CI - Asset management

[andrashiesz]

Hi, I was wondering what is the best practice to associate new CI to an existing asset, which has been already used in the past for a CI, but that CI got decommissioned. Example: A user is not using a laptop anymore so the asset goes to stockroom, but a new user will get assigned so a new CI is needed to ensure ITIL tickets will be separated for previous and new users. thanks

[klf1123 · Accepted solution]

Best practice is to not create a new CI. The CI and Asset relationship is one to one through out the entire lifecycle of the asset/ CI.

[andrashiesz]

Well, would you consider that as a gap instead of a best practice? If you need a new CI that means you need a new asset so you will end up having two assets, which kills the main purpose of effective asset management, isn't that?

[klf1123]

It's a matter of perspective, you are tracking the lifecycle of the asset the fact that you named it something else or that someone else is using it doesn't change the fact that the asset/CI still exists in it's lifecycle. The Incidents or Changes are against the device itself so you would want to maintain that history on the same record. The reuse or change in purpose does not mean a new CI is warranted. You are just making changes to the attributes on the same device. The same Asset and CI are used until disposition.

[Damhoej]

I have had the same question..

In my experience you should use Asset Tag as the unique key for the asset, and the CI Name can be changed during the life cycle.

Example:

You buy a very powerful laptop, and give it the Asset Tag: PL001 this tag never change.

First you deploy it as a SQL server POC, you give it the CI name: SQLPOC0011

After a year it is returned to stock, you change the CI to PL001, 2 months later you deploy the asset as an AutoCad computer. You then change the CI name to AC001.

In that way you keep both asset and CI relations, and have a complete history of your asset/CI