Is anyone using the On Hold Awaiting Problem Update Status in incidents and how are you using it please

[Marty2]

Hey is anyone using the On Hold Awaiting Problem Status code and when do you use it please.

Currently when we create a  problem we state the problem should have a work around, therefore if an incident occurs that is related to to the problem we ask our staff to resolve the incident by using work around on the problem and link to the problem.

I am interested in seeing in what circumstances others may be putting an incident on hold awaiting Problem Update if you already have a problem with a work around.  My current reservation in using the code is that Given how long it can take for some of our problems to be  resolved there is a potential for an incident to be kept on hold for a long time which could have sla implications.

Thanks  

[johnfeist]

Hi Marty,

We started relating incidents to problems before Major Incident was released and have not seen it necessary to change, so I hope that some of what follows is relevant to you.

When we recognize that an incident is another case of something that has been identified as a problem, we relate it to the problem and and put that incident on hold pending problem resolution.  At that point, the SLA question relative to the individual incident also goes on hold and the problem SLA is what matters.

We don't often run into the situation where we associate an incident to a problem with a known workaround, our first and second level support teams are usually aware of the workaround and just apply it.

The other thing that we do is when a solution to an open problem is documented and close the problem, scripting also closes all of the related incidents.

Hope that helps.

:{)

Helpful and Correct tags are appreciated and help others to find information faster

[Marty2]

Ah ok thanks for the reply John, much appreciated.   I guessed that may be how some people use it. We tend to to put an interim work around on the problem and then use that to resolve incidents until someone has had the time to do a more in depth  Root cause analysis on the problem, but then that can take some time to get to the bottom of the issue 

Thanks again

[gary_edgington]

Your first statement relates to how our organization works with INC/PRB. Certainly, MIM is not a requirement for attaching INCs to PRBs. The bottom line with PRB is to remove INCs from the env. 

Relating to SLAs, our INC group does place INCs on hold to stop the SLA clock. My question is, do ALL On Hold statuses stop the SLA clock?

Relating to your point about not relating INCs to PRBs if the INC has a workaround. At this point any INC that has a workaround could exist both related to a PRB and not related to a PRB. I prefer to relate to a PRB regardless of priority and or quantity. What this does is work to let your organization know how effective PRB is in your organization when it relates to removing INCs from the environment.

Our organization is around 50b net worth in the financial services industry and in the 100 PRB range annually.