7 Replies Latest reply on Nov 4, 2013 1:24 AM by Nay

    SLA option


      Ok I was wondering if anyone had setup an SLA to that uses 3 seperate criteria to get it's option? for example below.




      I have my minor catergory option as such Software>Standard>Fault or Software>Non Standard> Functionality
      Then I have the Service  - Microsoft Projects or Autocad

      Then a Priority? selection Low, Medium, High?



      Now I'm happy with having the two dropdowns to set the SLA however I wondered if it's possible first of all and if anyone had anything similar setup.



      So I would keep the 3 Tier Category option
      Select A service I.e Application,hardware having the issue
      Then select how important it is with the Priority

      Does anyone have a better way of doing what I suggest above, I'm open I'm looking for ideas tbf.


      Currently we have


      Category 3 Tier option based on Service first for example below



      User software > Microsoft Office > Fault



      Then Impact



      Low - Medium High - Critical

        • 1. Re: SLA option

          We treat all types of issues the same.


          Sev 1 - Major issue affecting many users - 2 hour

          Sev 2 - One user can't do their job - 1 day

          Sev 3 - Standard break/fix - 3 days

          Sev 4 - New install - 5 days

          Sev 7 - Project - 2 months


          Our thinking is that it doesn't matter what is wrong, it's the impact on users.  In the end does it really matter what is wrong?  If user can't do their job they need help soon vs someone that can't do one thing or has a work around.  With three tiers it would seem things get complicated very quickly.

          • 2. Re: SLA option
            Jamie Cannon ITSMMVPGroup

            You can set your SLA to calculate your Response Level based on all 3 criteria if you'd like.  In the SLA Administration you just need to add the variation fields you want your Matrix based on.


            I've had people do:


            Current Assignment = Group X

            Impact = Low

            Category = Hardware

            Lifecycle = Workflow X


            Once all these were met Response Level = Low


            Is that what you are looking to do?

            1 of 1 people found this helpful
            • 3. Re: SLA option

              It was indeed Jamie.

              That sort of matches what we have now, we are looking at adding that extra tier.


              I do understand what CSimpson is saying however they don't want to reinvent the wheel they just want to add extra functions.


              Will it be complicated for me to do based on my Boot camp experience or would I need more of a consultant to help with it?

              • 4. Re: SLA option
                Jamie Cannon ITSMMVPGroup

                Should be pretty simple if you are adding another tier to your SLA to make the matrix true.


                Go to your Response Agreement and choose Manage Variation Attribute:


                Add the new level you want by dragging it over:


                Now open the rules for your agreement and modify the ones you need to simply choosing the new option you want:


                If you have to create a new one, you can do so by selecting new rule then choose your rules from the list of options you have now.


                That's it.

                • 5. Re: SLA option
                  Jamie Cannon ITSMMVPGroup

                  If you need more stuff done by a consulting company let me know since I currently work for RennerBrown which is a Platinum Service Provider for LANDesk.

                  • 6. Re: SLA option

                    It's not so much a knowledge thing as a complicated thing.  The amount of options gets exponentially more complex as you add more criteria.  Doing it is the easy part, figuring out all the possibilities so you don't miss anything, that's the hard part.

                    • 7. Re: SLA option

                      Thanks for the response's Jamie, they have been of great help.



                      @Csimpson, I appreciate that the more complicated it gets the more issues might appear, we have to weigh out complication versus time/reporting.


                      As a global organisation it's very complicated to get everyones reporting correct plus, save each team time when logging incidents. Some things work for some and the rest for others.