Guidance Needed on Adding SailPoint Identity IQ to CSDM - Tech Service Offering Level
- Mark as New
- Bookmark
- Subscribe
- Mute
- Subscribe to RSS Feed
- Permalink
- Report Inappropriate Content
11-07-2024 11:36 AM - edited 11-08-2024 11:23 AM
Hello Community,
I'm looking for some advice on adding SailPoint Identity IQ as a Service within the CSDM framework. Here’s how I’m currently planning to set it up:
- Application Service: SailPoint Identity IQ - Production
- Application: SailPoint Identity IQ
- Technical Service: Identity and Access Management Services
- Tech Service Offering: [Unsure] - Potentially “SailPoint IIQ Administration/Service” or "only " Identity Management" , " Access Management" and so on...
I’m uncertain if this setup is fully aligned with CSDM best practices, particularly at the Tech Service Offering level.
Does this structure make sense, or are there better ways to organize it?
Any insights or suggestions would be greatly appreciated!
Thank you, Community! 😊
Fred

- Mark as New
- Bookmark
- Subscribe
- Mute
- Subscribe to RSS Feed
- Permalink
- Report Inappropriate Content
11-15-2024 01:01 AM
Good day Fred,
on the technical offering level you relate your supporting parties.
Is this party responsible for multiple Identity mgmt solutions, or only SailPoint?
Do they have 1 Offering for these Indentity mgmt solutions or 1 offering?
If there are multiple solutions within the same offering (same commitments) than a general one "Identity mgmt" can do. If there are multiple solutions or if there are different commitments, then I would specify it more detailed.
BR,
Barry
- Mark as New
- Bookmark
- Subscribe
- Mute
- Subscribe to RSS Feed
- Permalink
- Report Inappropriate Content
11-18-2024 08:34 AM
Hello Barry,
Thank you for your answer.
Actually, we have at least 2 solutions that could be part of the Technical Service Identity and Access Management Services.
So my idea ( and it seems to stick to your advice) is to create 2 offerings, "Access management (SailtPoint) and "User authentication ( Active Directory)".
It seems to meet your vision if my understanding is correct.
Thank you
Fred