I don't think you will get a straightforward answer as each organization will have to answer it differently.
I would look to the "user" guides for more info on the responsibilities for the "roles", at the very least, how they use the apps. Then you (your organization) has to make some decisions: Are you going to use the apps fully, or just use bits & pieces? Follow ITIL or just some of it? For example, you could use the CHG module and not configure any approvals (all CHG's are considered pre-approved) *and* set the coordinator assignment to be the same as the manager assignment *and* not care about or hold CAB meetings to discuss changes, etc. In that case, you don't have to bother with approvals, management oversight, or anything else really -- you are just using it as a ticketing system and you are trusting your staff to coordinate their efforts, not do any harm and document their CHG's. Some folks on the ARSList might squirm a bit at the thought of doing that, but if that's what your org wants out of the apps, then that's what your org wants. However, if you do intend to use the system fully, following the ITIL model, then you are going to have to figure out who will fill the roles for the apps you are using; will the person be dedicated to that role *or* will they wear multiple hats? Like, will you have a single asset manager (sole responsibility that does nothing else but asset manager tasks) -or- will each group/dept/campus have an manager/admin/staffer that plays "asset manager" responsible for the infrastructure inside their own walled garden, in addition to their other non-remedy responsibilities? So, it is not an easy question to answer without knowing your organization size, business-processes, ticket loads, staff capabilities, infrastructure size & churn, management's capabilities & tolerance for making/delegating decisions, etc. Bottom line & over simplified: Which role(s) need to be dedicated will vary from org to org. Most, if not all, roles can be filled by staffers who have other non-remedy responsibilities - they will just wear yet another hat. You aren't *required* to dedicates staff to a given role, but it *can* make life easier. And, once you go live, any roles that need to be dedicated will become apparent. How's that for an answer that doesn't really answer? Hope it helps anyway. JDHood On Wed, Nov 3, 2010 at 12:20 PM, Sanford, Claire < [email protected]> wrote: > ** > > We are in the process of scoping the volume of work associated with moving > from just using the Help Desk module in the ITSM suite to the ENTIRE ITSM > 7.6.03 Suite. We are currently a one person shop (me). > > I have been asked to find out what the "standard" number of people required > to manage an entire ITSM 7.6.03 Suite. > > Do we need a full time designated Change Manager? Problem Manager? > > This is what I was asked specifically: > > Please check with other Remedy Admins that you know who are on Service Desk > (ITSM) to find out how many resources they have defined as far as process > owners. Bob feels like he needs a process owner (or process architect) to > own the Change Management process and own this piece of the Service Desk > (ITSM). I would like to know how this is being handled elsewhere to help > back up Bob’s need for an FTE. > > Any info would be appreciated. > > *Claire Sanford* > Information Systems Division > Memorial Hermann Healthcare System > Phone: 713 448 6035 > [email protected] > > _attend WWRUG11 www.wwrug.com ARSlist: "Where the Answers Are"_ _______________________________________________________________________________ UNSUBSCRIBE or access ARSlist Archives at www.arslist.org attend wwrug11 www.wwrug.com ARSList: "Where the Answers Are"
