 am
It looks like 1 CAB a week is not going to be sufficient to support the business.
You could introduce CAB 2 for a Thursday with an RFC submission deadline say at midday on the Wednesday with RFC’s being presented for review on the Thursday.
The RFC submission deadline for Tuesdays CAB being Monday at midday.
This should give you enough time to capture all the RFC’s in preparation for each CAB and issue the change schedule to attending CAB members.
There always a chance that RFC’s will be submitted after the RFC submission deadline for each respective CAB, these could be simply placed on hold and added to the next CAB.
Example, an RFC submitted after Monday’s RFC submission deadline would be presented in Thursday’s CAB.
I use to host 3 customer CAB’s a week to support multiple businesses covering a large geographical area that shared the same infrastructure to varying degrees as well a technical advisory board (TAB) each week.
Somehow I managed not to go mad
Posted: Wed Dec 07, 2016 7:12 am
Unfortunately, your organisation has never heard of the word - 'PLAN ' it appears as they are taking advantage. You need to nip this in the bud as quickly as possible
While UKIT is correct, you can adjust the CAB frequency; what you need first is senior mgmt backing that the changes need to be planned etc and scheduled
Maybe have a change planning meeting as the gate keeper etc
Posted: Tue Dec 13, 2016 2:13 pm
"Planned" is that some new ITIL term going around? Sounds like it could be useful.
Posted: Wed Dec 14, 2016 9:40 am
It is one of those oxymoron terms - you know two words joined together
but in this case it is
Posted: Wed Dec 14, 2016 9:57 am
My favourite reply to my Fast Pathers (We use Fast Path here) is "Poor planning on your part does not constitute an emergency on mine".
Some people just never learn though...
Posted: Tue Jan 17, 2017 3:52 pm
As a Change Manager you should be accountable for any amendments to service affecting CI, if the right approvers have been contacted and you have the right services and correct associated CIs (therefore you know the worst case scenario as a worst case scenario), and if a plan is approved both technically and by the service owner(s) affected in a result of a failed change. Then you have to make a decision considering the imp plan, back out / contingency and risk implications (batch jobs / alerting etc),
A Change Manager has to assess the impact of both the ramifications of not resolving an issue and the ramifications of resolving an issue...
The difference in my experience between a Retrospective, Emergency or palnned change is understanding who benefits from the change and if it is vital to a Project, a manager or the companys bottom line or reputation.
POWER AND CONTROL
Posted: Tue Jan 17, 2017 4:10 pm
ITSM Manager's Certificate (Red Badge)
Change Management is POWER & CONTROL. /....evil laughter
Mr Hardesty, this is an experienced Change Manager to another... however I do not possess a Red Badge.... However I do have experience of assisting numerous large companies to become ISO 20k / ITIL 3 / SOX complient.... (as applicable)
If you think there is power and control in being a Change Manager you have worked for a company that is not either funded under an agreed financial contract or is not accountable for there actions under a RACI model.
Change Managers used to be accountable for the lifecycle of agreed CI's, and only rule by the power of their policys, processes & procedures.
Posted: Sat Jan 21, 2017 4:09 am
I have been doing IT Service Management for 30+ years
I started doing IT change Management in 1985 - 30+ years
A good CM would have a clear policy about the requirements for submissions to the Change Board as well as the Emergency, Minor / Standard, Fast Track (nod to Sandy) and BAU change requests.
One of the key requirements is that the implementation process - which includes the raising of the CR - is that the work has been well documented and planned out (cough, cough).
The Change Manager needs to be firmly in control of the process - with management's blessing - to act decisively and prudently in order ensure Production - the stuff being delivered to the customers and users - is not adversely impacted by any presented change.
My sig in this forum I wrote a good 9 or 10 years ago.
I now hold ITIL Expert (current version), ISO 20K practitioner, PRINCE2 Practitioner, CoBIT Foundation as well as still hold my original MCSE from way back when NT 4 was being replaced by 2K.
I have not bother to update it - for 1 - It still holds true; b - I like it and 3) I don't give a shit what any says - or moans - about it
It is a signature in a forum. If you don't like - well piss off then. I did not write it for you. I wrote it for me.
I have expressed and still hold true that the Change Manager should work for the IT Director or higher and be the final arbiter to allow solutions into Production - so as to protect the company from its own follow.
This needs to be true for any CM in any sized organisation.
The CM can not merely look at a check list and say ok - every appears in order as you have checked everything. The Board - to which the CM is the chair - needs to ensure that the documents - plans, etc - are actually fit for purpose.
I as a CM have stopped major projects (mega millions to mega hundreds in cost / impact) from moving to production. Some decisions got overruled; some did not. a few of the overruled did fail spectacularly - causing days if not weeks of issues - to which senior mgmt who overrode me started to defer to me.
That is the control and power for a Change Manager. PROTECT PRODUCTION. All else does not matter.
As for you being a CM, so effing what ? You only joined this forum 4 days ago not years ago.
You have posted 2 items in this forum and those were both in this discussion thread. You have the same gravitas - meaning none - in this forum - due to the length of the participation as the SPAM posters who post about game gold or furniture or other external links do.
Inside joke about change managers
Posted: Wed Mar 01, 2017 10:55 am
"Don't those guys realize things need to get done?"