IT service level: Less is more (sometimes)

The days of the gold-plated platinum culture in IT have been over for years. It used to be about maximising the business's expectations of IT before service levels were graded in gold, silver and bronze. However, there are still some organisations that have not taken this step. The dilemma: without proper Service Level Agreements (SLAs), business units can use IT services as needed and then complain they are too slow and too expensive.

The new standard of IT service levels

Some resourceful IT vendors and IT organisations go a step further and define service levels below Bronze. Sometimes it is called 'Basic', sometimes 'Brass', sometimes 'Wood'. The focus here is less on direct savings - although every tenth of a per cent of availability can save money. The new service level changes the approach to the customer: Instead of starting with platinum and negotiating this down 'against' the customer, the aim is to get the customer to explicitly order a higher additional requirement and therefore spend above new basic class. If the customer has good reasons why 'basic' is not sufficient, there is no limit. This is a smart move and a creative approach to getting the business to look at its own requirements and make a realistic assessment of what is actually needed.

High demands from business units

Examples of this approach can be found in a number of organisations: Some reduce support hours worldwide to 'local time' at headquarters. Others simply switch off access to IT systems at weekends - something that was previously unthinkable. This is not just about reduced costs and services, but also about compliance and security, because the thinking goes that less can happen offline. At the heart of the issue, however, is the question of how an IT organisation approaches the customer: does it have to be the all-round carefree package with comprehensive service.

Does a basic service level pay off?

Positive financial effects of IT service levels below bronze are difficult to generalise. After all, cost calculation and service allocation are handled individually in each organisation. Is it even possible to switch off Gold storage if only one customer goes down a service level? Or do the costs continue because the storage has to remain in operation due to other gold customers? And how does this work in a flat-rate cost allocation if the business unit is not really forced to save?

Nevertheless, we have seen this in projects: If a significant proportion of customers are satisfied with Basic, a lot of money can be saved on some services. Even if the topic is still uncharted territory for a majority of IT organisations, the method has a certain charm according to our ‘IT Agenda 2025’ survey. According to the survey, the new entry class in IT service is given a score of around 38 per cent when it comes to its effectiveness in reducing costs. This may not be a landslide, but it is at least worth considering.

Real gold or fools gold?

Experience has shown that no defined IT service levels are the worst solution. This is followed by service levels that are only supposedly ‘gold’. What is gold, and who determines the gold content? There is no standard here, everything is a matter of definition. Then, in some areas, KPIs may be green, but employees are dissatisfied. Incidentally, this happens most frequently in service desks: tickets are simply closed due to defined SLAs for the duration of open or unresolved tickets without the problem being solved. When a new ticket is opened, the clock starts ticking again.

Generalised statements about gold, silver and bronze are tricky. A good way to be on the safe side is to compare them with current market standards. Three hours response time for a Prio 1 incident? The market standard is 15 to 30 minutes. This also helps IT with objective communication and in negotiations with its customers.