SESSION 809 Wednesday, November 4, 10:15am - 11:15am Track: Strategic View ROI: Justifying a Modern Service Desk Solution Brion Peck Information Systems Group Director, Management Science Associates bpeck@msa.com Session Description This case study-based session is ideal for organizations considering implementing or looking to formalize or improve current service delivery processes. In order to obtain executive leadership approval, Management Science Associates built a business case with real-life estimates of potential savings and purchase rationale. By following MSA s successes and struggles, attendees will learn the phases of definition, the actual ROI benefits of the program, and discover that a-ha moment when people start to see the value and embrace and support it. (Experience Level: Intermediate) Speaker Background Brion Peck has been in IT leadership for more than twenty-five years, implementing ITIL in large and midsize companies. Having held IT leadership roles with US Airways, Sabre Technologies, EDS, HP, and Fruit of the Loom, Brion has made a career of bringing process improvement and automation to the business.
Session 809: ROI: Justifying a Modern Service Desk Solution Brion Peck Information Systems Group Director Management Science Associates About Brion Peck Information Systems Group Director IT leadership ~30 years Started with ITIL implementations in 2006 Served as a Global Process Owner 120K employees globally Worked for US Airways, Sabre/EDS/HP, Fruit of the Loom and Management Science Associates (MSA)
About MSA MSA is a privately held company In business over 50 years Owner is still active in the company Approximately 100+ million in revenues Core business is data management covering many verticals A growing data center hosting business ~40k sq. ft. of raised floor space in three data centers What To Understand If you want to make enemies, try to change something Woodrow Wilson Right is right. Even if everyone is against it, and wrong is wrong, even if everyone is for it William Penn If you can t describe what you are doing as a process, you don t know what you re doing W. Edwards Deming
Why We Didn t Need ITIL Our clients love that we are so flexible, we will change anything at anytime for them We already have a ticketing system and we have change management We score high on the surveys already so we must be doing a good job Why We Needed ITIL Our clients love that we are so flexible, we will change anything at anytime for them The clients hated when we rushed a change and created risk and impact for them, or that we didn t explain the complexities We already have a ticketing system and follow change management We have several ticketing systems and no one knows which one is the system of record Change is documented after the fact and use was sporadic We score high on the surveys already so we must be doing a good job We do score high that the agents are nice and professional but the comments reflect a desire to have first call resolutions and confidence in the service
Where To Start Find supporters and sell, sell, sell Hint: It s not always at the top, understand organizational dynamics (who listens to who) Review existing processes (Talk to everyone) What works What could use improvement Evaluate everything Identify the gaps, wants and needs (I created a matrix used for tool shopping) Compile into high level metrics How many requests (do you need a service catalog) How many incidents, changes, etc. Convincing Executives Educate them before talking funding Understand the executive audience members How much does each know Know who they trust Meet one on one and in groups Find the one most supportive and build off of that Be prepared to create several presentations Patience and understanding are key
What We Produced, Just For Funding Process assessment User satisfaction survey Five (5) separate ITIL overview presentations and documents Project plan for first 8 months Multi year roadmap of the ITIL rollout Communication and training plan Business case with cost and benefits Investment and ROI work sheet ROI Projections One service desk receives ~320 calls a week (16,640 calls/yr) 30% are requests that will now be automated through a service catalog 1,248 agent hours/year saved by taking less calls 4,992 tickets no longer passing through the service desk Assuming 15 mins for agent handling 2,496 combined user and technician hours/year saved due to service catalog Service catalog allows end users to track open requests Service catalog automates ticket routing for technicians Assume 15 mins for user and technician tracking Savings of $31,200 for Service Desk and $149,760 for Users and technicians/year
ROI Projections Improved incident and problem resolution times due to new processes Using one real life example of an incident caused by an unplanned change Client saw 10 hours and 41 minutes of negatively impacted performance MSA invested 30 hours of combined resolution time 8 people were contacted after-hours to engage in resolution If planned, the issue is resolved within less than an hour with minimal impact If you take 25% of total annual service desk tickets (16,640 tickets) Comes out to 4,160 tickets Assume planned changes and improved incident resolution saves one hour of technician time for those incidents (4,160 technician hours/year saved) Comes out to an annual cost savings of $249,000 Where We Started Currently Used Incident Management Change Management Service Catalog CMDB (partially implemented) Email Connector (not a module but a powerful function) In The Pipeline Problem (is ready not rolled out yet though) Project Management
Incident Since moving to ChangeGear and applying formal processes we have been able to: Capture more issues and requests Pre-ChangeGear ~17K incidents for a year Post ChangeGear ~27K incidents for a year 11% of the incident tickets are being opened via service catalog, and growing Calls the service desk does not need to take now Email connector being used to auto open tickets from alerts sent by various systems Incident breakdown Incident Continuous growth in automation through BPA s, tasks, and email connector to reduce response and resolution
Change Change was very informal prior to ChangeGear Over 10,000 RFC s submitted in the past year 5,683 of them automated through Service Catalog requests Transformation of approach to change from change anything at anytime to a planned and controlled approach Change Change breakdown Change Type Change Counts Major 6 Significant 154 Minor 689 Standard 3,451 Emergency 46 Service Catalog 5,683 Total 10,029 The 5,683 run through BPA s so service desk technicians do not have to be involved and the technician is only involved once all approvals have been received
Service Catalog Has been a huge win for us in automating the process from submission to validation Started small with high volume items that would bring us the biggest win Took time and education to get end users familiar with and trusting of the system since they no longer need to talk to anyone Savings have been beyond expectations by reducing how much everyone touched a request (5638 requests in a year) Service Catalog Currently 21 forms available to users Forms continue to grow and now business users are coming to us with forms looking for automation
CMDB CMDB has taken us a long time to figure out and is still taking time We have a basic scan of most servers and desktops and we do record incidents and changes to them Have been working with SunView Services to solve our outstanding issues Only about 20% of my vision is covered so far Email Connector While email connector is not a module it has been a powerful tool once we became comfortable with it We use it for our job scheduler so that any job that does not complete with a zero it opens a ticket to the correct team We have it built into a password reset process so that when someone uses the password reset function it opens and immediately closes a ticket so we have a record of the change and for who Many additional uses planned and requests coming in from users who know what it can do now
Problem We have completed the work for the problem module and it is waiting for training to be put together for it We are seeing many instances where this module will benefit our processes once in place We have added some customizations to our form to allow us to put 1 to 3 solutions to a problem with costs to allow management options when approving Project Management In the pipeline Purchased the project module and I am looking to integrate that module when resources are available so my teams can have basically all of their work in one system Allows for visibility of all teams on the project so they know when they have tasks, how long they have, due dates, and dependencies The system is familiar to the support teams already so no extra effort for them
Finding Savings We found some savings we weren t counting on Time to prep and execute for audits Innovate ways to automate requests Email connector to bypass human actions for generating tickets How much could truly skip the service desk Redefining how to use service desk techs(more technical) Impact of Change Advisory Board (CAB) Faster research of incidents and customer complaints Actual ROI Data First year startup costs vs. first years savings Costs to implement Change, Incident and Service Catalog ($427,392) Includes existing software maintenance, new licenses and labor Savings over the first year of implementation ($566,550) Requests actually increased due to more disciplined submit process Task feature decreased time spent on team and task management Automating request classification reduced on-call incidents by ~30% Significantly decreased research time for audit data gathering Current ROI after one year ($139,158)
Thank you for attending this session. Please don t forget to complete an evaluation form!