With repeated requests coming from all sorts of people for insights into the ITIL/ITSM world, I thought of putting up my ideas on this blog. That will continue, but now we also have a new medium to interract, VIDEO.!
One question people always ask is regarding the sequence of the courses. I have a strong recommendation for this sequence: ST, (SO, SD), SS, CSI in the same order. SD & SO can be taken in any sequence as per preference. There are a lot of concepts in ST which are required for discussions in Design as well as Operations. Hence, it is best to follow this sequence. Strategy makes sense ONLY after we have understood the lower part of the Service LifeCycle. And CSI (improvements) can be understoor much more clearly AFTER one has gone through the entire Service LifeCycle.
Those having questions are welcome to email them across.
Happy Viewing: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ieJtlTp5g4E
Thursday, May 24, 2012
Friday, August 12, 2011
K-model - Diagnostic escalation ladder for IT Infrastructure Management
Some thoughts on Designing diagnostic escalation chains...
One of the major bones of contention in most service desks (and Incident management teams) is about separating the areas of accountability for different levels of escalation. People often get confused about which level exactly should be addressing a particular solution. Conflicts arise due to unclear demarcation of boundaries between an L1 and L2 issues, and what exactly will trigger escalation to L2, and such like.
Often, in training programs, learners ask about appropriate steps for designing an escalation chain for Incident Management or Service Desks. The two basic classifications simply talk about functional and hierarchical escalations. These two are merely nomenclature – i.e. they simply tell the names, but provide little guidance on how to set up good escalation chains.
Hence I am sharing my thoughts / experience here in the form of a K model. Of course, there is no such thing as a BEST DESIGN. I am presenting a hierarchical K model which I feel would serve most IT Service Management situations. Of course, other views are also possible, but, this one, is generic enough to be used as a guide in almost all situations. If reported properly, it would give a strong diagnostic view of the gaps in skill sets in managing infrastructures.
For escalating incidents, I propose the following factors for distinguishing between levels:
1. Level K1: Incident level: This level would cover the actual effort required to manage a particular incident. This effort would involve impact management and restoration of service levels.
2. Level K2: Systemic level: This level would involve identifying any systemic/systematic issues lurking in the system for which some investigation or root-cause analysis is required. ITIL Problem management process would map here.
3. Level K3: Architecture level: This level would identify and uncover any architecture or design issues or limitations which have to be addressed by changing the architecture of the system as a whole. Often, in the initial period, service levels are satisfactory because of the huge capacity margins installed in anticipation of volume increases. At these initial levels, even inadequately designed architectures deliver acceptable levels. But over a period of time, as volumes increase these architectural issues will present themselves, and it will be far beyond the capability of Incident / problem management teams to identify (and rectify!) these issues.
4. Level K4: Vendor level: This level identifies issues to be escalated to the vendors (Oracle, Microsoft, BMC, etc.) for fixes which can be corrected ONLY by vendors. Generally, this is likely to involve the next update cycle of the vendor, but in case of dedicated support situations, (like applications) fixes can have much faster turnaround times.
Notice that the different levels change based on the resolution approach. Every time the "WHAT NEEDS TO BE DONE" game changes, we have the next level in the model.
This K model of escalation, helps to understand the “WHAT is happening” part more than the “HOW to handle it” aspects. In this K model, escalation happens every time the game changes. Typically, it would be common to find two or more levels of “How to handle it” within each of these K levels.
Hope this helps to produce diagnostic management statistics about the stability and longevity of the infrastructure by producing trends on each K level. It also highlights the gaps in skill sets for managing a given infrastructure.
Comments welcome.
One of the major bones of contention in most service desks (and Incident management teams) is about separating the areas of accountability for different levels of escalation. People often get confused about which level exactly should be addressing a particular solution. Conflicts arise due to unclear demarcation of boundaries between an L1 and L2 issues, and what exactly will trigger escalation to L2, and such like.
Often, in training programs, learners ask about appropriate steps for designing an escalation chain for Incident Management or Service Desks. The two basic classifications simply talk about functional and hierarchical escalations. These two are merely nomenclature – i.e. they simply tell the names, but provide little guidance on how to set up good escalation chains.
Hence I am sharing my thoughts / experience here in the form of a K model. Of course, there is no such thing as a BEST DESIGN. I am presenting a hierarchical K model which I feel would serve most IT Service Management situations. Of course, other views are also possible, but, this one, is generic enough to be used as a guide in almost all situations. If reported properly, it would give a strong diagnostic view of the gaps in skill sets in managing infrastructures.
For escalating incidents, I propose the following factors for distinguishing between levels:
1. Level K1: Incident level: This level would cover the actual effort required to manage a particular incident. This effort would involve impact management and restoration of service levels.
2. Level K2: Systemic level: This level would involve identifying any systemic/systematic issues lurking in the system for which some investigation or root-cause analysis is required. ITIL Problem management process would map here.
3. Level K3: Architecture level: This level would identify and uncover any architecture or design issues or limitations which have to be addressed by changing the architecture of the system as a whole. Often, in the initial period, service levels are satisfactory because of the huge capacity margins installed in anticipation of volume increases. At these initial levels, even inadequately designed architectures deliver acceptable levels. But over a period of time, as volumes increase these architectural issues will present themselves, and it will be far beyond the capability of Incident / problem management teams to identify (and rectify!) these issues.
4. Level K4: Vendor level: This level identifies issues to be escalated to the vendors (Oracle, Microsoft, BMC, etc.) for fixes which can be corrected ONLY by vendors. Generally, this is likely to involve the next update cycle of the vendor, but in case of dedicated support situations, (like applications) fixes can have much faster turnaround times.
Notice that the different levels change based on the resolution approach. Every time the "WHAT NEEDS TO BE DONE" game changes, we have the next level in the model.
This K model of escalation, helps to understand the “WHAT is happening” part more than the “HOW to handle it” aspects. In this K model, escalation happens every time the game changes. Typically, it would be common to find two or more levels of “How to handle it” within each of these K levels.
Hope this helps to produce diagnostic management statistics about the stability and longevity of the infrastructure by producing trends on each K level. It also highlights the gaps in skill sets for managing a given infrastructure.
Comments welcome.
Thursday, April 21, 2011
Enforcing Service Level Management in Government Operations:
Example of Lokpal in Action
My idea of a sample Lokpal Action: (with Service Management references in brackets)
A person receives an IT (Income Tax) refund cheque which has an error. His bank account number printed on the cheque is wrong; hence the cheque cannot be credited to his account. Presently, he has two options:
1. He can to go through the extremely tedious and cumbersome cheque re-issue process, on which he has no control after mailing the faulty cheque back.
2. He can also go to the court agains the IT Department to claim damages of effort and unpaid interest. If the court is convinced of his claim, it will award damages which have to be paid by the IT Department (meaning all of us).
Now, anyone who has experienced either government departmental working or judicial processes in India knows that both these options require too much time and enregy, with the end result still uncertian..! (SM: Utility is there, but Warranty is questionable.) Naturally, anyone in this situation is faced with two choices: either go through proper channels and incur lot of expenses of money & time or bribe someone to get things done quickly. The concerned officials always ensure that the 'bribe' seems more attractive than the 'legal, correct, moral' way of getting this done by working fast after bribing and slowing the work if not bribed. So, anyone will choose the lesser of the two costs, eh! Also with bribes, the results are practically guaranteed! (Warranty of Service!)
However, with the Lokpal, things will be very different. The Lokpal/LokAyukt will:
a. investigate and identify the guy who made the mistake (Roles and responsibilities)
b. calculate the damages including the cost of remidiation, (Evaluation) and
c. order the damages to be paid from the errant official's salary within a given timeframe (SLA)..! Why should the rest of the country pay for incompetence of a clerk?!! (Allocation of costs)
In this way, both aspects of the Govt Service: Utility and Warranty (assurance) are protected by Lokpal. The law gives awesome corrective power to the LokPal, and therefore to enable this power to be deliver positive results, it is important to keep it free from political influence, otherwise, it will become another useless appendage of the government machinery. (Maker Cheker parity as in Change Management)
Hence please note that it is extremely important to keep this lokpal outside the political influence, otherwise it will never work..! Please spread this and support the independance of Lokpal.
A person receives an IT (Income Tax) refund cheque which has an error. His bank account number printed on the cheque is wrong; hence the cheque cannot be credited to his account. Presently, he has two options:
1. He can to go through the extremely tedious and cumbersome cheque re-issue process, on which he has no control after mailing the faulty cheque back.
2. He can also go to the court agains the IT Department to claim damages of effort and unpaid interest. If the court is convinced of his claim, it will award damages which have to be paid by the IT Department (meaning all of us).
Now, anyone who has experienced either government departmental working or judicial processes in India knows that both these options require too much time and enregy, with the end result still uncertian..! (SM: Utility is there, but Warranty is questionable.) Naturally, anyone in this situation is faced with two choices: either go through proper channels and incur lot of expenses of money & time or bribe someone to get things done quickly. The concerned officials always ensure that the 'bribe' seems more attractive than the 'legal, correct, moral' way of getting this done by working fast after bribing and slowing the work if not bribed. So, anyone will choose the lesser of the two costs, eh! Also with bribes, the results are practically guaranteed! (Warranty of Service!)
However, with the Lokpal, things will be very different. The Lokpal/LokAyukt will:
a. investigate and identify the guy who made the mistake (Roles and responsibilities)
b. calculate the damages including the cost of remidiation, (Evaluation) and
c. order the damages to be paid from the errant official's salary within a given timeframe (SLA)..! Why should the rest of the country pay for incompetence of a clerk?!! (Allocation of costs)
In this way, both aspects of the Govt Service: Utility and Warranty (assurance) are protected by Lokpal. The law gives awesome corrective power to the LokPal, and therefore to enable this power to be deliver positive results, it is important to keep it free from political influence, otherwise, it will become another useless appendage of the government machinery. (Maker Cheker parity as in Change Management)
Hence please note that it is extremely important to keep this lokpal outside the political influence, otherwise it will never work..! Please spread this and support the independance of Lokpal.
Friday, April 15, 2011
An informal conversation with Anna Hazare on Lokpal Bill
Glad to share a transcript of the informal conversation with Shri Anna Hazare on Pune-Delhi flight on Fri 15th. Ofcourse, the entire conversation was in Marathi, but am putting it here in English to include my non-Marathi friends into the flow. Me: Anna, my name is Atul Kherde, and I would like to talk to you, can I sit with you.
Anna: Of course, go ahead.
Me: This is about the Lokpal Bill and frankly, I have not studied it to any great extent. So I would like to know some basics which an ordinary layman would want to know.
Anna: Kahi harkat nahi, (no problem, please go ahead)
Me: What is the nature of this Lokpal institution? What is the need for it since we already have a Judiciary which can act against errant public officials.
Anna: We have a lot of agencies whose job is to ensure that the govt officials work fairly and transperantly. CVC, CBI, etc are supposed to question / investigate the govt and take action if required through the Judicial channel. But they are under the direct control of the same govt which they are suppposed to monitor! One major tactic of corruption in the govt is delaying the work of ordinary citizens. So, with this Lokpal, people would be able to question the delays (non-performance) of govt officials.
Me: So, would it be right to say that "the MONITOR function of the govt work will be entrusted to the Lokpal"?
Anna: Yes. See, it will not be a parallel government. It will not replace the judiciary. The normal functioning of the executive will continue as it currently is. Only the monitoring and corrective action function will come to the Lokpal. Me: Will the Lokpal have any teeth? i.e. Can the Lokpal arrest people? Anna: The Lokpal will make inquiries and impose penalties. One major feature of this system is that the penalties will be recovered from the salaries of the erring officials. That will make the govt machinery more responsive to the needs of the ordinary citizens. Why should the entire nation pay for the mistakes of a few corrupt people!! Let us make THOSE PEOPLE pay!
Me: Where is the Lokpal vis-a-vis the Judiciary?
Anna: People will be able to visit Lokpal to seek help against non-performance of the govt machinery. The Lokpal will fix the accountability and time within which the citizen's pending issues have to be resolved. Lokpal will also impose penalties on the concerned officers if required. The Judiciary has a much wider scope.
Me: Selecting the right 'good' people seems to be a cornerstone here. But geniune goodness cannot come from a system. Goodness can come only from good people having individual merit. How many Annas and Kiran Bedis are there? Very few. So, I would like to understand how a system will produce goodness.
Anna: Good. So, we need a system of identifying good people, and that will come only from transperancy. Nominations will be invited and all those who are nominated will go through certian known filters like asset declaration, history, accusations, etc. The entire deliberations of the committee for selecting and identifying these 'good people' will be broadcast live, let the nation see it. It is easy to do favouritism in private, but if the discussions are on live broadcast, nobody will dare to support falsehoods. The real value addition of this Lokpal bill will come from identifying people of impeccable credentials, individual merit and spotless history. The whole process will take time but we have to make a start.
Me: On a more personal note: Anna, when we look at other people of your age we are stupefied..! What drives you? What is your motivation?
Anna: I was in the 1965 war, at Khemakaran where I lost most of my fellow-soilders. I too was hit by shrapnel, (showed the mark on his forehead) and could have died. That was a shock for me.. I thought there must be some purpose to my life. At one point, I was about to commit suicide, but on New Delhi railway station, I came across books by Swami Vivekanand and I realized the purpose of life is to serve others. Neither we bring anything with us when we are born, nor we carry anythign with us after death. But everyone is still searching, searching for something. We find people are searching for 'anand' (joy) in things. But THINGS will never give you stable joy. Costly crockery gives joy, but when it breaks it also brings sorrow. So, we should strive to find sthayi (stable) joy, which can come only by serving others. As the Gita says, "Karmannye waadhika raaste...", working without expectations will give joy. So, I decided not to marry because that would have given me chintas (minor worries). So I did not marry, but still have done prapanch! Ralegan Siddhi is my prapanch, but it is not a small (personal) prapanch but a big prapanch because it belongs to everybody and has contributions from everybody.
Me: Anna it was a great opportunity for me to get these inputs first hand..! I don't even want to say "thank you", this is far greater than what words can capture. One last question. If an ordinary citizen like me wants to contribute in your movement, what should s/he do? How do we get involved in the process?
Anna: See, the real strength of this country is the young population. Our youth is uncomparable. So, if anyone wants to contribute you can visit www.annahazare.org and start from there. Do send us an email or letter, and participate in the movement.
=========== xxx =============
It sure was a great experience meeting Anna, he is so down-to-earth and humble, that it is impossible to believe that this man has moved the entire nation..! There were a lot of other things about individual development, value-education, etc., which he shared, but to keep the focus on Lokpal, I have not included them here. Maybe another day..!
Tuesday, March 8, 2011
The onion of man-woman relationships...!
Hello everybody, and glad to be back..! On Women's day, here goes:
The Indian ethos offers a huge array of relations, right from grandfather, father, uncle, mama, elder-bro, kid-bro, boy-friend, hubby, jiju, son, damad, grandson, etc. for women. We have a similar list for men like Dadi, mom, mausi, bua, sis, girl-friend, wife, brother's wife, son's wife, etc. Each of these relationships has a certian distinct character, which can be experienced ONLY in Joint Family Cultures (i.e. From Middle East onwards to Japan). There are many things in our lives which only a Woman could have done for us. As also, there are many things in women's lives which only a Man could have done for them. The relations between Men and Women are like exploring the layers of an onion. You go on peeling each layer hoping to get to the bottom of the man-woman relationship, but when you actually reach the core, you find NOTHING or maybe a hint of the next generation. Then one questions, if there was nothing at the core, where/what is the man-woman relationship? And the answer emerges, "That was the whole onion which you peeled away, dude!! You were so busy peeling, you never noticed the layers you discarded!" The BASIC CORE relationship is simply about the next generation, but that is NOTHING in the whole onion. The really enjoyable part is about all those extremely varied layers. The more layers one is able to experience in their lives, the bigger will be THEIR onion of man-woman relationship!
A sincere thanks to all the women in my life!
The Indian ethos offers a huge array of relations, right from grandfather, father, uncle, mama, elder-bro, kid-bro, boy-friend, hubby, jiju, son, damad, grandson, etc. for women. We have a similar list for men like Dadi, mom, mausi, bua, sis, girl-friend, wife, brother's wife, son's wife, etc. Each of these relationships has a certian distinct character, which can be experienced ONLY in Joint Family Cultures (i.e. From Middle East onwards to Japan). There are many things in our lives which only a Woman could have done for us. As also, there are many things in women's lives which only a Man could have done for them. The relations between Men and Women are like exploring the layers of an onion. You go on peeling each layer hoping to get to the bottom of the man-woman relationship, but when you actually reach the core, you find NOTHING or maybe a hint of the next generation. Then one questions, if there was nothing at the core, where/what is the man-woman relationship? And the answer emerges, "That was the whole onion which you peeled away, dude!! You were so busy peeling, you never noticed the layers you discarded!" The BASIC CORE relationship is simply about the next generation, but that is NOTHING in the whole onion. The really enjoyable part is about all those extremely varied layers. The more layers one is able to experience in their lives, the bigger will be THEIR onion of man-woman relationship!
A sincere thanks to all the women in my life!
Tuesday, June 22, 2010
An utterly shocking air-hostess-institute ad: Seventy bloody thousand..!
A mockery of all the other professions where 'desirability as a female' is not the major criteria…
Disclaimer: I have taken around 400 flights in the past few years. Having witnessed the sheer HARD-work first hand, I have deep respect for the Air-Hostesses. This post is NOT ABOUT the air-hostess profession per se, but about a stupid ad by an air-hostess-training-institute.
Secondly: Whether you like it or not, “desirability as a female” is the SINGLE most important criterion into the selection process and I have no moral issue it.
The Ad: shows an impudent young girl who talks about her 'starting salary' as "Seventy bloody thousand!!! Who needs an NRI?" Her tone and demeanor and everything else will bring the word "F***ing" (instead of bloody) to mind in later recalls. The totality makes it clear that her entire capital is her gender, looks and age and she looks at life through roses and greeting card wisdom!
What I did not like about it:
1. Rs.70,000/- per month is a great value in the Indian salary context. If you don't agree, just think how many who retired by 2005 would have dreamt of crossing that figure even towards the end of 30-35 years' professional life? Is this girl doing more value-addition? It is a kind of insult to all those who were in much more socially productive professions, but never made this kind of money.
2. Forget retired people. Just recollect/imagine how much effort and grit YOU required (or will require) to cross this figure. Realize that that effort/grit can be trumped merely by the right "desirability as a female". I felt insulted. Don't YOU?
3. What about the millions of other girls who will not make this kind of money (nurses, doctors, teachers, lawyers, clerks, accountants, etc.) because they are in jobs where they choose NOT to capitalize on their "desirability as a female". Is "finding an NRI" the ultimate salvation of a girl's life? I would like to know the opinion of some female readers on this one.
4. This ad shows money as the singular output of a job. If we are talking purely of money, then Rs.70,000/- per month is waaay toooo cheap. The movie ‘Corporate’ showed that there are girls in that demography who make that kind of money in 24 hours, OK?. Doesn’t this ad promote the “money is the ultimate goal” culture? Yes, I see some boys too nowadays, but the numbers are miniscule. And yes, the ‘desirability’ criterion remains applicable with boys too.
So, I thought the ad insulting to both sides:
Those who join are being told, “Look – the hard-work etc is all ok. At the rock bottom, you are just a piece of *** otherwise you wouldn’t be here.”.
Those who choose join other professions are being told: “Look, you may slog for the rest of your life. That cutie next door will gift a Toyota Camry to her dad/boyfriend you can’t even dream of!”
Again, these are ‘facts-of-life’. Facts are facts, they cannot be right or wrong. The issue is not with the facts, but with the values projected by the ad. The attitude projected by the impudent girl in the ad is entirely unfit for an air-hostess. (At least an air-hostess-training-institute should know this.) This “Seventy bloody thousand” line has the potential to ‘get into the head’ of quite a few girls of that age. I can imagine the plight of many parents who will be forced to cough-up the astronomical fees against their judgment or lose face with their daughters purely on monetary grounds. I do hope the ad is withdrawn soon because it projects the wrong values.
Ohh! hullo, come back!!! Where is service management angle in this?
Service Management Issue: The service catalog lists services which are ‘stated’. However, in service management, for good customer satisfaction, ‘implied’ services are as important as ‘stated’ services. In a service management situation, if you fail to grasp the implied services correctly, you are headed for failure, regardless of your competence on the ‘stated’ services.
Now, please don’t read any innuendo in ‘implied’ services. Some of them are:
1. Making customers ‘feel’ pleasant and happy from welcome to exit.
2. Being very difficult to “shout at”. (it is difficult to yell at a 20 yr old girl!)
3. Invoking ‘gallantry in customers’ to cover shortcomings in service. People say ‘koi baat nahi!’ more readily.
Though an average middle-aged man would fall miserably short in these ‘implied’ services, there is nothing morally wrong with these services. Facts-of-life!
Cheers!
Disclaimer: I have taken around 400 flights in the past few years. Having witnessed the sheer HARD-work first hand, I have deep respect for the Air-Hostesses. This post is NOT ABOUT the air-hostess profession per se, but about a stupid ad by an air-hostess-training-institute.
Secondly: Whether you like it or not, “desirability as a female” is the SINGLE most important criterion into the selection process and I have no moral issue it.
The Ad: shows an impudent young girl who talks about her 'starting salary' as "Seventy bloody thousand!!! Who needs an NRI?" Her tone and demeanor and everything else will bring the word "F***ing" (instead of bloody) to mind in later recalls. The totality makes it clear that her entire capital is her gender, looks and age and she looks at life through roses and greeting card wisdom!
What I did not like about it:
1. Rs.70,000/- per month is a great value in the Indian salary context. If you don't agree, just think how many who retired by 2005 would have dreamt of crossing that figure even towards the end of 30-35 years' professional life? Is this girl doing more value-addition? It is a kind of insult to all those who were in much more socially productive professions, but never made this kind of money.
2. Forget retired people. Just recollect/imagine how much effort and grit YOU required (or will require) to cross this figure. Realize that that effort/grit can be trumped merely by the right "desirability as a female". I felt insulted. Don't YOU?
3. What about the millions of other girls who will not make this kind of money (nurses, doctors, teachers, lawyers, clerks, accountants, etc.) because they are in jobs where they choose NOT to capitalize on their "desirability as a female". Is "finding an NRI" the ultimate salvation of a girl's life? I would like to know the opinion of some female readers on this one.
4. This ad shows money as the singular output of a job. If we are talking purely of money, then Rs.70,000/- per month is waaay toooo cheap. The movie ‘Corporate’ showed that there are girls in that demography who make that kind of money in 24 hours, OK?. Doesn’t this ad promote the “money is the ultimate goal” culture? Yes, I see some boys too nowadays, but the numbers are miniscule. And yes, the ‘desirability’ criterion remains applicable with boys too.
So, I thought the ad insulting to both sides:
Those who join are being told, “Look – the hard-work etc is all ok. At the rock bottom, you are just a piece of *** otherwise you wouldn’t be here.”.
Those who choose join other professions are being told: “Look, you may slog for the rest of your life. That cutie next door will gift a Toyota Camry to her dad/boyfriend you can’t even dream of!”
Again, these are ‘facts-of-life’. Facts are facts, they cannot be right or wrong. The issue is not with the facts, but with the values projected by the ad. The attitude projected by the impudent girl in the ad is entirely unfit for an air-hostess. (At least an air-hostess-training-institute should know this.) This “Seventy bloody thousand” line has the potential to ‘get into the head’ of quite a few girls of that age. I can imagine the plight of many parents who will be forced to cough-up the astronomical fees against their judgment or lose face with their daughters purely on monetary grounds. I do hope the ad is withdrawn soon because it projects the wrong values.
Ohh! hullo, come back!!! Where is service management angle in this?
Service Management Issue: The service catalog lists services which are ‘stated’. However, in service management, for good customer satisfaction, ‘implied’ services are as important as ‘stated’ services. In a service management situation, if you fail to grasp the implied services correctly, you are headed for failure, regardless of your competence on the ‘stated’ services.
Now, please don’t read any innuendo in ‘implied’ services. Some of them are:
1. Making customers ‘feel’ pleasant and happy from welcome to exit.
2. Being very difficult to “shout at”. (it is difficult to yell at a 20 yr old girl!)
3. Invoking ‘gallantry in customers’ to cover shortcomings in service. People say ‘koi baat nahi!’ more readily.
Though an average middle-aged man would fall miserably short in these ‘implied’ services, there is nothing morally wrong with these services. Facts-of-life!
Cheers!
Friday, June 4, 2010
Ketchup sachets are free WITH THE PIZZA, OK?
Apart from consulting, I also am a trainer for almost the entire pyramid of ITIL / ITSM courses. Right from ITIL V3 Foundation, to the Intermediate levels of RCV, OSA, PPO and SOA on one side and the SS, SD, ST, SO and CSI on the other. I am also accredited to deliver one of the most obtuse courses ever, the MALC! Naturally, travelling to new places and meeting new people is one of the chief attractions of the job. Every time I face a new batch, I meet many new people. Since, these courses are in the Management Training domain, I never cut short on the introduction round as it gives me good insights into the personalities. Over the few days of training, the participants share very intimate aspects of their professional life and I am required to share the ITIL wisdom on that particular aspect. (occassionally, I have to restrain them from going into their personal lives...) Being able to help highly competent technical people to transcend their technical boundaries and venture into the management domain is a great source of personal fulfillment and satisfaction.
Every time a training program is closing, there is a feedback session, where often people voice their opinions. Many communicate with me over email after the batch is over, and over the past few years, I have collected quite a few geniune friends; these relationships have endured over the years, where we keep in touch and report our 'current states', 'whereabouts', career choices, etc.
So, when I got a chat-request from one Varma from Agra, in India, I took it routinely as a participant who wants to stay in touch, nothing more. Over some time we exchanged polite "GoodMornings" and "How are yous".
Now, I don't like to set up the BUSY red-dot on the GoogleTalk - it is kindof standoffish. So, my status is always green. I would rather run the risk of people pinging me at inopportune moments rather than appear uncommunicative. [Ofcourse, this is my blog so it is all about ME. I am not accusing anyone else of being standoffish, so don't get peeved if you happen to set up red-dots all the time. That is your choice and I fully love and respect people who put up busy signs...]
From the last few days, this Varma asked politely whether I would answer queries. I said yes. Then he asked a question. I answered. Then he started arguing about that. Then I told him that I wouldn't be able to engage in a debate with him on chat. If he had simple queries of the "which course should I do before which" types, I could reply quickly. Then I educated him on the difference between closed questions (name two components of priority) and open questions (tell me something about priority model), and indicated that the chat medium is suitable only for closed questions. Then I told him, that delivering trainings is my PROFESSION, so if he needs elaborate answers, he has to get into one of my training programs. Now if you have read so far, your patience must have run out, and so had mine. So, I explained to him that he could ask questions on LinkedIn if he liked, and I would reply publically when I could. The next day, I got a friend request from him on linked in and then I got a question in the LinkedIn inbox which I reproduce here verbatim: "Please advice how Service Operation (SO) maintains a balance between an internal IT view and an external business view. Pleas elaborate!" Phew! So, now the LinkedIn inbox becomes the chat mechanism..!
When I had said LinkedIn, I expected him to start a discussion into which I too could have contributed. This is an invitation to write books without any royalty! So, ultimately I had to do the ultimate... I felt sad, but I have only so many hours in a day (24 last time I counted) and simply cannot devote the time to such open-ended questions.
However, I had to clarify the situation in Service Management terms, otherwise I would not be able to sleep properly. So, bingo! I realized ***Service Catlog SubVersion*** How? Well, as a trainer, I deliver certian paid services. Out of which, there are courses like V2M, V3F, ST, SO, RCV, PPO, MALC, etc. To access these services, participants have to pay the requsite fees. They land into a classroom, and there depending upon relevance and participation of other class members, their queries are answered. The other (friendly) services I provide (yeah, friendly, no extra charge!) are minor queries over email, chat and rarely, phone too. These would be queries which could have been legitimately asked in the class, but somehow were not. So, ok, you can ask them now, provided they can be answered quickly. Often, participants, call-up and discuss career options, and looking at the serious nature of the query, I usually devote sufficient time to these. I usually guide the participant to first formulate the question. And usually in a subsequent call, help them to discover the answer.
The first set are paid services, and through them, if one get access to me, the second set are free services with due trust on the discretion of the user. But when a user gets access to the free services, and tries to use that free access to obtain what is essentially a paid service, then we have a case of Service Catalog SubVersion. And once a SC_Sub incident is raised, it might impinge upon the user's access to the free services too.
Yeah, I mean the freebies are always associated with a paid service. Sugar is free with a cup of coffee! How many cubes? ok someone might get away with as many as 20 cubes! But if you start talking boxes? Pl BUY as many pounds as you want. The ketchup sachets are free if you BUY a pizza. And then too, you can take 2 or 3 or 4 or ... ok 8, NOW STOP!!!! For a truck-load of sachets, you have to approach the place where they sell them. We give them free with pizzas!
Pray how many, one may ask, sugar-cubes or sachets are legitimately 'takeable'? This is the difference between a service situation and a product situation. There is no REAL answer to this question. However, one easily KNOWS when the boundary gets crossed. In a service situation (exactly parallel to mens-rea), intentions define legitimacy, not specifications!
Ohhh, sorry, come again, what was that? "What is mens-rea?" Oh. Please sign up for my classes on Indian Penal Code!
Cheers!
Every time a training program is closing, there is a feedback session, where often people voice their opinions. Many communicate with me over email after the batch is over, and over the past few years, I have collected quite a few geniune friends; these relationships have endured over the years, where we keep in touch and report our 'current states', 'whereabouts', career choices, etc.
So, when I got a chat-request from one Varma from Agra, in India, I took it routinely as a participant who wants to stay in touch, nothing more. Over some time we exchanged polite "GoodMornings" and "How are yous".
Now, I don't like to set up the BUSY red-dot on the GoogleTalk - it is kindof standoffish. So, my status is always green. I would rather run the risk of people pinging me at inopportune moments rather than appear uncommunicative. [Ofcourse, this is my blog so it is all about ME. I am not accusing anyone else of being standoffish, so don't get peeved if you happen to set up red-dots all the time. That is your choice and I fully love and respect people who put up busy signs...]
From the last few days, this Varma asked politely whether I would answer queries. I said yes. Then he asked a question. I answered. Then he started arguing about that. Then I told him that I wouldn't be able to engage in a debate with him on chat. If he had simple queries of the "which course should I do before which" types, I could reply quickly. Then I educated him on the difference between closed questions (name two components of priority) and open questions (tell me something about priority model), and indicated that the chat medium is suitable only for closed questions. Then I told him, that delivering trainings is my PROFESSION, so if he needs elaborate answers, he has to get into one of my training programs. Now if you have read so far, your patience must have run out, and so had mine. So, I explained to him that he could ask questions on LinkedIn if he liked, and I would reply publically when I could. The next day, I got a friend request from him on linked in and then I got a question in the LinkedIn inbox which I reproduce here verbatim: "Please advice how Service Operation (SO) maintains a balance between an internal IT view and an external business view. Pleas elaborate!" Phew! So, now the LinkedIn inbox becomes the chat mechanism..!
When I had said LinkedIn, I expected him to start a discussion into which I too could have contributed. This is an invitation to write books without any royalty! So, ultimately I had to do the ultimate... I felt sad, but I have only so many hours in a day (24 last time I counted) and simply cannot devote the time to such open-ended questions.
However, I had to clarify the situation in Service Management terms, otherwise I would not be able to sleep properly. So, bingo! I realized ***Service Catlog SubVersion*** How? Well, as a trainer, I deliver certian paid services. Out of which, there are courses like V2M, V3F, ST, SO, RCV, PPO, MALC, etc. To access these services, participants have to pay the requsite fees. They land into a classroom, and there depending upon relevance and participation of other class members, their queries are answered. The other (friendly) services I provide (yeah, friendly, no extra charge!) are minor queries over email, chat and rarely, phone too. These would be queries which could have been legitimately asked in the class, but somehow were not. So, ok, you can ask them now, provided they can be answered quickly. Often, participants, call-up and discuss career options, and looking at the serious nature of the query, I usually devote sufficient time to these. I usually guide the participant to first formulate the question. And usually in a subsequent call, help them to discover the answer.
The first set are paid services, and through them, if one get access to me, the second set are free services with due trust on the discretion of the user. But when a user gets access to the free services, and tries to use that free access to obtain what is essentially a paid service, then we have a case of Service Catalog SubVersion. And once a SC_Sub incident is raised, it might impinge upon the user's access to the free services too.
Yeah, I mean the freebies are always associated with a paid service. Sugar is free with a cup of coffee! How many cubes? ok someone might get away with as many as 20 cubes! But if you start talking boxes? Pl BUY as many pounds as you want. The ketchup sachets are free if you BUY a pizza. And then too, you can take 2 or 3 or 4 or ... ok 8, NOW STOP!!!! For a truck-load of sachets, you have to approach the place where they sell them. We give them free with pizzas!
Pray how many, one may ask, sugar-cubes or sachets are legitimately 'takeable'? This is the difference between a service situation and a product situation. There is no REAL answer to this question. However, one easily KNOWS when the boundary gets crossed. In a service situation (exactly parallel to mens-rea), intentions define legitimacy, not specifications!
Ohhh, sorry, come again, what was that? "What is mens-rea?" Oh. Please sign up for my classes on Indian Penal Code!
Cheers!
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
