*       Standard Naming conventions, good documentation, avoiding using
reserved IDs, adding rather than modifying, exports and backups, using your
own ID rather than the Demo account to modify objects so your name/last
modify date shows.

 

Certainly you want to apply the best practice configuration control
techniques of Remedy...my point is, with a tool as big as ITSM plus without
knowing intimately what the vendor has changed, added, and/or deleted, the
configuration control piece is much, much harder with a vendor-supplied
product than with a custom build.

 

  _____  

From: Action Request System discussion list(ARSList)
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Ben Cantatore
Sent: Friday, January 26, 2007 12:37 PM
To: [email protected]
Subject: Re: OT: ITSM Total Cost of Implementation Discussion

 

** 
See my comments below: 




Kaiser Norm E CIV USAF 96 CG/SCWOE <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> 
Sent by: "Action Request System discussion list(ARSList)"
<[email protected]> 

01/26/2007 11:05 AM 


Please respond to
[email protected]


To

[email protected] 


cc

 


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? 

-- If you're trying to stay as close to out of the box functionality, then
yes to a certain degree it does dictate how your process should work.  I
think there's enough flexibility through ARS objects (forms, filters, active
links, ect) that you can change the ITSM apps to match company's process.

-          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?   

-- Yes, I'm going through that pain right now.

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

  -- If the company is following industry best practices, shouldn't be
drastic changes, but all sorts of minor customizations will probably be
needed.  

-          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? 

-- Standard Naming conventions, good documentation, avoiding using reserved
IDs, adding rather than modifying, exports and backups, using your own ID
rather than the Demo account to modify objects so your name/last modify date
shows. 
  
All thoughts and opinions are much appreciated. 
  
Norm 

__20060125_______________________This posting was submitted with HTML in
it___ 

__20060125_______________________This posting was submitted with HTML in
it___


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

Reply via email to