OLA

[David Longley]

I want to look at creating some OLA between support teams, how do i go about setting this up as i can only see SLA within the service portfolio section.

thanks 

[James Ainsworth]

Hi David, 

We don't have specific OLA configurations at the moment.  We do have a change to introduce these. For the most part the term SLA and OLA terms are interchangeable as it can be the same mechanism for both customers and between teams.  Basically response and fix times.  We plan on having operational/technical services put in place in the future which would work with OLAs.

For now it may be something that can be configured in other ways depending on your approach.  It maybe creating a Service under a category called Operations or Technical and use the SLA feature for this.  If it is a more simple requirement, it may just be setting tasks for the other team with due dates.  All depends on how you want to approach this.  

Do you have in mind what you would like to achieve with OLAs for this scenario?

James

[Dave Longley]

any news on this?? been over 4 years now @James Ainsworth

[James Ainsworth]

Hi Dave,

From my earlier post, we did implement the mentioned options to create technical services vs business services.  There is also an area where you can define the relationships between services including dependencies.  While the SLAs are labelled as SLAs, the service levels can still apply when supporting another service within your own organization.

So I can understand what you are looking for could you have a look at my earlier question. 

On 18/10/2019 at 09:04, James Ainsworth said:

Do you have in mind what you would like to achieve with OLAs for this scenario?

 

[Berto2002]

We are interested in SLA/OLA in relation to Suppliers so we can better access support and set expectations with customers and analysts. At a high level we would like to be able to:

• 'Assign' a Request to a Supplier Contract. Perhaps this is a new collapsible section in the Request where the Contract is linked (via a lookup of the Supplier)
• The Contract records would have fields for agreed operational performance (which may have to be freeform due to the infinite variations possible) containing relevant information such as:
  • Supported Hours/Days/Times
  • Response/Resolution times
  • Contact / call logging details
  • Pre-requisite information the supplier needs us to give
  • The people involved such as our contract owner and their contract owner
  • Escalation information
• Have the above properties of that Contract exposed in the UI at the point of linking/assignment with the usual visibility options for team/customer, etc. The aim would be that it's clear how to get support and what to tell the customer about how it progresses
• A tie-in in the sub-status that allows us to state whether the Request is or is not currently dependent on the Supplier (Contract). E.g. Request would be "In Progress (Supplier)" or "In Progress (Internal)"

A future development of this would be to codify some of those fields (the most obvious being the supported hours and priorities) so some measurements of supplier/contract performance could be gleaned.