Purpose:

To realize the IT strategy, IT solutions need to be identified, developed or acquired, as well as implemented and integrated into the business process.

Objective:

Provides the solutions and passes them to be turned into services.

Description:

Ideation, meaning opportunities that go through many changes, iterations, and modifications are translated into ideas. Creative tools such as mind mapping, lateral thinking, and problem-solving techniques such as scenario analysis, fishbone diagrams, process mapping, the theory of constraints, TRIZ (theory of inventive problem-solving – the acronym in Russian), and storyboarding are used during this phase. These tools try to stimulate creative thinking and enhance ideas. Observing customers in their environment and understanding their frustrations and challenges is useful during this phase. Ideation and opportunity capture stages can be worked on closely together, and multiple passes and iterations through these stages are standard.

Entrance Criteria:

  • <?>

Exit Criteria:

  • <?>

Process and Procedures:

Tailoring Guidelines:

None

Process Verification Record(s):

  • <?>
    • Stored By: <?>

Measure(s):

  • Percent of stakeholders effectively engaged
    • Maintained By: <?>
    • Submitted By: <?>
    • Frequency of Submission: <?>
  • Level of stakeholder satisfaction with involvement
    • Maintained By: <?>
    • Submitted By: <?>
    • Frequency of Submission: <?>
  • Percent of stakeholders approving enterprise need, scope, planned outcome and level of project risk
    • Maintained By: <?>
    • Submitted By: <?>
    • Frequency of Submission: <?>
  • Percent of projects undertaken without approved business cases
    • Maintained By: <?>
    • Submitted By: <?>
    • Frequency of Submission: <?>
  • Percent of activities aligned to scope and expected outcomes
    • Maintained By: <?>
    • Submitted By: <?>
    • Frequency of Submission: <?>
  • Percent of active programs undertaken without valid and updated programs value maps
    • Maintained By: <?>
    • Submitted By: <?>
    • Frequency of Submission: <?>
  • Frequency of status reviews
    • Maintained By: <?>
    • Submitted By: <?>
    • Frequency of Submission: <?>
  • Percent of deviations from plan addressed
    • Maintained By: <?>
    • Submitted By: <?>
    • Frequency of Submission: <?>
  • Percent of stakeholder sign-offs for stage-gate reviews of active programs activities according to the plans.
    • Maintained By: <?>
    • Submitted By: <?>
    • Frequency of Submission: <?>
  • Number of resource issues (e.g., skills, capacity)
    • Maintained By: <?>
    • Submitted By: <?>
    • Frequency of Submission: <?>
  • Percent of expected benefits achieved
    • Maintained By: <?>
    • Submitted By: <?>
    • Frequency of Submission: <?>
  • Percent of outcomes with first-time acceptance
    • Maintained By: <?>
    • Submitted By: <?>
    • Frequency of Submission: <?>
  • Level of stakeholder satisfaction expressed at project closure review
    • Maintained By: <?>
    • Submitted By: <?>
    • Frequency of Submission: <?>
  • Percent of requirements reworked due to misalignment with enterprise needs and expectations
    • Maintained By: <?>
    • Submitted By: <?>
    • Frequency of Submission: <?>
  • Level of stakeholder satisfaction with requirements
    • Maintained By: <?>
    • Submitted By: <?>
    • Frequency of Submission: <?>
  • Percent of requirements satisfied by proposed solution
    • Maintained By: <?>
    • Submitted By: <?>
    • Frequency of Submission: <?>
  • Number of incidents not identified as risk
    • Maintained By: <?>
    • Submitted By: <?>
    • Frequency of Submission: <?>
  • Percent of risk unsuccessfully mitigated
    • Maintained By: <?>
    • Submitted By: <?>
    • Frequency of Submission: <?>
  • Percent of business case objectives met by proposed solution
    • Maintained By: <?>
    • Submitted By: <?>
    • Frequency of Submission: <?>
  • Percent of stakeholders not approving solution in relation to business case
    • Maintained By: <?>
    • Submitted By: <?>
    • Frequency of Submission: <?>
  • Number of reworked solution designs due to misalignment with requirements
    • Maintained By: <?>
    • Submitted By: <?>
    • Frequency of Submission: <?>
  • Time taken to approve that design deliverable has met requirements
    • Maintained By: <?>
    • Submitted By: <?>
    • Frequency of Submission: <?>
  • Number of solution exceptions to design noted during stage reviews
    • Maintained By: <?>
    • Submitted By: <?>
    • Frequency of Submission: <?>
  • Number of errors found during testing
    • Maintained By: <?>
    • Submitted By: <?>
    • Frequency of Submission: <?>
  • Time and effort to complete tests
    • Maintained By: <?>
    • Submitted By: <?>
    • Frequency of Submission: <?>
  • Number of tracked approved changes that generate new errors
    • Maintained By: <?>
    • Submitted By: <?>
    • Frequency of Submission: <?>
  • Number of demands for maintenance that go unsatisfied
    • Maintained By: <?>
    • Submitted By: <?>
    • Frequency of Submission: <?>
  • Number of unplanned capacity, performance or availability upgrades
    • Maintained By: <?>
    • Submitted By: <?>
    • Frequency of Submission: <?>
  • Number of transaction peaks where target performance is exceeded
    • Maintained By: <?>
    • Submitted By: <?>
    • Frequency of Submission: <?>
  • Number of availability incidents
    • Maintained By: <?>
    • Submitted By: <?>
    • Frequency of Submission: <?>
  • Number of events where capacity has exceeded planned limits
    • Maintained By: <?>
    • Submitted By: <?>
    • Frequency of Submission: <?>
  • Number and percentage of unresolved availability, performance and capacity issues
    • Maintained By: <?>
    • Submitted By: <?>
    • Frequency of Submission: <?>
  • Level of stakeholder desire for the change
    • Maintained By: <?>
    • Submitted By: <?>
    • Frequency of Submission: <?>
  • Level of senior management involvement
    • Maintained By: <?>
    • Submitted By: <?>
    • Frequency of Submission: <?>
  • Satisfaction ratings of implementation team by affected stakeholders
    • Maintained By: <?>
    • Submitted By: <?>
    • Frequency of Submission: <?>
  • Number of identified skills or capacity issues
    • Maintained By: <?>
    • Submitted By: <?>
    • Frequency of Submission: <?>
  • Stakeholder feedback on level of understanding
    • Maintained By: <?>
    • Submitted By: <?>
    • Frequency of Submission: <?>
  • Number of queries received
    • Maintained By: <?>
    • Submitted By: <?>
    • Frequency of Submission: <?>
  • Percent of role players with appropriately assigned authority
    • Maintained By: <?>
    • Submitted By: <?>
    • Frequency of Submission: <?>
  • Role player feedback on level of empowerment
    • Maintained By: <?>
    • Submitted By: <?>
    • Frequency of Submission: <?>
  • Percent of role players trained
    • Maintained By: <?>
    • Submitted By: <?>
    • Frequency of Submission: <?>
  • Role player self-assessment of relevant capabilities
    • Maintained By: <?>
    • Submitted By: <?>
    • Frequency of Submission: <?>
  • Level of satisfaction of role players operating, using and maintaining the change
    • Maintained By: <?>
    • Submitted By: <?>
    • Frequency of Submission: <?>
  • Percent of users appropriately trained for the change
    • Maintained By: <?>
    • Submitted By: <?>
    • Frequency of Submission: <?>
  • Level of satisfaction of users with adoption of the change
    • Maintained By: <?>
    • Submitted By: <?>
    • Frequency of Submission: <?>
  • Amount of rework caused by failed changes
    • Maintained By: <?>
    • Submitted By: <?>
    • Frequency of Submission: <?>
  • Reduced time and effort required to make changes
    • Maintained By: <?>
    • Submitted By: <?>
    • Frequency of Submission: <?>
  • Number and age of backlogged change requests
    • Maintained By: <?>
    • Submitted By: <?>
    • Frequency of Submission: <?>
  • Percent of unsuccessful changes due to inadequate impact assessments
    • Maintained By: <?>
    • Submitted By: <?>
    • Frequency of Submission: <?>
  • Percent of total changes that are emergency fixes
    • Maintained By: <?>
    • Submitted By: <?>
    • Frequency of Submission: <?>
  • Number of emergency changes not authorized after the change
    • Maintained By: <?>
    • Submitted By: <?>
    • Frequency of Submission: <?>
  • Stakeholder feedback ratings on satisfaction with communications
    • Maintained By: <?>
    • Submitted By: <?>
    • Frequency of Submission: <?>
  • Percent of stakeholders satisfied with the completeness of testing process
    • Maintained By: <?>
    • Submitted By: <?>
    • Frequency of Submission: <?>
  • Number and percent of releases not ready for release on schedule
    • Maintained By: <?>
    • Submitted By: <?>
    • Frequency of Submission: <?>
  • Number or percent of releases that fail to stabilize within an acceptable period
    • Maintained By: <?>
    • Submitted By: <?>
    • Frequency of Submission: <?>
  • Percent of releases causing downtime
    • Maintained By: <?>
    • Submitted By: <?>
    • Frequency of Submission: <?>
  • Number and percent of root cause analyses completed
    • Maintained By: <?>
    • Submitted By: <?>
    • Frequency of Submission: <?>
  • Percent of information categories covered
    • Maintained By: <?>
    • Submitted By: <?>
    • Frequency of Submission: <?>
  • Volume of information classified
    • Maintained By: <?>
    • Submitted By: <?>
    • Frequency of Submission: <?>
  • Percent of categorized information validated
    • Maintained By: <?>
    • Submitted By: <?>
    • Frequency of Submission: <?>
  • Number of users trained in using and sharing knowledge
    • Maintained By: <?>
    • Submitted By: <?>
    • Frequency of Submission: <?>
  • Level of satisfaction of users
    • Maintained By: <?>
    • Submitted By: <?>
    • Frequency of Submission: <?>
  • Percent of knowledge repository used
    • Maintained By: <?>
    • Submitted By: <?>
    • Frequency of Submission: <?>
  • Frequency of update
    • Maintained By: <?>
    • Submitted By: <?>
    • Frequency of Submission: <?>
  • Percent of used licences against paid-for licences
    • Maintained By: <?>
    • Submitted By: <?>
    • Frequency of Submission: <?>
  • Number of assets not utilized
    • Maintained By: <?>
    • Submitted By: <?>
    • Frequency of Submission: <?>
  • Benchmark costs
    • Maintained By: <?>
    • Submitted By: <?>
    • Frequency of Submission: <?>
  • Number of obsolete assets
    • Maintained By: <?>
    • Submitted By: <?>
    • Frequency of Submission: <?>
  • Number of deviations between the configuration repository and live configuration
    • Maintained By: <?>
    • Submitted By: <?>
    • Frequency of Submission: <?>
  • Number of discrepancies relating to incomplete or missing configuration information
    • Maintained By: <?>
    • Submitted By: <?>
    • Frequency of Submission: <?>

References & Related Standards:

  • Kotter, John, Leading Change, Harvard Business School Press, USA 1996
  • PMBOK
    • Quality assurance and acceptance of all products
  • PRINCE2
    • Product-based planning
  • ISO/IEC 20000
    • 0.1 Release management process
    • 6.3 Service continuity and availability management
    • 9.1 Configuration management
    • 9.2 Change management
  • ITIL V3 2011
    • Service Design, 4.1 Design Coordination
    • Service Design, 4.4 Availability Management
    • Service Design, 4.5 Capacity Management
    • Service Transition, 4.1 Transition Planning and Support
    • Service Transition, 4.2 Change Management
    • Service Transition, 4.3 Service Asset and Configuration Management
    • Service Transition, 4.4 Release and Deployment Management
    • Service Transition, 4.5 Service Validation and Testing
    • Service Transition, 4.6 Change Evaluation
    • Service Transition, 4.7 Knowledge Management