What will be the impact if SLA duration is changed in the existing SLA?

[ATRIVEDI]

We have a requirement to change the duration of an existing SLA. While reviewing the documentation, I found recommendations to create a new SLA and use conditions so that the new SLA applies from the effective date onward, while the existing SLA continues to apply to older records.

Could someone clarify why this approach is recommended and what the impact would be if we simply modified the duration of the existing SLA instead?

Thanks.

[Dr Atul G- LNG]

Hi @ATRIVEDI 

Yes, creating a new SLA is the best option in this case. It helps ensure accurate reporting and avoids unintended impacts on existing records.

If you modify an existing SLA, you may need to repair all active/running SLAs. This could also lead to incorrect results or even SLA breaches if the timing recalculates after the change.

Additionally, it can affect historical and ongoing reporting accuracy.

Therefore, creating a new SLA is a safer and more reliable approach.

[ATRIVEDI]

Hi @Dr Atul G- LNG,

I tested a few scenarios in the pre-prod instance and found that for active SLAs (in-progress and pending tickets), changing the duration in the existing SLA causes the calculation to be updated based on the new duration. Closed tickets are not impacted.

I was considering updating the existing SLA rather than creating a new one. This would ensure that active tickets are recalculated automatically, and for closed tickets that would have breached under the new duration, we could run an SLA repair.

However, I am unable to identify the potential drawbacks of this approach. Could you please advise on what issues or impacts we should consider before proceeding this way?

[Mark Manders]

The drawback mainly is in the reporting (and a slight chance of issue when you do a repair on old(er) tickets.

Using a new definition ensures that everything runs as expected (also in reporting). And unless a mistake was made in configuring the definition (in which case you should update it and run a repair on everything), it doesn't make sense to update an existing one.

An SLA is an agreement. That means that two parties agreed what the response/resolution time should be during the time the contract is valid. Just updating the duration in the system will be a breach of that contract (well... not really, but your reporting is no longer on that agreed upon duration).

[Dr Atul G- LNG]

Hi @ATRIVEDI 

As you mentioned, this was tested in pre-production and it only affects active SLAs, not closed ones. Yes, it will recalculate the SLA time, mate, but I would still point out that this approach is technically incorrect because you are losing the actual SLA that was calculated under the old SLA definition.

That said, from an experience and operational perspective, creating a new SLA definition is a good approach and probably the best one. If you're confident that there are no other impacts and you're comfortable with the recalculation of the SLA times, then go ahead, mate.