Mitigate Risk And Maximize Value In Service-Level Definitions

As more companies build out IT and business service catalogs, the business relevance of strong service levels is increasing. Unfortunately, most service levels are poorly defined and don't support new IT processes and business-level demands. Many sourcing and vendor management (SVM) professionals tell Forrester that they find themselves explaining to the business why service-level reporting indicates the health of the service is fine — even when business-user service quality perception is bad. Reduced service-level fulfillment rates, ambiguous service-level descriptions, weak service-level credit and incentive models, and poorly defined accountability are the typical reasons for weak outsourcing relationships. In far too many cases, service-level agreements are more focused on the provider's risk mitigation than on the client's business requirements. While it is a challenge for SVM professionals to find the right way to define service levels, several best practices can mitigate the service delivery risk and maximize the value of an outsourcing engagement.