I would think, Knowing the Air Force a little..
That reprogramming the "old dog" manager who had been there forever mindset
-- would be very difficult.
Which in turn would break the real functionality of the application in the
first place.
Otherwise like hundreds of other "systems" the military institutes, some
manager somewhere or everywhere will bypass with local policy ignoring
Governing policy.



On 1/26/07, Aaron Keller <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

**

From a company viewpoint, I have always been a proponent of the custom
build.  ITSM, or any pre-built app, must by its nature be an attempt at all
things to all companies.  And since all companies are not alike, you
invariably end up with a square peg and a round hole.  You spend as much
time customizing and compromising as it would have taken to develop from the
ground up.  And you've paid twice (once for ARS, once for the app), and
continue to pay twice in the form of support.  That's especially true with
Remedy.  Because Remedy is so customizable, (and is marketed and sold as
such) companies *expect* customization.



Now, from a developer or administrator viewpoint, is all that extra work
really a bad thing?  After all, it keeps them their jobs.  I'll leave that
for another discussion.



To your points:

1 - I don't believe the vendor controls an organization's processes, but
the ITIL standards themselves control an organization's processes (and a
vendor's).  And because the ITIL standards derive (at least in part) from
the organizations, it's really just a peer-pressure situation among
companies instead of high-schoolers.

For those companies that don't embrace ITIL – don't upgrade.  Instead, go
custom.



2 – Of course it makes it difficult to reverse engineer, but not really to
customize.  One doesn't need an understanding of the entire product to
customize it, only an understanding of the workflow surrounding the item to
be customized.  And through logging and the search DB, that's relatively
easy to figure out.



3 – Yes, customization is unavoidable.



4 – You handle configuration control with a change control process.  The
basics are: 1) no changes without a change control record. 2) The change
control record tracks what was changed, and why.  3) EVERY changed object
references a change control record.  When it comes time to evaluate an
upgrade, you then have a list of changed items to compare to the list of
"What's New".  It's not easy, but it's straight-forward.  Also, *when* you
customize, try to do it in a way that will play well with future upgrades.
 Such as: never delete, just hide.  And don't change workflow, just disable
and replace.  (By the way, you'd never have that problem if you built
custom.)



-Aaron

* Email: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
 ------------------------------

*From:* Action Request System discussion list(ARSList) [mailto:
[EMAIL PROTECTED] *On Behalf Of *Kaiser Norm E CIV USAF 96 CG/SCWOE
*Sent:* Friday, January 26, 2007 11:06 AM
*To:* [email protected]
*Subject:* OT: ITSM Total Cost of Implementation Discussion



Hi list:



I apologize for not being a more active participant of the ARS list
community recently…work has had me tied up more in red tape than in real
development lately.



Anyway, I put this in as off topic, but I think it's only a bit off
topic.  I would like to get any and all viewpoints on the subject of
implementing ITSM vs. another product or a custom product.  Specifically,
how do you feel about the following points (some are from a devil's advocate
perspective):



-          ITSM 7.0 was overhauled from the previous version to be "ITIL
compliant".  An organization that does not want to embrace the ITIL model,
however, is stuck because BMC only supports so many versions back.
Eventually support is dropped on the non-ITIL compliant versions.  Thus,
doesn't the vendor effectively control your organization's process and not
the other way around? What are your thoughts on that?

-          ITSM 7.0 has some 26,000 code objects (forms, ALs, filters, and
escalations).  Doesn't that make the tool nearly impossible to reverse
engineer? And a bear to customize?

-          Isn't customization unavoidable…especially in large enterprises
with longstanding, proven business practices?

-          If customization is unavoidable, how do you handle
configuration control? That is, how do you know the next version won't wipe
out all the work you did on your customizations?



All thoughts and opinions are much appreciated.



Norm


SunCom is the wireless company that's committed to doing things
differently.

Things we want you to know.

This e-mail and any files transmitted with it are confidential and are
intended solely for the use of the individual or entity to whom they are
addressed. This communication may contain material protected by the
attorney-client privilege. If you are not the intended recipient or the
person responsible for delivering the e-mail to the intended recipient, be
advised that you have received this e-mail in error and that any use,
dissemination, forwarding, printing or copying of this e-mail is strictly
prohibited.
__20060125_______________________This posting was submitted with HTML in
it___ __20060125_______________________This posting was submitted with HTML
in it___




--
Patrick Zandi

_______________________________________________________________________________
UNSUBSCRIBE or access ARSlist Archives at www.arslist.org ARSlist:"Where the Answers 
Are"

Reply via email to