Beruflich Dokumente
Kultur Dokumente
AGENDA
Background and History of KT What Does Highly Effective Look Like Process Overview Demonstrated Value KT and ITIL Successful Implementation Requirements KT Client Results Questions
Canada
Mexico
Finland Estonia Latvia Lithuania United Ireland Kingdom Netherlands Germany Switzerland France Headquarters Italy Princeton, NJ United Arab Emirates Argentina Peru Venezuela Chile Columbia
Korea Japan Hong Kong Taiwan Thailand Singapore Philippines Malaysia New Zealand Australia
Operational goals:
COMMUNICATION: Stakeholders are informed, and have confidence in the information CERTAINTY: restoration and troubleshooting processes create a sense of control
Why Clear Thinking Matters Individuals handling individual incidents/problems differently might be OK
? ?
Why Clear Thinking Matters for teams, that approach can quickly become a quality/efficiency problem
200
150
100
50
Linear to a team of 16
9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 20 Owners
10
11
Quality
Adoption
= Results
Coaching + Alignment of: Processes and Triggers Roles and responsibilities Measurement Role modeling/leadership/Culture Expectations - Consequences - Feedback Documentation and Knowledge Creation .
Business Results (Decreased cost per incident; Decreased resolution time; Increased Customer Support) Organization Results (Enhanced Teamwork; Enhanced communication; Enhanced ability to make and implement decisions)
Skill Development alone will get you 10-20% adoption What are the other adoption drivers in your business?
Copyright 2013Kepner-Tregoe, Inc. All Rights Reserved. 12
13
Optimized
Processes exist to measure effectiveness Lessons learned are examined consistently and applied Management uses metrics to improve the organization Senior management encourages use of KT business process improvement and true cost performance tools to refine related business processes
Level 5
Managed
Level 4
Process is integrated with corporate business processes Metrics used to evaluate process performance Management prioritizes, resources, and tracks performance Senior management insists on use of KT process
Defined
Process standardized with triggers for use Management models use of process on key issues Department managers requires process be applied to defined issues Metrics established to evaluate performance Documented evidence of process use
Repeatable
Level 2
Basic process exists, but not used on all issues Management supports use via training and/or unstructured coaching Individual performers self-motivated to use new process
Improvised
Level 1
No standard practices No metrics or documentation available to measure performance Management aware of the need for improved issue resolution skills Individual performers apply issue resolution tools if they know them
14
Process Overview
Inputs
Information Experience Judgment Knowledge
Gather Sort Organize Analyze Communicate
Systematic Thinking
&
Q
16
Which is best?
Avoids pitfall of jumping to a choice.
17
Kepner-Tregoes PM Process
Benefits vs Costs
Give/Gather Info
What?
Why?
How?
How Much?
Cost
Go?
Purpose & Scope
Gain/Test Understanding
Performance
Determine Action Understand and manage performance Design Diagnose Influence Who? Order? When?
Who/ When?
What if?
Go?
Time
Targeted Involvement for: Information Buy in Sign off Trouble shooting Decision making
Ready?
Status?
Changes?
Results?
18
Decision Analysis
Decision Making / Solution Design
Situation Appraisal
Issues to Resolve
19
Demonstrating Value
Process Demonstration
Case Study
Read case individually In your group, solve the problem
21
Right answer more often Consistent and accurate (weve got our act together!)
Facilitate knowledge management -- Development, Organization and Retrieval
22
Separate/Clarify
Set Priority
PA
Dis tinctions & Changes Tes ting/Verifying Pos s ible Caus es Time
23
Dead-Time Study #1
3 weeks wasted due to incomplete problem description
Escalation #: 5211XX Opened: June 15, 1999 Closed: August 5, 1999 Dead Time (Amt/%): 3 of 8 weeks (37.5%)
List Concerns
Separate/ Clarify
Set Priority Describe Problem Develop Possbile Causes Evaluate & Confirm Possible Causes Trial Fix Time
24
Dead-Time Study #2
6 months wasted due to incomplete Escalation #: problem description Opened: Closed: and hunch-driven Dead Time (Amt/%): activity
List Concerns 5190XX February 1999 August 2000 6 of 18 months (33.3%)
Separate/ Clarify
Set Priority Describe Problem Develop Possbile Causes Evaluate & Confirm Possible Causes Trial Fix Time
25
Problem Analysis
Describe the Problem State the Problem
Include bo th an o bject and a defect in the sentence. (WHA T IS WRONG WITH WHA T?)
IS NOT <comparable equipment> Packets being lost In lab <test rig> <equipment name> <packets sent see logs>
<trunk equipment> One way voice Hutchison Telecom <exact location> <equipment name> <card name>
WHERE
Where geo graphically? Where o n the o bject?
WHEN
When first?
BEFORE
When since?
EXTENT
Ho w many o bjects? What is the size? Ho w many defects?
27
KT and ITIL
KT in ITIL
V2
V3
Copyright 2013Kepner-Tregoe, Inc. All Rights Reserved. 29
ITIL Objectives
Increase customer focus within the IT organization
Increase quality of IT services Reduce IT service cost Improve process thinking within the IT organization
Incident Management
Objective
31
Problem Management
Objective Get to the root cause of Incidents and then initiate actions to improve or correct the situation Prevent recurrence of Incidents related to these errors - Both reactive and proactive Problem Definition The unknown underlying cause of one or more Incidents
Copyright 2013Kepner-Tregoe, Inc. All Rights Reserved. 32
Situation Appraisal
Incident Management
Problem Management
Incidents
Customer
Select the best fix/workaround Decision Analysis Potential Problem Analysis
Problem
Find root cause Problem Analysis Think-Beyondthe-Fix
Fix/WorkAround/JDI
Implementation
Known Error
Incident Resolution
Change Management
RFC
33
SA
Establish
PA
Basic Evidence
SA
Understand
DA
Choose Superior Solution
PPA
Prevent Contain
SA
Plan Action Summary
GO
DA
Summary
Role Assignments Gather Data Solutions Available? Question to the Void Understand the Issue Establish Problem Statement
Audit Objectives Risk Assessment Document Solutions Customer Impacts Select Solution Probability Containment Actions
PPA
Readiness Check Summary
PA
Seek Additional Evidence Change Documentation Emergency Changes Approved Stakeholder Summary Provided
Initial Contact
PA
Think of Causes
PA
Test Causes Against IS/IS Nots Choose the most reasonable
SA
Discovery Impact Summary
PA
Problem Statement
Before Continuing: Do we have a deviation?
PA
Quick IS/IS Not
Alternate Path: Distinctions and Changes Tips: Focus on gathering strong data around the WHAT section Look for IS NOTs that are related and similar to the IS Trigger: Too many ideas, Ideas Fail or Not Enough Data
Go
Verify Cause Decide on Action Think Beyond the Fix
Is Cause Unknown?
Do We Need to Know to take an effective action?
PA
Distinctions
PA
Find Related Changes
And/or
Change Change + Change Change + Distinction Distinction Alone
Ask: What is different odd special or unique about IS vs IS NOTs ? Focus on the IS What has changed around those differences?
35
Frustrating Examples to see repeat and cause a service to be unavailable: hard drive full, transactional log full, data errors in incoming EDI stream etc.
The Post Process Think Beyond the Fix plays an important role in stopping this frustration.
36
37
38
40
Client Results
41
Reduced Costs: Using Decision Analysis, Aristocrat Technologies, a fast growing company, selected their suppliers for key component parts
Results: Annual savings of $2.2+ million per year.
42
Client Results
Reduced Cost: DRS Optronics (DRSO) used KT problem solving to prevent shut down of a product line worth $25 million/year
Results: avoided retrofit costs of $2.2 million year one and double that in year two
Increased Customer Satisfaction: Research In Motions BlackBerry Premium Support used the KT Process to gain confidence and trust from their customers
Results: decreased time to resolve customer issues by 40% and increased customer satisfaction by 24 points
43
Client Results
Saved Lives: NASA used decision analysis and problem solving to bring Apollo XIII safely back to earth from space
Results: Apollo XIII returned safely to earth and engineers found root cause critical for safety of future missions
Phenomenal Growth: during their period of high growth, Scientific Atlanta credits the acceptance and success of their Six Sigma initiative to KTs processes
Results: High quality, low price and on-time delivery by reducing defects, operating costs and cycle time
44
45
46