Get the CMDB RightAdvice for building a configuration management database system that works for your company.
In a webinar Wednesday, EMA VP Dennis Drogseth presented some recent research findings on the topic, along with guidance for making this work in your organization.
Theres a definite upswing, EMA reports, but most organizations are still in the very early stages. Twenty-four percent of respondents to its recent survey, whove already done their initial vendor selection, are still in the planning vs. deployment stage, and 28% are less than six months into deployment. Thats in contrast to just 10% that have been in deployment for more than two years.
Generally CEOs, CIOs or, at the least, VPs either are have some awareness of, are supporting or helping to fund these efforts, but its usually those at the director level who generally do the actual team coordination.
Most organizations have two levels of teams involved: In addition to a core team, theres usually a distributed team representing CI ownerships across various functions who coordinate to define requirements and shape the system.
Theres still a substantial amount of in-house development, but the action for the base system is moving to third-party software vendors. Most in-house development is revolving around customization of third-party tools to fit customers environments.
Today its configuration management, according to the survey. But Drogseth noted that in focal interviews incident and problem management came out as key concerns, as respondents are trying to create a closed loop system in which they can support high levels of service management in context with how changes are made.
Governance and compliance become more important in 2008, with 57% citing these as long-term CMDB priorities.
IT governance is an important requirement for maintaining the integrity of CMDB systems, Drogseth says, and clear views of the CMDB system as it performs will increasingly be in demand.
Nearly 50% said they began their CMDB deployment with ITIL training, but 7% said they had no ITIL training and 24% didnt start with such training.
A point of interest, Drogseth says, is that theres a strong correlation between those who had ITIL training and those who consider their CMDB efforts to be very successful.
Process tends to get minimized in too many environments, which have too much of an interest in purchasing technology, Drogseth says.
And so much of a CMDB is related to politics and processes, requiring gaining buy-in from traditionally silod IT organizations with their own tools, data and reports.
Nearly 60% of respondents said they did it themselves, and 5% said their vendors handled it.
We usually recommend a dialog with the initial logic and requirements being defined internally, and then for a detailed implementation, have a dialog with the vendor, Drogseth says.
ITIL V3 almost eliminates the notion that a full-fledged CMDB system is anything but federated by definition, Drogseth says. But you have to start with something concrete that brings value, and a single system may just be it.
Ten percent of respondents consider their deployments to be very successful. These deployments are characterized not only by the use of ITIL training, but also by having clearly defined schema, a tendency to update the CMDB system more frequently, going in with expectations that the CMDB system will demonstrate break-even ROI in one year, and an understanding that politics vs. technical issues are the toughest factors going forward.
Most importantly, Drogseth says, no one regretted moving into a CMDB. They all felt it was necessary inevitable.
This article appears courtesy of bITa Planet.com.