Problem management process graph is wrong

Page 60 of SO shows the problem management process as a flow chart. The decision "Workaround" has one single exit, which is not labeled. It directly points to "Create Known Error Record". There is no prerequisite for a known error to have a workaround (known error means we know the cause!).

Additionally there is an arrow coming up from resolution back to "Investigation & Diagnosis" and "Workaround?" (it could be that it also points to "Create Known Error Record", since the graph is very ambigous).

The review of major problems is done after closure, which I find very confusing. How can I add value to the problem documentation or even continue in diagnosis of the problem if it is already closed? Maybe I do not understand review well enough, but to my opinion it should contain "how to prevent recurrence" (Page 64), which is what pm is all about. So if a problem is recurring, the problem is NOT solved and you handled your problem as if it was an incident.

Additionally Problem Closure contains
"When any change has been completed (and successfully reviewed)."
This seems illogical to me.


ITIL V3 process documentation sucks

Agree. I've heard it said that a workaround is a pre-req to a Known Error but the book is quite explicit that it isn't
ITIL V3 process documentation sucks at a strict process level. Sometimes this arises because it isn't a process at all (see many of JVB's comments). other times like this one it is just vague (sloppy?).

TSO are busily improving the process documentation on ITIL Live. Or so I'm told - I ain't paying the price of a small car to find out.

OGC isn't going to do anything about it in core ITIL V3: "process" is so last millenium, "service" is where it's happening. Besides, look at the aftermarket it generates...

Again a good example of "(un-)intelligence of the market"

That goes to show, markets tend to go to high risk products with lousy quality and a large marketing budget....

Sometimes being skeptical is close to building a depression. I have continued this BOKKE a little on my own blog in the post Quality of the ITIL(r) documentation, for those who want to read a bit more.

Is there anyone out there who pays ITIL(r) live? Are they really improving? Or plainly copying stuff from others that have improved the processes on the web?

Any ITIL Live user reports yet?

Haven't seen any on the web and I know that Skep has asked. Anyone have any insight into this? Inquiring minds want to know...



seems like neither of their subscribers wants to comment...

Are there any?

Maybe everybody is smart enough not to subscribe???

nah, for every fad there is a customer...

The known-error sub-process

What seems to have happened is that they forgot to write the known error sub-process. It is mentioned a couple of times elswhere in the SO book but not in the Problem Management chapter.


Syndicate content