Continual Improvement -vs- Operational Requests

[Diane22]

We are looking at implementing CIM shortly.  The question that keeps coming up is what should be a general service request and assigned to the core support team to provision or should the entry be made in the CSI register as a first step to be reviewed and approved in the weekly meeting.  We want to ensure the CSI meeting provides value and does not create unwarranted delays operationally. We would want to avoid being the 'filter or bottleneck' for everything that a practice owner may want/need but does not currently have.

An option being considered is to classify by complexity.  For example:  add a value to an existing choice field would be a simple operational request, but to create a new choice field (modify form) would be a CIM task as it would require some level of communication and modifies behavior when using the application as well as potential reporting impact.

Ideas?  how to others streamline to ensure consistency and efficiency?

What do others do?  

[KC32]

We are actually working through the same issue.  We have been taking an approach that a Demand would be more Service Portfolio or Org Level ideas and improvement programs.   Then using CIM we can tie back to those with reference details and field links to ID all CIMs under said Program or Demand.    We generally use the Demand to manage the details of program level deliverables, with individual actions for teams in CIMs and CIM Tasks.   

It would be great to get some input from SNow Teams.  

[Diane22]

We are still working through this challenge, but have also added demand to the challenge.  We are implementing CIM shortly, as well as Demand.  If we create the phases and tasks under CIM (managing using the workbench and dashboards etc), am I the only one to see a possible duplication with Demand ... to also have similar tracking/overview of operational work.  Personally, not a huge fan of approvals in both CIM and in Demand. What is the recommended best practice? How should the data flow between these modules.  I'd rather see one source of truth and that data being consumed by additional modules.

The SPM training sets the expectation that it will include Project and Portfolio Management, IT Financial Management, Agile development, APM, Resource Management and Service Management (operational work).  I'm curious to gain an understanding as to how the integration will occur, while sustaining data integrity in both ITSM, CIM and Demand.

Am currently taking the SPM training to gain an improved understanding.  If the intent of SPM is to track all, including operations; how do we attain this goal without reducing the value of the ITSM data?  For example, if an incident - becomes a defect - then goes to demand, a story => and then change = we lose the relationship between incident and change.  Same for requests:  if it is an operational request (-vs a project), what is the benefit of going from request or idea => CIM => demand =>story=> change.  

Unfortunately, the demand training is on SPM standard only, so doesn't set the expectation that Agile will be covered.  Hoping to hear from SNow team as well.

Would appreciate hearing from SNow as to the recommended approach for these modules to integrate (work together) vs- sacrificing the data of one for the other, thus creating an unappetizing need to manipulate data for decision making 😞