ARMY AL&T
Change Advisory Board. Communication of change activities between teams prevents conflicts of time and resources, thus providing customers a more reliable level of service.
• Service-Level Management has created robust relationships between PD ALTESS and its customers. Service-Level Agreements are created in concert with the customer; PD ALTESS Service-Level Coordinators identify each party’s needs and responsibilities.
Continual Service Improvement As part of the ITIL life-cycle framework, PD ALTESS has also
developed a robust and ongoing Continual Service Improvement (CSI) initiative that identifies improvement needs. CSI allows PD ALTESS to determine where the organization is, where it wants to go, and—the top priority—how it will get there.
A recent CSI effort is PD ALTESS’ revised Change Management process. Through feedback and analysis, the ITSM Program staff determined that the initial Change Management process, used throughout the organization, relied too heavily on “oral history.” Information was passed along by word of mouth instead of being properly documented.
The initial process also relied on a culture of individuals acting as heroes to accomplish tasks. Change types were not clearly defined, and the organization lacked a central repository for change requests. Further, Team Leads and Service-Level Coordinators did not receive notifications for changes affecting their teams or customers.
After identifying these deficiencies in the Change Management process, the ITSM staff developed improvements. To ensure support and ownership across the organization, PD ALTESS leadership at all levels was included in the design of the improved process prior to its deployment.
PD ALTESS selected the BMC Remedy Change Management application, by BMC Software, to automate the change process and to serve as the organization’s central repository for changes. As a result, communication among teams became more effi- cient. The workflows of the Change Management process were also modified and automated in BMC Remedy to include a new step requiring Team Lead approval, as well as notification to the Service-Level Management Team for changes affecting customers.
The revised Change Management process also introduced a Forward Schedule of Change (FSC) calendar, which provides a central location for information on upcoming business events, releases, and other activities. The FSC enables PD ALTESS to raise the awareness of change and release activities taking place throughout the organization. In doing so, the FSC improves interorganizational communication and reduces scheduling
OCTOBER –DECEMBER 2010 70
conflicts. The FSC is coordinated by a dedicated Master Scheduler, a role introduced in connection with the revised Change Management process. Collaborating with the Change Initiator, the Master Scheduler sets the scheduled start and end dates for each proposed change to avert potential conflicts.
Once the design of the revised Change Management process was complete and it was added to the CSI communication plan, training on the revised process was provided to meet each team’s specific needs and concerns.
Overall, PD ALTESS’ ITSM, coupled with its institutional- ized ITIL processes, has created quick wins for the organization and its team members. Adopting ITIL processes has also created benefits that will be realized for years to come.
These efforts have effectively “broken down the silos” between PD ALTESS teams. Each team now shares a common organi- zational goal: to provide value-added service to customers and, ultimately, to the Soldier.
Iman Shebaro is a Senior Consultant with Deloitte Consulting, providing onsite contracting support to PD ALTESS. She holds a B.B.A. in international business from the University of Texas and an M.A. in international affairs from American University.
Charles Smith is a PD ALTESS Technical Writer. He holds both a B.S. and an M.S. in English from Radford University and is a graduate of the Student Career Experience Program.
ALT ESS NEWS
Page 1 |
Page 2 |
Page 3 |
Page 4 |
Page 5 |
Page 6 |
Page 7 |
Page 8 |
Page 9 |
Page 10 |
Page 11 |
Page 12 |
Page 13 |
Page 14 |
Page 15 |
Page 16 |
Page 17 |
Page 18 |
Page 19 |
Page 20 |
Page 21 |
Page 22 |
Page 23 |
Page 24 |
Page 25 |
Page 26 |
Page 27 |
Page 28 |
Page 29 |
Page 30 |
Page 31 |
Page 32 |
Page 33 |
Page 34 |
Page 35 |
Page 36 |
Page 37 |
Page 38 |
Page 39 |
Page 40 |
Page 41 |
Page 42 |
Page 43 |
Page 44 |
Page 45 |
Page 46 |
Page 47 |
Page 48 |
Page 49 |
Page 50 |
Page 51 |
Page 52 |
Page 53 |
Page 54 |
Page 55 |
Page 56 |
Page 57 |
Page 58 |
Page 59 |
Page 60 |
Page 61 |
Page 62 |
Page 63 |
Page 64 |
Page 65 |
Page 66 |
Page 67 |
Page 68 |
Page 69 |
Page 70 |
Page 71 |
Page 72 |
Page 73 |
Page 74 |
Page 75 |
Page 76
