Having delivered a number and a variety of infrastructure management solutions, if I were to take a greenfield approach (do it all over again), taking a top down approach would be a more feasible one. Measuring the customer experience would be the first step, at least across a selected set of critical business services or applications.
The business case would be relatively easier as an increased visibility of customer experience of business service or application, whether negative or positive, is something that is understood easier.
Understood easier in comparison to taking a bottom up approach of ensuring the management of every infrastructure component, decomposed to the nth degree. To start with infrastructure management, then to undertake service modelling and then to understand the service impacts, although equally valid as a means, would take a longer path to business visibility and appreciation. Whereas, the immediate visibility of customer experience measurement and reporting helps quickly socialise the concepts and then use that visibility as a driver to then decompose into the underlying infrastructure elements.
Customer experience measurement can be achieved via a number of mechanism, typically via synthesizing the user transaction (active) or/and network traffic analysis at the application layer (passive). A combination of the two would also be a good mechanism, that would then assist with analysis and diagnostics.
The approach would be generic and equally applicable, whether it is across a critical set of online application transactions by a user or a SIP based VoIP service transaction. Both would derive user experience measurements.
The customer experience first approach would also form as a benchmark for assessing the positive impact of implementing more granular infrastructure management (server, database, process, application, network infrastructure, traffic performance & route analytics) at the lower layers. Such management improvements should be reflected in the continuous measurement of customer experience of service.
Saturday, April 18, 2009
Monday, April 13, 2009
The Right Fit
On the topic of the right fit/solution to the problem, solutions that fit within the magic quadrant are hardly the solution when it comes to relatively small markets (population and segment), smaller providers and ever shrinking budgets. Although I have been responsible for assessing and recommending magic quadrant ITSM COTS solutions, one niche player that I have watched with interest, over the past 3+ years, has been AdventNet.
Even for a fast growing MSP that competes in the smaller markets, the tipping point for ITSM automation related transformation is an elusive one. Most home grown and open source based solutions have amazing levels of elasticity :o) Therefore that transformation business case is certainly is a tough one to step up to a commercial-off-the-shelf, magic quadrant, ITSM solution-set, even if it was based on a phased out approach, aligned to a roadmap. Such transformations are made even harder by ITSM software vendors who do not appreciate the smaller market dynamics and the associated cost models. The North American and European pricing models are not ones that easily fit into the round hole. This is not necessarily limited to ITSM software solutions but also make the carrier service provider space a hard one within those smaller markets. Network Management solutions for instance if not priced as a reasonable % of the per port/customer/service/unit infrastructure cost, becomes a significant burden to business case. These typically come along with a big central price tag plus the unit cost which makes the initial deployment or investment a difficult one.
Back to AdventNet, they seem to have the ideal breadth of capability from a smaller communications service provider or the typical managed services provider perspective, with a ITSM solution set that spans the breadth of capability as well as the lower layers of infrastructure management. A solution set that consists of a Service Desk, server & layer-2/3 network infrastructure management, application availability and performance management, network route analytics, dashboarding/visualisation, auto-discovery, traffic profiling and analysis and more. Their capability sits close to the right fit, somewhere between the magic quadrant heavies and open source. Open source of course brings along its own complexities. The invariable customisations and the service provider then taking on maintaining the intellectual capacity to continually evolve/develop, which perhaps should not be within its core competencies.
AdventNet, at that close to the right fit position, seems ripe for the picking at a time where acquisition seems to be the trend.
Finally, yet another player worthy of mention within the context of the "right fit" is Zenoss. A breadth of capability, a single solution-set and what seems to be a flexible pricing model.
Even for a fast growing MSP that competes in the smaller markets, the tipping point for ITSM automation related transformation is an elusive one. Most home grown and open source based solutions have amazing levels of elasticity :o) Therefore that transformation business case is certainly is a tough one to step up to a commercial-off-the-shelf, magic quadrant, ITSM solution-set, even if it was based on a phased out approach, aligned to a roadmap. Such transformations are made even harder by ITSM software vendors who do not appreciate the smaller market dynamics and the associated cost models. The North American and European pricing models are not ones that easily fit into the round hole. This is not necessarily limited to ITSM software solutions but also make the carrier service provider space a hard one within those smaller markets. Network Management solutions for instance if not priced as a reasonable % of the per port/customer/service/unit infrastructure cost, becomes a significant burden to business case. These typically come along with a big central price tag plus the unit cost which makes the initial deployment or investment a difficult one.
Back to AdventNet, they seem to have the ideal breadth of capability from a smaller communications service provider or the typical managed services provider perspective, with a ITSM solution set that spans the breadth of capability as well as the lower layers of infrastructure management. A solution set that consists of a Service Desk, server & layer-2/3 network infrastructure management, application availability and performance management, network route analytics, dashboarding/visualisation, auto-discovery, traffic profiling and analysis and more. Their capability sits close to the right fit, somewhere between the magic quadrant heavies and open source. Open source of course brings along its own complexities. The invariable customisations and the service provider then taking on maintaining the intellectual capacity to continually evolve/develop, which perhaps should not be within its core competencies.
AdventNet, at that close to the right fit position, seems ripe for the picking at a time where acquisition seems to be the trend.
Finally, yet another player worthy of mention within the context of the "right fit" is Zenoss. A breadth of capability, a single solution-set and what seems to be a flexible pricing model.
Saturday, April 11, 2009
Welcome!
Hi,
I am an ITSM (IT Service Management) Architect, having worked a number of years in the ICT industry, mainly in the communications service and managed service provider space.
I thought it would be a cool idea to share my thoughts and experiences, and to also seize the opportunity to network on topics such as: ITIL v2, v3, CMDBs, CMSs, Service Desk implementations, the effectiveness of vendor implementation methodologies, commercial-off-the-shelf vs open source solutions, "end-to-end" service management and how measureable that is, budgets that are $millions vs not as many $s, the ITSM Eutopia, the pit falls and the battle scars, what the Enterprise may need vs what the MSP may offer, auto-discovery, service models and service impact management, business dashboards, the soft business cases and the hard projects, successes and credibility, oh, so little time.
I thought this would be the start of a great forum where we could share some honest views and experiences and also navigate ourselves through the legal mine fields of doing so.
What better place other than at ITSM.Architect :o)
Look forward to it!!!
I am an ITSM (IT Service Management) Architect, having worked a number of years in the ICT industry, mainly in the communications service and managed service provider space.
I thought it would be a cool idea to share my thoughts and experiences, and to also seize the opportunity to network on topics such as: ITIL v2, v3, CMDBs, CMSs, Service Desk implementations, the effectiveness of vendor implementation methodologies, commercial-off-the-shelf vs open source solutions, "end-to-end" service management and how measureable that is, budgets that are $millions vs not as many $s, the ITSM Eutopia, the pit falls and the battle scars, what the Enterprise may need vs what the MSP may offer, auto-discovery, service models and service impact management, business dashboards, the soft business cases and the hard projects, successes and credibility, oh, so little time.
I thought this would be the start of a great forum where we could share some honest views and experiences and also navigate ourselves through the legal mine fields of doing so.
What better place other than at ITSM.Architect :o)
Look forward to it!!!
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)