9/5/2006

An Asset Management Implementation

Best Practice and Migration to CMDB

9/5/2006 ©2006 BMC Software2

Asset Management Best Practice Implementation

› Introductions› What is a Best Practice?› What is IT Asset Management?› Background/Business Perspective› Existing Functionality› Enhancements: Building the Relationships› Structure of ‘Discovery’› Tracking Changes› Preparing to Migrate to CMDB› Benefits› Summary

9/5/2006 ©2006 BMC Software3

Introductions and Definitions

› Mike Campbell – Dev Technology› John Marshall – Dev Technology

› Definitions– BMC® Remedy® Asset Management Module– CMDB (configuration management database)– Asset in the Asset Management Module (inventory)– ITSM (Information Technology Service Management)– ITIL (Information Technology Infrastructure Library)

9/5/2006 ©2006 BMC Software4

What is a Best Practice?

› Clarity*› Consistency*› Credibility*

› How do those relate to Asset Management best practices?

› What is it?› What you are going to do to it?› Everybody believes what you did was right and accurate

– (golden egg)!

*Pink Elephant Pink Link

9/5/2006 ©2006 BMC Software5

What is IT Asset Management?

› A Discipline May Include:– Finances– Contracts– Lifecycles– Inventory

• Everybody does this– Software licenses

• Almost nobody does this– Vendors– Procurement– Leases – Warranties– Cost Accounting

9/5/2006 ©2006 BMC Software6

Background/Business Perspective

› Managed Service Contract– Seat price for all IT services DOJ entity– Full ITSM implementation, started with focus on HD, 6 weeks for entire

implementation– Billing and Refresh forced a robust Asset system

› Asset Module allows us to build business relationships› Billing requires a partnership between customer and IT on accuracy

of data› We have continually modified our Asset Module to meet the needs

of what a CMDB would do for us/Exploited data› Provided a conduit for communication between customer and

business advantage.

9/5/2006 ©2006 BMC Software7

Asset(What to Track & Building Relationships in Asset)

› CTI*– Nothing more than what it is!– Tier 1, Tier 2, Tier 3, Tier 4, (infinity in release 11.0) ☺

› Locations– Where it is!

› People Associated to Applications*– And a relationship

› Applications Associated Servers*› Billing› Catalog* (in inventory assets)› PO/PR› COTS Licenses

9/5/2006 ©2006 BMC Software8

Existing Functionality

› Assets associated to people show up on HD tickets– Critical when dispatching FE to a location

› People associated to applications – Automate the process

› Applications are associated to servers› Servers are assets with rolled-up associations

– First step to successful CMDB…relationships

– Have we kept our clarity?

9/5/2006 ©2006 BMC Software9

Making Applications Assets

Functionality exists in almost all asset tools!Why don’t more organizations use it?

9/5/2006 ©2006 BMC Software10

Association of People to Assets

› Using existing functionality, associate users as they receive the application

– On the Asset form, there is a People tab, which will allow you to build that relationship

– When an application goes down, you will immediately know who wasimpacted

– Ok, you hate screen shots….• But using an Asset Management tool, versions 5.5, 5.6, 6.0, 7.0, have you kept

your CONSISTENCY– YES, except for maybe ‘class structures’

9/5/2006 ©2006 BMC Software11

Existing Functionality (Cont’d)

› Using the Related Items tab on the Asset Record form– Relate the applications to the server CTI– This can be done manually from the Asset form or through an automated

process of existing functionality– Users Impacted field on Asset Record is a total of users associated to each

application

TOOL has to be able to keep the clarity, consistency and credibility

9/5/2006 ©2006 BMC Software12

Existing Functionality - With Some Help

My last screen shot, I promise.But we have kept our

“What it is and the relationshipsit holds.”

9/5/2006 ©2006 BMC Software13

Existing Functionality - Tweaking What is There!

› First three can be done› Who does it?› Why not?

– Billing– Purchase Requisitions– Purchase Orders

› Related Items (CMDB relationships)› People*

9/5/2006 ©2006 BMC Software14

Functionality that Contributes to Asset Management

› Billing– Major user of Crystal Reports– 100% from Asset Records

• Seat price is driven by desktops/laptops that are deployed• If a user is assigned two laptops, that is two ‘seats’

9/5/2006 ©2006 BMC Software15

Enhanced Functionality

› Best Practice to integrate feeds to compare asset data – Second step to successful CMDB

• Reconciliation– Tivoli connection and other Federated data– Configuration Management– Workflow identifies issues to management– Other Asset (BMC) connections; compare to multiple sources

9/5/2006 ©2006 BMC Software16

Asset Adjudication - Credible Sources

› Asset in place, we can track our changes via tickets (fix what is found in reconciliation); small pieces at a time

– Third step to successful CMDB…eyes on • May need to change if data isn’t what was expected• May need to check the source of the data• May need to change relationships and or CDM (common data model)

9/5/2006 ©2006 BMC Software17

Bringing a Discovered Source into Asset - Tivoli

› Had to be from a source our client would recognize as ‘credible’– Didn’t use the virtual solution– Brought data in on a nightly basis (perl)– Ran workflow to compare Tivoli data to itself (existing data set)– Update Assets from Tivoli data based on Remedy work flow

9/5/2006 ©2006 BMC Software18

Summary - What We Did

› Took existing functionality and used it to enhance customers’ processes

› Built asset functionality when necessary› Extensive use of Mid-Tier 6.3 (Remedy Browser)

to see Assets› Use own dataset ID to allow data to be reconciled

when we go to CMDB (will change the script that pulls data from Tivoli)

9/5/2006 ©2006 BMC Software19

Summary - What We Did

The Process

ImplementedAsset Module

Forced use ofapplications and

software as an asset

Builtrelationships

Built Tivolitables

in Remedy

Used Remedy APIand Perl to bring data in

Built workflow fromAsset team

rules

Modified ourrecords asappropriate

Confirmedaccuracy of changes

(reconciliation)

Evaluated ourmigration toCMDB-reuse

9/5/2006 ©2006 BMC Software20

Summary – Why We Did It

› Minimal investment of our time to properly track assets– IT costs are enormous. Aligning with the business, customer perceives we

have more value added.› Become a service aggregator

– Doesn’t matter if it is an application, software or hardware, we can tell the status and impact

› Dispatch of Field Engineers– Critical they get the IMAC right the first time with accurate data

› Critical to create end-to-end service paradigm, focusing on what we delivered and not the hardware

– Trying to realize nobody cares if a server goes down in the middle of the night, if there are no users impacted – fix it in the morning

9/5/2006 ©2006 BMC Software21

Summary - Why We Did It (Cont’d)

› Strong Asset Module is close to a CMDB– ITIL needs CMDB in some form– More asset information we possessed prior to migration to CMDB, better

prepared, we THINK› Aligns with ITIL benefits

– Customer satisfaction– Reduced risk– Reduced costs (maximized use of existing functionality)– Better communication (know what is impacted during outage)– Standards are agreed upon (business rules)– Greater productivity/more experience with asset information– Quality approach – we know who did what, when, and how to correct (no

golden egg, but we know what happened)

9/5/2006 ©2006 BMC Software22

Summary – Why We Did It

› Common sense› Right thing to do› Train was moving

QUESTIONS?