Ivanti Blog: Posts by

How to Structure Your IT Service Desk to Support Process Improvements

Wed, 26 May 2021 12:00:00 Z

Buying a modern service desk tool won’t solve all your problems in and of itself. Although these tools are designed to ensure general best practices are met, service desk tools must also be configured to address your organization’s specific essential protocols.

In a recent Info-Tech study that surveyed 623 organizations worldwide, the most frequently adopted service management processes are:

Incident management (94.86 percent)
Change management (87.96 percent)
Problem management (71.11 percent)

However, despite adopting these processes, aside from a few pockets of maturity and IT service management (ITSM) improvement, most CIOs reported limited and sometimes negative results, according to Standardize the Service Desk, a publication from Info-Tech Research Group. Deeper analysis showed that the majority of organizations were focused on selection and implementation and failed to put equal effort behind structuring service desk processes.

Without the proper foundation and fine-tuning, their new tool was not positioned to perform at its best.

Structuring Service Desk Processes Leads to Maturity

Building a solid organizational structure that supports your processes is the hidden work that signifies a mature system.

Standardization is essential to creating an environment that’s mapped to your business’ needs, allowing for the vast configuration that will make the service desk more intuitive and maximize its potential to have the best possible impact.

Building a solid organizational structure for your service desk also helps to hold each sector of your business accountable by aiding in assigning roles and responsibilities, enforcing improved processes, and outlining the order in which certain actions are taken and prioritized.

When structuring your service desk, you’ll first need to assess all facets of the existing ITSM and make improvements from the ground up. Consider utilizing the methods below to provide your organization with the structure it needs to properly task and funnel service desk inquiries.

Improve Your CX With a Tiered Generalist Service Desk

Take a look at some of the advantages your organization will experience when you implement a tiered service desk:

Increased Order and Organization

Systems that do not have a tiered response in place tend to get bottle-necked from the very beginning.

Customer requests can easily get lost in the shuffle, particularly if users are forced to muddle through multiple dispatch numbers or contact emails to register their issue. Imagine if they did all the work to find the right contact information only to reach a service desk team member who must then send them on to another specialist to have their issue resolved. Exhausted by the unclear route to completing the process, both customers and team members are left unsatisfied, even if in the end the problem is fixed.

With a flood of requests coming through your system, it’s pertinent to have a clear hierarchy in practice and replicated through your ITSM.

Faster Response Time

Employing a tiered system to navigate your service desk allows your business to respond faster and more efficiently. Through a funneling process, open tickets are escalated to certain types of support based on the level of technical specificity required.

With a tiered system, all customers are initially directed to a single point of contact. There, they confirm the issue and are sent to either Level 1, a frontline service desk team member; Level 2, a second-tier support member with a deeper generalist skill set; or Level 3, a specialist with knowledge of specific applications or technology. Because issues are resolved more efficiently with less time on hold or being tossed around through the system, this model reports a higher customer experience (CX).

Info-Tech research shows that tiered service desks with a first-tier generalist resolution rate over 60 percent have the highest customer satisfaction and best operating costs of all other types of structures.

Significant Cost Savings

A tiered system also directly impacts your bottom line.

As tickets work their way up the funnel, the average volume decreases as Level 1 agents take the brunt of the load with more general and easy-to-solve issues, and Level 2 and Level 3 agents handle more complex cases.

Ultimately, by properly funneling users through a well-established and vetted request system, high volume/low level issues are directed to generalists and low volume/high level issues are sent to technical specialists, essentially saving you money in labor and time on task.

Info-Tech research shows that with the tiered generalist model, most businesses experience about 48 percent more cost-effectiveness, saving around $3.5M for an enterprise producing just 1,000 calls per week.

The success of this model depends on several factors, including effective communication between service desk tiers, efficient escalation procedures, clear guidelines on prioritizing tickets, and clear service support metrics. However, with a deep commitment to building strategy and maintaining processes, a tiered model can truly influence positive outcomes.

Automate and Empower Using the Shift-Left Strategy

Imagine that a Level 2 customer incident can be moved back to a Level 1 incident and resolved by the user instead of a specialist. The goal of this process, known as the shift-left strategy, is to move problem resolution closer to the end user by directing them to a self-service portal whenever possible or appropriate.

By shifting end-users from specialists to generalists and from generalists to self-service, users experience a boost in satisfaction and companies see lower service support costs. Companies save on support costs by better filtering common issues or easily-resolved requests at the front of the funnel while pushing the most complex technical problems up to more skilled, higher-level service desk members (pg. 38). Typically, organizations have analysts resolve the majority of incidents, meaning companies are using their most skilled and highly paid specialists to address the least complex issues. Shifting left allows those issues to move to self-service (lower cost per ticket) and generalists (lower paid), saving businesses on the cost of labor while still offering a satisfactory experience.

An InfoTech report showed that customers who were satisfied with the effectiveness of the service desk also rated all other IT processes 70% higher than dissatisfied end-users. As well, users who were satisfied with the timeliness of the service desk rated all other IT processes 40% higher than dissatisfied users (pg. 8 in Standardize the Service Desk). These noticeable improvements in satisfaction are highly reliant on the fact that users can resolve their own issues quickly and effectively without advanced wait times, resulting in a faster and more effective resolution rate.

Enable Self-Service Portals

At the start of the service desk consultation, end users are met with a ground zero level of support that allows them to address the issue themselves via an automated self-service portal. This stage presents the IT service group with a dashboard that consists of resolutions for issues such as password resets, general information updates, and some troubleshooting. Other examples of a common low-risk change request would be a server reboot.

Even in these smaller requests, users are left feeling empowered now that solutions can be achieved when they desire and without much IT support interaction required. Bonus for the company is that self-service portals entail the least cost to the organization. This scenario is a win-win.

Test Often and Right Away

Another thing to consider when rolling out the shift-left strategy is to test frequently. Traditionally, organizations focus on testing right before a release, putting off the process of correcting errors until after implementation. But delaying testing can make it harder to detect shortcomings later on once the portal is already in use.

To achieve a higher level of stability, combine automation coding and testing into one activity to immediately uncover any pitfalls in the automation. With the shift-left approach and ample time to measure and tweak responses, your organization can detect defects earlier and quickly improve the overall quality of the application for users.

Engage Technicians to Ensure Quality Data Is Captured

Accountability is at the heart of a well-structured organization. Without the importance placed on roles and contribution to the service desk, the standardization of the service desk will not be successful. Members across IT and beyond must be fully engaged and understand their purpose in providing unwavering service support.

Start by analyzing your ITSM dashboard and ensure the right metrics are captured. Every system should be built to gather information that shapes the goal of your organization. The first step to engaging your technicians is to help them identify quick-win and high-priority tickets as well as anticipate potential SLA breaches. From there, introduce meaningful metrics for them to focus on, including end-user satisfaction, ticket volume, first-contact resolution, and the average time to resolve incidents or fulfill service requests.

Leveraging a healthy relationship with your team and allowing them ownership in the structuring process of the service desk will undoubtedly have lasting effects on the quality of your rollout. Communicate your goals and reward anticipating the needs of your users. Whichever of these methods you choose, you will start to see consistent maturation of your ITSM.

Ready to Consider a New ITSM Tool?

Getting a new IT service desk in place is just the beginning. Your next step—and it’s an important one—is to configure your ITSM solution. The Info-Tech Research publication, “Standardize the Service Desk,” provides a blueprint for roll-out success, enabling your organization to:

Increase user satisfaction.
Boost service desk efficiency.
Cut time and cost to resolve tickets.
Build a foundation for future projects.

ITSM Buyers' Guide: 7 Use Cases to Define Your ITSM Goals

Mon, 24 May 2021 12:00:00 Z

Attempting an upgrade or switch to a new ITSM tool is obstacle-ridden for IT directors. From having to address fears surrounding the cost of switching vendors to assessing service management maturity, building a case around why and how an ITSM can advance the business can be a harrowing feat. Thankfully, Info-Tech pulled together this selection guide.

Namely, a substantial obstacle on that list is the dilemma of how to demonstrate value to stakeholders and gain buy-in. There’s a common perception that IT solutions only cost the company money, making approval for ITSM upgrades extremely difficult to achieve.

But IT is much more than just a provider of technology—with the right solutions, it has the power to break down barriers between department silos and connect processes for a more seamless experience both end-users and technicians can get behind. To really show the value of a solution, IT directors must go deeper into the actual benefits ITSMs bring and align them with business interests that can win over stakeholders. Learn how to show this value in Info-Tech’s “IT Service Management Selection Guide.”

Defining Use Cases Helps to Build a Business Case

According to research done by Apptio, seventy-seven percent of CIOs have trouble articulating true application costs, yet this is the key to getting a yes¹. Defining use cases is an effective method for expressing costs and benefits essential to growth. Well-defined use cases provide a clear and concise view into nearly every facet of the project, from business and technical drivers and the current state of the system to funding and whatever risks might hinder progress.

Successful deployment of use cases can result in improved operational efficiency, customer satisfaction, and compliance—benefits that are typically central to IT interests. On the other hand, revenue generation rate, cost reductions, and an increase in net income are what matter most to stakeholders. With these key objectives in mind, developing a business case based on how each feature will be used can help to deliver a sound argument fully illustrating where solutions are needed most and how to achieve results that attract the eye of stakeholders.

Once your team has identified high-level goals, take a look at how these seven use cases can help to narrow down essential features and accelerate the ITSM selection process.

Enterprise service management
Customer-centric services
Customer-support management
IT finance
Product owner management
IT operations management
Incident management

1. Enterprise Service Management

Businesses are seeing the value of extending their service management solutions outside IT to other departments. In fact, according to a report done by HDI that examined how organizations benefited from investing in enterprise service management (ESM) software, 75% of businesses saw an increase in productivity after expanding their services outside IT². From human resources and corporate operations to facilities and customer support, ESM solutions enable automated workflows, organize incident and service requests, and centralize resources.

Investment in ESM makes a huge impact on productivity with numerous business outcomes like increased employee satisfaction, higher visibility into workflows, informed risk mitigation, and a lower total cost of ownership (TCO).

To identify features that meet this use case, look into the following areas:

Self-service features
Service and solutions design
Knowledge and reporting

2. Customer-Centric Services

Customer-centric services are a major driver for upgrading or switching ITSM solutions. Companies hope to provide a larger variety of offerings that keep their customers engaged throughout multiple levels of the sales funnel. Through this method, customers are invited to peruse resources and address common issues through a personalized portal or web space designed just for them. By offering more self-service options, content management features, and speedier service and product delivery, customer-centric services give greater transparency and ultimately boost the customer experience.

Technicians also get a win here with businesses reporting a 52% increase in employee satisfaction since expanding service management outside of IT³. Thanks to a more streamlined system, customer service technicians have more time, allowing them to enhance processes and identify areas for improvement.

To meet this use case, research the following areas:

Self-service features
Service and solutions design
Knowledge and reporting
Technician usability features

3. Customer Support Management

In a recent study by Hubspot, although only 42% of the companies surveyed used help desk systems for customer service, 86% of them reported that the software gave them an increase in productivity⁴. This informs us of the value a dedicated customer relationship management (CRM) system can bring to support teams. CRMs position businesses to provide the highest level of support by giving them access to accurate and timely reporting with triage solutions and dashboards that make it easy to keep a pulse on clients and client data. It’s a wonder more companies aren’t making the investment.

Depending on the type of support offered to external clients, an ITSM solution or a CRM add-on could be the answer. For instance, if first-contact resolutions are the primary practice, an integration that extends CRM capabilities may be appropriate, whereas for an omnichannel approach, an ITSM solution might be a better fit.

To support this use case, take a look at the following areas:

Service and solutions design
Knowledge and reporting
Technician usability features
Incident management

4. IT Finance

A study by Apptio showed that directors of IT who present defensible insights into IT finances save up to 10% on costs⁵. Having more visibility into finances allows IT directors to quickly analyze budget deviations and extrapolate day-to-day costs from innovative expenditures. With greater visibility into capital (CapEx) and operating expenses (OpEx), companies acquire a new strategic tool for their arsenal with clear, discernible data that can be used to guide decisions about how services are funded.

For features that support this use case, look into these areas:

Service and solutions design
Reporting and analysis
Technician usability features
Asset management for IT finance
Configuration management features

5. Product Owner Management

Businesses today are being tasked to meet operations needs with even greater agility and collaboration across departments. This mindset is certainly evolving the philosophy behind how teams work, creating a more product-focused environment directed toward managing the entire lifecycle of an application.

Supporting DevOps or site reliability engineering (SRE) is a pertinent business case to make, with 84.3% of tech professionals reporting that their ability to innovate is greatly affected by customer-impacted issues⁶. To influence ITSM maturity, businesses will need to invest in improved workflows and communications with integrations, automated testing, and infrastructure provisioning.

Look to the following areas to identify features to meet this use case:

Service and solutions design
Knowledge and reporting
Development and project management
Problem management
Change and configuration management
Incident and event management

6. IT Operations Management

Automation and reporting is a large part of maturing operations and positioning your organization for growth. Successfully managing IT operations hinges on accurately detecting larger underlying issues and minimizing recurring incidents.

What holds companies back from achieving a maturity in their systems can be as simple as relying too much on manual processes and not investing enough in automation. According to a report by ScienceLogic, organizations saw a 70% reduction in their mean time to recovery (MTTR) and manual troubleshooting effort when using automation instead of manual processes⁷.

Try looking into the following areas to meet this use case:

Service and solutions design
Knowledge and reporting
Technician usability features
Problem management
Change and configuration management
Incident and event management

With more visibility into operations, IT teams can better monitor automation and performance while having the capability to prevent as well as respond to outages and other events. Features that focus on IT operations management also accelerate the speed of analysis and decrease response times.

7. Incident Management

Addressing issues in real time is a constant concern for businesses looking to improve their incident management solution. As end-users increase the demand for more immediate, high-touch results, technicians are being called to respond faster and resolve incidents in fewer interactions. In a recent study done by Ivanti, up to 80% of endpoint issues were resolved by self-healing technology before users even reported them⁸. By investing in solutions that allow for self-service, end users are provided quick solutions without having to wait for a technician to respond.

To identify features that meet this use, look into the following areas:

Self-serve features
Service and solutions design
Knowledge and reporting
Technician usability features
Asset management
Problem management

With the right incident management system, both end-users and technicians will be empowered to resolve issues on their own at a faster rate while also reducing recurring incidents.

Build Your Vendor List Based on the Features That Matter Most

From here, take stock of the features that best align with your use cases and develop your list of requirements. Vendors that meet your highest requirements should make the cut as your team narrows in on a final decision. Also, be sure to set realistic timelines. By highlighting project milestones, it will be easier to recognize and articulate the metrics for success and keep stakeholders engaged.

Building a business case for your ITSM goals is a large undertaking with many moving parts that may distract from the vision so try to stay close to the core use cases and features that matter most to your organization’s growth. When done right, well-defined use cases should help IT directors discuss and defend their choice of solutions and make the ITSM selection process clear and effective for all parties.

Want to learn more about how to get your team on board?

Take a deep dive into the Info-Tech report for more details on the costs of inertia and the best strategy for switching vendors.

[1] “100 IT Cost Reduction Questions You Should be Asking.” Apptio Inc. 2020

[2] “The State of Enterprise Service Management.” HDI and Samanage, November 2018. Web.

[3] “The State of Enterprise Service Management.” HDI and Samanage, November 2018. Web.

[4] “The State of Customer Service in 2020.” Hubspot, July 2020.

[5] “100 IT Cost Reduction Questions You Should be Asking.” Apptio Inc. 2020

[6] “The State of Automation in Incident Management.” xMatters, 2020.

[7] “Reduce MTTR by Automating Troubleshooting.” ScienceLogic 2020.

[8] Ivanti, 2020.

Press Pause on Auto-Renewals: How to Brave a Software Switch

Wed, 19 May 2021 12:00:00 Z

One of the biggest reasons organizations don’t try out a new software vendor is the perceived costs of switching. Most cite the fear of implementation being too expensive, too difficult, or too time-consuming—all excuses to justify maintaining a vendor contract, even if that vendor is performing poorly and not meeting expectations.

But what’s at risk when organizations simply renew year after year? Who loses if the status quo is maintained? The truth is, both the vendor and the company lose.

Consequences of Staying in Bad Vendor Relationship

In a recent survey conducted by Info-Tech Research Group, 93 percent of small businesses, 92.7 percent medium, and 91.9 percent of large companies planned to renew their vendor contract, yet when asked if they would recommend their vendor to others, the average likelihood of referral was less than 25 percent.

This shows that even though organizations are highly unsatisfied with their vendors, they are more likely to keep them anyway. As anyone who’s made a purchase knows, keeping a product without complaint is nearly synonymous with voicing satisfaction. Expressing dissatisfaction or doing the work to analyze how a product is used and the impact it has on your organization is essential to the process of maturing and advancing any domain expertise, including IT service management (ITSM).

Vendors lose because that much-needed feedback is not provided. Without it, they forfeit the opportunity to accommodate their customer’s growing needs and improve their offerings.

Organizations, on the other hand, miss out on opportunities to negotiate for better rates, more support, and deeper discounts. From lower software costs to enhanced security features, switching vendors is the best time to score a better deal for your business.

Vendor Satisfaction Goes Up After Switching

Businesses that shy away from a vendor switch because of perceived costs are stifling their investment and undercutting the value of having a strong vendor partnership. According to an Info-Tech study, medium and large enterprises, in particular, when well-positioned, are shown to be at least 25 percent more satisfied after taking the leap to a new vendor.

With 80 percent of organizations being more satisfied after changing vendors and over half of those organizations being at least 60 percent more satisfied, companies should have good enough reason to make a change.

When renewal time rolls around again, follow these three steps to determine whether switching vendors will result in more value and satisfaction from your IT service management tool.

Step 1: Identify Opportunities to Switch Software Vendors

Before choosing a new vendor, do a deep dive on your current tools and determine which are the poorest performers. Evaluate software features and capabilities and assess their importance, relevance, and effectiveness by ranking them into these categories:

Unused
Nice to have
Important
Mission-critical

Be sure to take into account user reviews and feedback from your team to determine which tools warrant being added to the chopping block.

Prioritize Poorly Performing Software in the Top Right Quadrant

Now that you've ranked your current tools, set up a scatter plot with four quadrants on an x- and y-axis. Software at the cross-section of being the least effective and unused should fall at the lowest rank whereas the most effective and mission-critical applications should be at the highest end of the spectrum.

Once you’ve completed your list, reflect on those applications that are least effective yet of importance to your company’s mission. Ask yourself is the software actually ineffectual or has it been underutilized? It’s important to note that switching vendors won’t change the success of the software if organizations don’t commit to implementing and leveraging the software.

It’s also important to not only switch out unessential software but also to retain or add software that’s essential to your organization. Prioritize switching poorly performing software in the top-right quadrant.

Step 2: Decide on Your Terms for Negotiation

With the right negotiating platform, switching vendors can lead to cost savings as well as a higher ROI. When looking to leverage a vendor switch for a discount, be sure to arm yourself with all the data you’ve collected about your current software usage and goals. Pull reports on licenses, the real cost of portals and logins for each employee, and define how you would improve the implementation and utilization of new applications in the future.

Make It Align with Your Mission

If you’re satisfied with the product and believe that with a deeper commitment you can achieve a larger slice of your mission, consider what type of deal will grant you the most value for your time.

According to InfoTech research, the top three reasons companies receive a discount with a vendor are:

Volume purchase
Multi-year commitment
Optimized usage or licenses

Large enterprises, for instance, see an average percentage discount of 31 percent when leveraging large volume purchases. So, sit with your research and determine if there is a way you can leverage your company size, annual contracts, or use more custom applications to score a greater discount.

True Value Depends on What’s Most Important to You

On the other hand, a return on your investment may not always be in the form of discounts. Organizations that come to the table with a solid stance on their needs and goals can realize savings over time in the form of easier implementation, lower support costs, and enhanced security and provider support.

The goal is to make the deal work for you.

Making the switch creates the opportunity to engage with and commit to a new application and service provider. Breaking up with your vendor isn’t easy nor the most pleasant, but being prepared with your bargaining tools is the move that will set you up for the future.

Step 3: Optimize Your Selection Process

Now that you’ve determined your position on leveraging the purchase and which applications are worth the switch, you’ll need to assemble a small team.

Smaller Teams and Time Limits Are Key

When constructing your team, be sure to have representatives from various departments and try to stick to a manageable group of three to five people. A smaller focus group with cross-departmental representation will ensure the process moves along and that the needs of each department are addressed. Having too many people involved in the selection process reduces effectiveness, leading to more time and resources spent on making decisions.

To further manage your time and resources, set a limit on the amount of time spent on selection. On average, most organizations take 8.3 weeks to decide on a piece of software—and spending additional time and effort making the selection does not necessarily improve product satisfaction. In fact, in the end, organizations are notably less satisfied after months of deliberation. So, bring your research to the table, do your vetting, and select the top two or three vendors you like best.

Make the Move to New ITSM Tool

The fear of switching should not hold you back from implementing a system that can help you realize maximum gains and increase satisfaction. Renewal is an opportunity cost. By gathering the data and keeping your pulse on the needs of your organization, you’ll have the clarity and the tools to negotiate a better contract and forge a better relationship with your new vendor.

Take a deep dive into the Info-Tech report for more details on the costs of inertia and the best strategy for switching vendors.

Download Now: https://www.ivanti.com/lp/itsm/assets/s1/switching-software-vendors-drives-increased-satisfaction

7 Habits I&O Leaders Should Replace in 2021

Mon, 17 May 2021 12:00:01 Z

As the digital-first operating world evolves, IT organizations are struggling to decide which practices to maintain and which to phase out. This transition from a “plan/build/run” lifecycle to a more agile, team-oriented structure has become the catalyst for organizational conflict, challenging the very foundation of how companies should operate. Split by generational and philosophical ideas of governance, organizations are challenged to evolve to a world that’s already demanding a change.

For instance, in years past, the lifecycle of a product was managed in silos, with large gaps of time between deployment, testing, feedback, and correction. But with automation and software access on a 24-hour loop for end-users, that lifecycle is happening faster and its causal effects are closing the gap on such a long feedback loop. Technicians and specialists need to be at the ready and have the permission to respond, correct, deploy, and test products organically and without a level of bureaucracy that stymies response and maturity.

Critical shifts in organizational structure and practices are necessary to address these opportunities that arise from modern technology in operations. In this massive phase of evolution, development and operations must be more collaborative than ever. Through today’s 24/7/365 nature of doing business, most companies have been merely adapting on the fly but now it’s time to establish the infrastructure operating model that will make tech modernization successful.

Here, seven habits infrastructure and operations (I&O) departments need to abandon—and what to do instead.

Bad Habit #1: Separating R&D from Operations

Historically, research and development (R&D) have been inextricably linked. Small teams worked in secret far away from operations, toiling over the creation of new technology and testing outcomes that would ultimately dictate its rollout.

Operations, on the other hand, had to quickly inform themselves of the new technology but when met with issues by the customer, outside of a few troubleshooting actions, would have no way of rectifying the issue.

Eventually, those concerns would get filtered back to R&D but any changes to the product led to a hard stop or months of reevaluating development and a phasing in of upgrades. R&D had little to no connection to those who would market, sell, and mitigate the concerns of users of those products.

What to Do Instead: Shorten the Feedback Loop

This practice of development first, test last (with little variation) has hindered organizations from reaching their true potential in the marketplace.

Businesses must consider that operations and those who interact most with end-users are invaluable to the development process. Because of their position on the frontline, they are the first to hear concerns, needs, problems, and positive feedback, too.

Operations’ proximity to customers can surely shorten the feedback loop, allowing R&D to tweak products faster and more efficiently, optimizing rollout and testing, and ultimately, making it easier to meet the needs of users. Which segues to the next point.

Bad Habit #2: Relying on Specialty Silos

With the onset of e-commerce and service management systems, companies are flooded with inquiries, complaints, and user issues. This information is valuable, yet companies lack the structure to reap the benefits.

To be in the best position to respond to customers, your business model needs to reflect a more collaborative, cross-functional structure that encourages input from all specialties. Unlike the traditional waterfall model, where products advanced linearly through the plan, build, and delivery phases largely in vast silos led by specialists, today’s newer model must embrace agility. By implementing a product-centered model, businesses will be able to continuously tweak a product and respond quickly and intuitively to customer needs.

What to Do Instead: Create Cross-Functional Product Teams

Organizationally, companies must also retire the closed method of having one class of specialist owning the product at a time. Because a product-centered model calls for adaptability and continuous evolution, products shouldn’t “complete”—they should be tweaked until they are ready to be retired. This process of improvement ahead of retiring a product must rely on constant collaboration and even overlap among specialties.

One example of a product-centered organizational model is to distribute members of your I&O staff across multiple teams. Each team should focus on the full build and run of a product, providing production and development support. Based on multiple studies of human social organization, InfoTech research recommends forming cross-functional product teams of six to eight people. This more effective approach relies on persistent, cross-functional teams of high-performing individuals who are continuously learning and shaping the product.

By foregoing traditional production models and embracing variation, your product and your team will become more innovative and functional.

Bad Habit #3: Disregarding the Human Factor

Although technology has made huge advances over the years, companies still rely on old ways of managing employees and defining or measuring efficiency. Some organizations also assume that because many systems are becoming automated, less human staff is needed. Contrary to this belief, humans are essential to computing.

Chaos engineering and resilience engineering are an example of why the human factor is so paramount to the workplace. Resilience engineering examines the dynamics of humans, cognitive psychology, and ergonomics. Chaos engineering, pioneered by Netflix, assumes crashes and failures are inevitable and thus functions to stress test computer software in real-world scenarios.

At their core, both philosophies acknowledge that humans plus computers cause complex systems and that this relationship creates innumerable paradoxes that reinforce the bond between the two.

What to Do Instead: Adopt ‘Resilience Engineering’

Because companies typically automate processes that are easier and high volume, what’s left for humans are the more difficult tasks. The humans operating these systems are met with tremendous challenges to problem solve and mitigate failures that may arise.

To keep humans most effective in the loop, companies should consider resilience engineering. This may mean you will have to forgo some automation opportunities to embrace a degree of redundancy in your teams.

Yet the human factor in the workplace is deeper than problem-solving, it’s also about cultivating an environment of psychological safety—one where the employee experience is taken into account. This approach means pulling resources into things like ergonomics, employee sustainability, and considering cognitive psychology, like attention span and thought processes.

With the focus on human operators, businesses should seek to bring teams together and push the envelope on digital-first practices like utilizing chat platforms and automated change and service request processes. Giving your employees access to tools like these and putting humans first ensures that they will have more resources to help them succeed.

Bad Habit #4: Relying on Command-and-Control Governance

Corporations have largely held the belief that top-down leadership is the best way to manage any resource from workers to finance. To move forward with a project or make changes to resolve an issue, there’s a chain of command often leading several steps up the ladder for approval. Although this method has been deemed tried and true, this type of “helicopter governance” actually stalls implementation and hinders growth.

What to Do Instead: Provide a Principled Framework

If the goal is to become agile, teams will need greater resources and more autonomy. Leaders should give workers the room to address issues and make decisions based on their own judgment.

Ultimately, this approach means moving away from a philosophy of “review and approve” and transitioning to one of “trust and verify.”

Leadership should trust their team with this level of professional ownership and check in only to verify the goal was met. By removing the roadblocks and burdens of procedure-driven governance, teams can meet goals however they see fit within a framework of principles to guide them. If organizations are focused on being mission-based and product-centered, the values by which teams make decisions should fall right in line.

Bad Habit #5: Hiring Based Only on Skillset

The philosophy behind who to hire and why has evolved substantially over the last few decades. With automation in the workplace and technical skills being in high demand, organizations need to evolve once again. Hiring based solely on expertise does not mean workers are ready to meet the challenge of an ever-changing, product-centered environment.

What to Do Instead: Prioritize Learners and Collaborators

When hiring, companies should look for individuals who get high marks as collaborators, and love to learn and explore new solutions on the job. As modern organizations demand more dynamic workers and problem solvers to join teams, new talent should have the proper skillset, and they should also be flexible and adaptable.

This also extends to how companies maintain talent. In the past, companies were in the habit of arbitrarily restructuring or reorging teams, even swapping members out simply based on metrics. Now, organizations should be wary of making swift changes like this that undermine investment in employees and devalue relationships between team members. Instead, a company should commit to becoming a learning organization. This fundamental shift places a high value on development and employee growth by giving teams access to unlimited information when and how they need.

A solid place to start is by investing in pull-based learning infrastructures, a model that encourages workers to proactively pull useful and relevant information at will. Whether it’s in the form of articles posted on an internal communication platform or downloadable content or webinars made available through company resources, on-demand learning and other forms of enrichment empower workers to create new solutions and bring more value to their team and the organization as a whole.

Bad Habit #6: Underfunding Learning and Development

In line with becoming a learning organization, how companies fund projects must be reevaluated as well. Typically, centralized decision-makers manage annual capital funds and determine the budget for each team or program. These large chunks of funding, usually given annually and infrequently, have a tendency to hop over innovative projects because the budget is allocated based on measured practices and finite resources.

What to Do Instead: Sponsor Employee-Led Projects

But to innovate, companies need to swing for the fences and invest in new ideas. Metered funding is a compelling way to support more experimental projects and fund learning-based initiatives. If we consider companies like Uber, which has invested $500 million in a collaboration with Toyota to develop self-driving cars, we notice a startup model that isn’t afraid to put funding into projects that may be a bit outside the box yet in the vein of their mission.

Start by funding learning-based initiatives in the early stages and phasing into growth-based funding later. Ideas presented to design makers are given several rounds of funding periodically depending on the stage of the project and advancements made. Create a roadmap of business outcomes, and use team velocity to estimate the number of sprints it’ll take to reach the edge of the goal. This approach should also help you estimate the cost of the project. Metered funding also allows your organization to pragmatically fund explorations and product enhancements, bringing some balance to funding when the ROI is largely unknown.

Bad Habit #7: Relying on Steep Hierarchical Structures

The last few decades have been driven by middle management, which new studies are showing hinders the flow of communication between staff and executives. Often hierarchical structures in the workplace can be rife with issues, including territorial managers, lack of collaboration, and complacent, less innovative practices.

What to Do Instead: Embrace a Flatter Organization

There’s been a movement to dispose of traditional organizational structures and embrace a flatter one. Flat organizational structures, such as holacracy and Teal, decentralize middle management and rely on either a smaller than normal amount of middle managers or no middle management at all.

But in newer organizational models, teams are free to be active in the decision-making with few obstructions between them and executives. Flat organizational structures are embraced by many tech companies who thrive on making more impactful decisions faster and have teams who are empowered and autonomous.

Be Dedicated to the Change

More is more this year. Achieving agility increases your company’s response time, improves your product, and better communicates your mission through and through. Change must be intrinsic and highly valued in order to truly innovate.

Start with a commitment to a new philosophy on how you want to govern as an organization and realign every aspect to the values that will help your company thrive. Find out more about what you need to know in the Forrester report, "The Future of Technology Operations" and register for the webinar with a Forrester guest analyst.