CSDM Naming Conventions Business Service / Technical Service Management / Service offering

[cwring]

The business CSDM folks have suggested they were told that naming the Technical Service Management and Service Offering could have the same names. On the cmdb deduplication tasks we are now getting tasks that show duplicate CI values for Business Service (multiples on this table) and duplicates across Technology Management Service /Service Offering,  and Business Service / Service Offerings.

Should we look at changing the IRE rule or should the names be unique like the IRE suggests. (My stance would be the names should be unique or have unique attributes like the rest of the CMDB, but I am getting pushback from the business)

if the IRE rule change is necessary, what should the IRE rule be changed to?

The main rule for Business Service is Name, we have tried other combinations such as taxonomy node/name, taxonomy node by itself, and name/parent. However, any of these combinations restricts the ability to update any existing services saying that the IRE rule is enforced.

[sizzleMcFace · Accepted solution]

Keep unique names/keys per CI type (Business Service, Technical Service, Service Offering) if you can, as recommended by the CSDM whitepaper.

Do not weaken IRE to allow duplicates. Instead, if the business absolutely requires duplicate display names, enforce uniqueness via taxonomy + name or another attribute combination in IRE. Of course, as you said this presents further issues and it still makes more sense to just keep names unique.