Information Requirement of Management Levels - Download as PDF

Document Sample
Information Requirement of Management Levels - Download as PDF Powered By Docstoc
					OPERATIONAL EXCELLENCE PROGRAM
Service Level Management




  Management Information Requirements




                           Document Number: OEP-10-14
                                                        SLM Management Information Requirements
                                                                  Operational Excellence Program
                                                                     Document No.: OEP-10-14




                       DOCUMENT REVIEW AND APPROVAL


      Document Review

       Name                  Title              Action                    Date
Julia Wilkins        Process Coordinator    Review             09/29/06
Gary Case            Process Consultant     Review             11/02/06
Laurie Dolan         Process Consultant     Review             11/02/06
O’Shaughnessy        Program Manager        Review             11/06/06
Wendy Kuhn           Process Owner          Review/Approve     11/10/06



      Document Approval

      This document has been developed based on the best practices of the Information
      Technology Infrastructure Library (ITIL) as part of the Operational Excellence Program
      (OEP) in the Office of Information Technology Services. It is approved for
      implementation as of this date.



                           ____________________________________November 13, 2006_
                           Joe Lithgo                              Date
                           Operational Excellence Program Director




      Page 2 of 18                                                  Approved on: 11/13/2006
                                                   SLM Management Information Requirements
                                                             Operational Excellence Program
                                                                Document No.: OEP-10-14




                                DOCUMENT HISTORY


      Version                Title         Date                  Author
Version 1.0          Preliminary        11/13/2006 Crystal Leigh
Version 2.0          Converted to OEP   02/14/2007 Geri Hirsch
                     Core Template




                     DOCUMENT CONTRIBUTORS AND AUTHORS


       Title         Service Level Management Process                  Name
                             Design Team (PDT)
Process Coordinator Service Level Management PDT        Julia Wilkins
Process Consultant Service Level Management PDT         Laurie Dolan
Team Lead Author    Service Level Management PDT        Crystal Leigh
Team Contributor    Service Level Management PDT        KC Dowd
Team Contributor    Service Level Management PDT        Beth Gracey
Team Contributor    Service Level Management PDT        Brian Layh
Team Contributor    Service Level Management PDT        Tom Hill
Team Contributor    Service Level Management PDT        Thomas Tomczak
Team Contributor    Service Level Management PDT        Jamie Vogel
Team Contributor    Service Level Management PDT        Crystal Leigh




      Page 3 of 18                                             Approved on: 11/13/2006
                                                                                                       SLM Management Information Requirements
                                                                                                                 Operational Excellence Program
                                                                                                                    Document No.: OEP-10-14




                                                               Table of Contents

1       CHAPTER ONE ................................................................................................................................................5
    1.1          INTRODUCTION ............................................................................................................................................5
    1.2          CSF/KPI DEVELOPMENT.............................................................................................................................5
    1.3          PERFORMANCE MANAGEMENT REPORTS ....................................................................................................7
       1.3.1        ITS Executive Management Reports ......................................................................................................7
       1.3.2        ITS Senior Management Reports ...........................................................................................................8
       1.3.3        ITS Support Group Management Reports..............................................................................................8
       1.3.4        Customer Management Reports.............................................................................................................9
    1.4          PROCESS MANAGEMENT REPORTS ............................................................................................................11
       1.4.1        ITS Service Level Process Owner Reports...........................................................................................11
       1.4.2        ITS Service Level Process Manager Reports .......................................................................................11
       1.4.3        ITS Service Level Manager Reports ....................................................................................................12
 2  INFORMATION MANAGEMENT FRAMEWORK FOR THE SERVICE LEVEL MANAGEMENT
PROCESS  .............................................................................................................................................................13
    2.1          INTRODUCTION ..........................................................................................................................................13
    2.2          MEASUREMENT FRAMEWORK ...................................................................................................................14
APPENDIX A - METRIC EVALUATION .............................................................................................................16
APPENDIX B – REPORT DISTRIBUTION SUMMARY....................................................................................18




            Page 4 of 18                                                                                                    Approved on: 11/13/2006
                                                               SLM Management Information Requirements
                                                                         Operational Excellence Program
                                                                            Document No.: OEP-10-14




1 CHAPTER ONE

1.1 Introduction

One of the keys to any ITIL implementation is to identify the appropriate level of measurements
and reports that provide value to understanding the efficiency and effectiveness of each process.

This document describes the Management Information Requirements for Service Level
Management. The requirements will show a direct link between the Critical Success Factors
(CSFs) and Key Performance Indicators (KPIs) that were developed in the OEP High Level
Process Model, as well as the reports that support the KPIs.

Aligning the CSFs and KPIs and reports will help support an overall IT Scorecard. Going
through this exercise will also help identify any new reports that are required to support the KPIs
and also to identify any redundant or non-value add reports that can be eliminated.

The document will also define the target audience for each report and identify which
metrics/reports support the two essential management roles. One role is responsible for the
performance of the organization; the other for the operation of the process.

1.2 CSF/KPI Development

Currently Available         To Be Developed
                            * also indicates To Be Developed

CSF              KPI                      Metric               Report Name      Additional Reports
                                          (Measurement)
Manage the       Percentage increase in   Number of SLAs       Service Level    SLA Target
quantity and     Service Level            supported by         Document         Trending*
quality of the   Agreements adequately    OLAs and UCs         Review Status*
ITS services     supported by OLAs and
required         UCs*
                 Percentage increase in   Number of OLAs       Service Level    OLA Target
                 number of OLAs in        in place for         Document         Trending*
                 place                    existing services    Review Status*
                 Percentage increase in   Number of P1         Service
                 # of P1 incidents        incidents            Availability
                 resolved in target       resolved in target   Impact*
                 timeframe*               timeframe
        Page 5 of 18                                                       Approved on: 11/13/2006
                                                                 SLM Management Information Requirements
                                                                           Operational Excellence Program
                                                                              Document No.: OEP-10-14



CSF            KPI                         Metric                Report Name        Additional Reports
                                           (Measurement)
                Percentage increase in     Number of P2          Service
                # of P2 incidents          incidents             Availability
                resolved in target         resolved in target    Impact*
                timeframe*                 timeframe
                Percentage increase in     Number of P3          Service
                # of P3 incidents          incidents             Availability
                resolved in target         resolved in target    Impact*
                timeframe*                 timeframe
                Percentage increase in     Number of P4          Service
                # of P4 incidents          incidents             Availability
                resolved in target         resolved in target    Impact*
                timeframe*                 timeframe
Deliver         Percentage availability    Amount of time        Availability       Availability (OLA
services as     of services (by            (Hours, minutes,      (SLA target vs.    target vs. Actual);
agreed          customer)*                 etc.) of              Actual)*           Availability/
                                           availability                             Downtime; Client
                                                                                    Impact Forward
                                                                                    Schedule of Change*
                Percentage availability    Amount of time        Availability       Availability (OLA
                by service*                (Hours, minutes,      (SLA target vs.    target vs. Actual);
                                           etc.) of              Actual)*           Availability/
                                           availability                             Downtime; Client
                                                                                    Impact Forward
                                                                                    Schedule of Change*
Manage          Increase in use of the     Number of hits to     Service Catalog
relationship    Service Catalog;           web page per          Usage*
with                                       month
customers
                Percentage Service         Number of SIPs        Service
                Improvement Programs       completed to the      Improvement
                completed to customer      satisfaction of the   Program
                satisfaction;              customer              Status*
                Percentage Service         Number of SIPs        Service
                Improvement Programs       completed on          Improvement
                completed on time;         time                  Program
                                                                 Status*
                Percentage increase in     Number of             Service Level
                Service Level Review       Service Level         Review
                meetings conducted         Review Meetings       Percentage*
                                           conducted.

                                    Table 1: CSF/KPI cross-reference

        Page 6 of 18                                                            Approved on: 11/13/2006
                                                             SLM Management Information Requirements
                                                                       Operational Excellence Program
                                                                          Document No.: OEP-10-14




1.3 Performance Management Reports

This section describes the Performance Management reports as recommended for the Service
Level Management Process. A distinction is made between ITS Executive Management, ITS
Senior Management, ITS Support Group Management and the Customer Management level.
Additionally, process performance reports for process staff are described in this section, for the
Service Level Process Owner, the Service Level Process Manager and the Service Level
Manager.

Only an overview of the reports, including their use and objective is provided in the main body
of this section. Frequency of the reporting is to be determined by the recipients of the reports.

Reports listed in italics are not currently available.


1.3.1 ITS Executive Management Reports

a. Report Name: Availability – SLA target vs. Actual

Objective: Availability showing the Projected Time Available (SLA target) vs. the Actual Time

Summarization/Grouping: Consolidation of all ITS services, by individual service, by
Department/Customer, and by Critical Business Application within a Department.

b. Report Name: Service Availability Impact

Objective: For those services within a department falling outside of availability targets,
summarize the reasons for the differences.

Summarization/Grouping: Changes impacting availability of service (both scheduled and
emergency), Incidents impacting availability of service to include resolution times outside of
priority model, Service Desk response

c. Report Name: Problem Resolution Rates

Objective: Problem resolution rate showing the number of problems identified and percentage
resolved.

Summarization/Grouping: For all services, by Department, by Business Critical Application


        Page 7 of 18                                                     Approved on: 11/13/2006
                                                            SLM Management Information Requirements
                                                                      Operational Excellence Program
                                                                         Document No.: OEP-10-14




1.3.2 ITS Senior Management Reports

a. Report Name: Availability – SLA target vs. Actual

Objective: Availability showing the Projected Time Available (SLA target) vs. the Actual Time

Summarization/Grouping: Consolidation of all ITS services, by service groupings, by individual
service or sub-service.

b. Report Name: Service Availability Impact

Objective: For those services within a service grouping falling outside of availability targets,
summarize the reasons for the difference.

Summarization/Grouping: Changes impacting availability of service (both scheduled and
emergency), Incidents impacting availability of service to include resolution times outside of
priority model, Service Desk response, Second level response to P1, P2, P3, P4
incidents/requests based on OLA targets.

c. Report Name: Problem Resolution Rates

Objective: Problem resolution rate showing the number of problems identified and percentage
resolved.

Summarization/Grouping: For all services, by Service Groupings, by individual service or sub-
service


1.3.3 ITS Support Group Management Reports

a. Report Name: Availability – SLA target vs. Actual

Objective: Availability showing the Projected Time Available (SLA target) vs. the Actual Time

Summarization/Grouping: Consolidation of all ITS services, by individual service or sub-
service, by CI (component/grouping).

b. Report Name: Availability – OLA target vs. Actual

Objective: Availability showing the Projected Time Available (OLA target) vs. the Actual Time

       Page 8 of 18                                                      Approved on: 11/13/2006
                                                          SLM Management Information Requirements
                                                                    Operational Excellence Program
                                                                       Document No.: OEP-10-14




Summarization/Grouping: By sub-service, by CI (component/grouping).

c. Report Name: Availability and Downtime

Objective: Availability showing the proportioned current availability percentage, the Best Case
projected availability percentage, Accumulated downtime (actual hours/minutes), and remaining
downtime while still remaining within OLA/SLA targets (actual time).

Summarization/Grouping: By sub-service, by CI (component/grouping).

d. Report Name: OLA target Trending

Objective: Forward trending of availability based on OLA targets, projecting 3 months forward
based on last 6 months.

Summarization/Grouping: By sub-service, by CI (component/grouping).

e. Report Name: Service Availability Impact

Objective: For those components within a service, sub-service, or CI (component/grouping)
falling outside of availability targets, summarize the reasons for the differences

Summarization/Grouping: Changes impacting availability of sub-service (both scheduled and
emergency), Incidents impacting availability of sub-service or CI to include resolution times
outside of priority model, Service Desk response, Second level response to P1, P2, P3, P4
incidents/requests based on OLA targets, Efficiency of changes (percentage completed within
window and successfully)

f. Report Name: Problem Resolution Rates

Objective: Problem resolution rate showing the number of problems identified and percentage
resolved.

Summarization/Grouping: For all services, by individual service or sub-service


1.3.4 Customer Management Reports

a. Report Name: Availability – SLA target vs. Actual

       Page 9 of 18                                                   Approved on: 11/13/2006
                                                            SLM Management Information Requirements
                                                                      Operational Excellence Program
                                                                         Document No.: OEP-10-14




Objective: Availability showing the Projected Time Available (SLA target) vs. the Actual Time

Summarization/Grouping: Consolidation of all ITS services provided to the
Department/Customer, by individual service provided to the Customer, and by Business Critical
Application within a Department.

b. Report Name: Service Availability Impact

Objective: For those services within a department falling outside of availability targets,
summarize the reasons for the differences

Summarization/Grouping: Changes impacting availability of service (both scheduled and
emergency), Incidents impacting availability of service to include resolution times outside of
priority model, Service Desk response.

c. Report Name: Service Improvement Program Status

Objective: Report on any Service Improvement Programs by showing the number of SIPs,
Status of SIPs, percentage completed satisfactorily

Summarization/Grouping: For all SIPs related to services within the Department and for
Business Critical Applications.

d. Report Name: Problem Resolution Rates

Objective: Problem resolution rate by showing the number of problems identified, percentage
resolved.

Summarization/Grouping: For all services within the Department and for Business Critical
Applications.

e. Report Name: Service Level Document Review Status

Objective: SLA Review Status by listing those SLAs that are currently being reviewed and those
scheduled for review in the next reporting period.

Summarization/Grouping: Individual SLAs within the Department by scheduled review dates.

f. Report Name: Client Impact Forward Schedule of Change

Objective: To show those changes that will impact the client for a specified reporting period.
       Page 10 of 18                                                   Approved on: 11/13/2006
                                                           SLM Management Information Requirements
                                                                     Operational Excellence Program
                                                                        Document No.: OEP-10-14




Summarization/Grouping: By services used within the Department


1.4 Process Management Reports

Process Management reports are created for the Service Level Management staff. The reports are
intended to steer the Service Level Process Management efforts.

1.4.1 ITS Service Level Process Owner Reports

a. Report Name: Service Catalog Usage

Objective: To show the overall use of the Service Catalog based on hits to the web site.

Summarization/Grouping: Service Catalog as a whole.

b. Report Name: SLA Target Trending

Objective: To show the percentage of SLA targets met within the last 6 months, last 3 months,
and last month

Summarization/Grouping: All SLAs

c. Report Name: Service Level Review Percentage

Objective: To show the percentage of Service Level Review Meetings scheduled and completed
within the last month.

Summarization/Grouping: Service Level Review Meetings for all Customers.


1.4.2 ITS Service Level Process Manager (Service Level Management
      Coordinator) Reports

a. Report Name: SLA Target Trending

Objective: To show the percentage of SLA targets met within the last 6 months, last 3 months,
and last month.

       Page 11 of 18                                                   Approved on: 11/13/2006
                                                           SLM Management Information Requirements
                                                                     Operational Excellence Program
                                                                        Document No.: OEP-10-14




Summarization/Grouping: All SLAs

b. Report Name: Service Availability Impact

Objective: For those services outside of the SLA targets in the last month.

Summarization/Grouping: The incidents that impacted the service, and changes that impacted
the service

c. Report Name: Service Level Review Percentage

Objective: To show the percentage of Service Level Review Meetings scheduled and completed
within the last month.

Summarization/Grouping: Service Level Review Meetings for all Customers, Service Level
Review Meetings by Service Level Manager.

d. Report Name: Service Improvement Programs Status

Objective: To show the number of SIPs initiated, percentage completed, and percentage behind
schedule.

Summarization/Grouping: SIPs for all Services


1.4.3 ITS Service Level Manager (Business Account Manager) Reports

a. Report Name: Availability – SLA Target vs. Actual

Objective: Availability showing the Projected Time Available (SLA target) vs. the Actual Time

Summarization/Grouping: Consolidation of all ITS services provided to the
Department/Customer for this Service Level Manager, by individual service provided to the
same Customer, and by Business Critical Application within same Department.

b. Report Name: Service Availability Impact

Objective: For those services or service groupings outside of the SLA targets in the last month,
summarize the reasons for the differences.


       Page 12 of 18                                                   Approved on: 11/13/2006
                                                           SLM Management Information Requirements
                                                                     Operational Excellence Program
                                                                        Document No.: OEP-10-14




Summarization/Grouping: Changes impacting availability of the service or service groupings,
the incidents that impacted the service or service groupings, Service Desk and Level 2 support
response times to those changes and incidents.

c. Report Name: Service Level Review Percentage

Objective: To show the number of Service Level Review Meetings scheduled for individual
Service Level managers, the percentage complete, and the percentage delayed.

Summarization/Grouping: Service Level Review Meetings by Service Level Manager.

d. Report Name: Service Level Document Review Status (OLA/SLA)

Objective: To show the number of Service Level documents (OLAs and SLAs) scheduled for
review, the percentage complete, percentage under revision, status of revisions, percentage
revised, and the number of times revised.

Summarization/Grouping: SLAs and OLAs by Service Level Manager and by Customer.

e. Report Name: Service Improvement Programs Status

Objective: To show the number of SIPs initiated, the percentage completed successfully (on-time
and satisfactorily to the client), percentage behind schedule.

Summarization/Grouping: By services used by the customer for the service level managers.


2 Information Management Framework for the Service Level
  Management Process

2.1 Introduction

The following table represents a framework by which the management can determine the status
of an organization’s operations. It comprises four areas of internal evaluation. It then
consolidates reporting into one or more of those four areas. The reporting serves as evaluation
criteria and provides trends over time that highlights key operational areas. The areas that
describe the efficiency and effectiveness of an organization are:


       Page 13 of 18                                                   Approved on: 11/13/2006
                                                                   SLM Management Information Requirements
                                                                             Operational Excellence Program
                                                                                Document No.: OEP-10-14




Value: Reports or surveys to measure the effectiveness and perceived value of the process to the
stakeholders and users.

Quality: Process quality indicators are typically activity based and is established to measure the
quality of individual or key activities as they relate to the objective of the end-to-end process.

Performance: Metrics established under this quadrant measure the average process throughput or
cycle time. (e.g. metrics to capture the speed and performance of the stated process objective and
output).

Compliance: Process compliance seeks to measure the percentage of process deployment across
the IT organization. A process may have a good perceived value, good quality and speedy
throughput but only be adhered to by a fraction of the IT organization.

Value:           Is what we are doing making a difference?
Quality:         How well are we doing it?
Performance:     How fast or slow are we doing it?
Compliance:      Are we doing it?



2.2     Measurement Framework


Category         CSF              KPI                               Policy              Target     Tool
Value            Deliver          Percentage availability of        1. Service Level    Priority   IT
                 services as      services (by customer)*;          Management          Model      Service
                 agreed           Percentage availability by        Process and                    Mgt tool
                                  service*                          Compliance
                 Manage           Increase in use of the Service    8. Service Level    TBD        TBD
                 relationship     Catalog;                          Management
                 with             Percentage Service                Service Catalog;
                 customers        Improvement Programs              9. Service Level
                                  completed to customer             Management
                                  satisfaction                      Process
                                                                    Improvement
                                                                    Policy
Quality          Manage the       Percentage increase in            3. Service Level    TBD        TBD
                 quantity and     Service Level Agreements          Agreement
                 quality of the   adequately supported by           Policy
                 ITS services     OLAs and UCs*
                 required
          Page 14 of 18                                                        Approved on: 11/13/2006
                                                                 SLM Management Information Requirements
                                                                           Operational Excellence Program
                                                                              Document No.: OEP-10-14



Category       CSF              KPI                               Policy              Target     Tool
               Manage the       Percentage Service                9. Service Level               TBD
               relationship     Improvement Programs              Management
               with             completed on time                 Process
               customers                                          Improvement
                                                                  Policy
Performance    Manage the       Percentage increase in # of P1    1. Service Level    Priority   IT
               quantity and     incidents resolved in target      Management          Model      Service
               quality of the   timeframe*;                       Process and                    Mgt tool
               ITS services     Percentage increase in # of P2    Compliance
               required         incidents resolved in target      Policy
                                timeframe*;
                                Percentage increase in # of P3
                                incidents resolved in target
                                timeframe*;
                                Percentage increase in # of P4
                                incidents resolved in target
                                timeframe*
Compliance     Manage the       Percentage increase in            4. Service Level               TBD
               quantity and     number of OLAs in place           Management
               quality of the                                     Operational
               ITS services                                       Level Agreement
               required                                           Policy
               Manage the       Percentage increase in            14. Service                    TBD
               relationship     Service Level Review              Level
               with             meetings conducted                Performance
               customers                                          Review Policy
* indicates a future KPI
                                  Table 2. Measurement Framework




       Page 15 of 18                                                         Approved on: 11/13/2006
                                                            SLM Management Information Requirements
                                                                      Operational Excellence Program
                                                                         Document No.: OEP-10-14




Appendix A - Metric Evaluation
This section describes how each report with value, quality, etc., can be viewed / read / assessed /
evaluated to provide the status of the organization.

   1. Availability (SLA target vs. Actual): Provides a comparison of SLA target availability
      with actual availability.
             Evaluation: The Actual Availability meeting or exceeding the SLA target for
             availability throughout the various categorical distinctions as defined under each
             section of reports, indicates meeting the agreed upon quality of service
             availability.

   2. Service Availability Impact: For those services below the SLA target for availability this
      report provides a list of areas impacting that service, service grouping, or component.
              Evaluation: This lists all events impacting availability, categorizing by scheduled
              and emergency. Scheduled changes would have been approved by the customer
              and while it does impact the performance of the service, it would not indicate a
              lack of compliance with the SLA.

   3. Problem Resolution Rates: Provides compliance and value reporting on how ITS is
      actively working to implement long-term solutions for more efficient services.
              Evaluation: This lists the open problems and recently resolved problems to show
              the status. Increased efficiency and speed in resolving problems adds value to the
              service.

   4. Availability (OLA target vs. Actual): Provides a comparison of OLA target availability
      with actual availability.
             Evaluation: The Actual Availability meeting or exceeding the OLA target for
             availability throughout the various categorical distinctions as defined under each
             section of reports, indicates meeting the agreed upon quality of service
             availability.

   5. Availability/Downtime: Provides both percentages and real numbers reporting mid-
      period availability as proportioned across the full agreement period.
             Evaluation: A downtime within the SLA or OLA availability target would
             indicate the amount of time available for maintenance. A downtime outside the
             SLA or OLA availability target would indicate a breach.



       Page 16 of 18                                                    Approved on: 11/13/2006
                                                       SLM Management Information Requirements
                                                                 Operational Excellence Program
                                                                    Document No.: OEP-10-14




6. OLA Target Trending: Provides a 9 month trending report (past and future) of how the
   OLA Targets are being met and the projection for the next 3 months.
        Evaluation: A trend indicating a breach of an OLA target would alert the service
        group to a potential problem and indicate extra attention should be given to the
        service and its components.

7. Service Catalog Usage: Provides the number of hits to the web site and a comparison
   over a set period.
           Evaluation: An increase in the number of hits to the web site indicates more
           usage of the service catalog as a regular resource of information for our
           customers.

8. SLA Target Trending: Provides a 9 month trending report (past and future) of how the
   SLA Targets are being met and the projection for the next 3 months.
         Evaluation: A trend indicating a breach of an SLA target would alert the service
         level process group to a potential problem and indicate extra attention should be
         given to the service and its components.

9. Service Level Review Percentage: Provides a measurement of the number of service
   level reviews scheduled and completed.
           Evaluation: A consistent percentage of service level reviews indicate that
           customers are regularly contacted concerning their service. An increase of service
           level reviews may indicate issues with their service.

10. Service Improvement Program Status: Provides a measurement of the effectiveness and
    efficiency of Service Improvement Programs (SIPs).
            Evaluation: SIPS completed successfully involves both the completion of the SIP
            on-time and to the satisfaction of the customer. Customer Satisfaction will be
            evaluated through the Service Level Review meetings with the customers.

11. Service Level Document Review Status (OLA/SLA): Provides a measurement of the
    efficiency of maintaining the OLAs and SLAs.
            Evaluation: A consistent percentage of service level document reviews completed
            indicate that the Service Level documents are more closely matching the current
            services. In the case of the Customer Review, it also alerts all parties to up-
            coming potential negotiations and discussions concerning specific SLAs.

12. Client Impact Forward Schedule of Change: Provides a list of the up-coming scheduled
    changes that may possibly impact services used by the client.
            Evaluation: Any change on the list could possibly impact service availability and
            should promote information exchange between the customer and ITS.
    Page 17 of 18                                                 Approved on: 11/13/2006
                                                               SLM Management Information Requirements
                                                                         Operational Excellence Program
                                                                            Document No.: OEP-10-14




Appendix B – Report Distribution Summary
Table one below details how the various building blocks fit against the reports for the various
target audiences.               Ta
                                  rg




                                                      IT
                                    et




                                                         S
                                                         IT
                                       A




                                                          IT




                                                           Se ice
                                                            S
                                       ud




                                                             S




                                                              Se

                                                               rv
                                                                Su
                                         ie


                                                 IT




                                                                 ic
                                                                  rv sto Ma




                                                                  IT
                                           nc




                                                                   pp
                                                  S




                                                                    e

                                                                    S
             R




                                                                      IT
                                             e




                                                                       Le
                                                                       Ex




                                                                       C
                                                                       or
              ep




                                                                        Se roc s O t
                                                                         S




                                                                         u

                                                                         Le
                                                                          tG




                                                                          ve
                                                                          ec
                or




                                                                           rv
                                                                           Se




                                                                            ve

                                                                             l P ces
                                                                             ut




                                                                              ro




                                                                              ic
                  ts




                                                                               ni




                                                                               m

                                                                                lP
                                                                                iv




                                                                                e
                                                                                 up
                                                                                  or




                                                                                  er
                                                                                   e




                                                                                   Le
                                                                                    ro
                                                                                     M

                                                                                     M




                                                                                     M




                                                                                     es

                                                                                      ve
                                                                                       an
                                                                                       an




                                                                                       an




                                                                                        s
                                                                                        na ent




                                                                                         l M ge r
                                                                                           ag nt
                                                                                           ag




                                                                                           M
                                                                                           ag nt
                                                                                            ge




                                                                                            an
                                                                                             an
                                                                                              em

                                                                                              em




                                                                                              em
                                                                                               m




                                                                                               w

                                                                                                a

                                                                                                ag
                                                                                                 ne
                                                                                                  e




                                                                                                  e

                                                                                                  en




                                                                                                    er
                                                                                                     r
       Availability SLA target vs Actual                               X     X    X    X                  X
       Service Availability Impact                                     X     X    X    X          X       X
       Problem Resolution Rates                                        X     X    X    X
       Availability OLA target vs Actual                                          X
       Availability and Downtime                                                  X
       OLA Target Trending                                                        X
       Service Catalog Usage                                                                X
       SLA Target Trending                                                                  X     X
       Service Level Review Percentage                                                      X     X       X
       Service Improvement Program Status                                              X          X       X
       Service Level Document Review Status                                            X                  X
       Client Impact Forward Schedule of Change                                        X                  X
                            Table 3. Listing of Reports and their Audience




       Page 18 of 18                                                         Approved on: 11/13/2006

				
DOCUMENT INFO
Description: Information Requirement of Management Levels document sample