Let's put emergency changes to one side for the moment, and distinguish between the two other types of changes. In the ITIL world, there are three kinds of changes: standard, normal, and emergency changes. Second, it's the first process in the Service Transition part of the ITIL lifecycle, and it's nice to pursue these processes in some kind of order. Firstly it's often the bottleneck for experienced teams wanting to pursue continuous delivery, because it represents the interface between development teams and the world of operations. I'm starting this series by looking at change management for two reasons. I welcome your feedback and real-life experiences. In this occasional series I'll be examining how to create such lightweight ITIL implementations. However it's possible to follow ITIL principles and practices in a lightweight way that achieves the goals of effective service management while at the same time enabling rapid, reliable delivery. Often frameworks like ITIL are blamed for imposing these kinds of burdensome processes. This is a significant roadblock for teams trying to implement continuous delivery. Many large organizations have heavyweight change management processes that generate lead times of several days or more between asking for a change to be made and having it approved for deployment. Update: for an example of this strategy applied in a large, regulated company, see this case study from Australia's National Broadband Network. Continuous Delivery and ITIL: Change Management Published 28 November 2010
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |