Relations between Service and Service offering

[Rob Mollee]

I'm currently working on a Service Model for our Customers, but I have encountered a difference between CSDM 2.0 and a previous presentation used in Knowledge 19. In CSDM 2.0 Whitepaper, there is a reference between the Service Offering and the Technical and/or Business Service; In  the CSDM Intro presentation used on Knowledge19, however, there is still a Contains::Contained by Relation between Business/Technical Service and the Service offering. 

Has this insight changed with CSDM 2.0? Or more specifically, should we define the Suggested Relationship between Service and Service offering?

[Stig Brandt1]

Hi Rob, hope you are good😀

i think you you need to use the reference attribute, as every s.o. will/should/must always have a service as parent.

I would reckon that the drawing you refer to from knowledge19 is wrong.

Br

Stig

[Rob Mollee]

Hi Stig, good to speak to you again, hope all's well at your end!

Yep, I would think a reference attribute is always required, but a CMDB relation allows for neat reporting without the need to create Database views; So for me, I would prefer both...

Let's see what ServiceNow advises on this one, as the relation was also in the CSDM White Paper 1.0;

Best regards, Rob

[CasperJT]

Hi Rob,

From a dependency perspectiv, I think having the relationship is important, as you will otherwise miss out on having the full overview from portfolio to hardware.

One could wonder (or even hope) if ServiceNow plan on adding a business rule (or similar), which adds the relationship in the relations database based on the 'uses reference attribute'.

My assumptino is that 2.0 trumps 1.0, but they could also be seen as working in unison.

Let's hope Scott or someone else replies as well.

Best regards,

Casper

[Rob Mollee]

Thanks, Casper!