It’s always good to see independent studies confirming the problems and challenges we are addressing with RESOLVE are being experienced by many people.
According to Gartner the biggest inhibitors to more widespread adoption continue to be:
These are exactly the problems we are tackling head-on with RESOLVE Accelerated Incident Resolution as we look to drive automation and scalability to network and IT operations for many of our customers.
The first challenge you come across when you try to drive efficiency into network and IT operations is that building automation is not that easy. Yes, for strategic high-value automations, it is worth the effort, but you’ll quickly find that it can often take much longer than you have expected with IT Process Automation (ITPA) tools. A key aspect why this is the case is exactly just as Gartner describes i.e. “Lack of understanding of the process being automated”.
For a process to be fully automated end-to-end (we refer to these as closed-loop automation), the developer really needs to understand the details of the process to the Nth degree. All the different possibilities that can happen, all the exception cases. For incident resolution, this is further complicated by the variability of how you identify and troubleshoot problems. Added to the fact that the automation developer is unlikely to be the Subject Matter Expert (SME) who has the requisite knowledge – it is inevitable that existing approaches to incident resolution automation are often limited.
RESOLVE has a different approach to automation. Yes we do closed-loop automation and deliver crazy saving when automating strategic end-to-end processes, but what makes RESOLVE stand out is it’s ability to deconstruct complex processes into simpler decision points with partial automation steps that allows alerts and incident resolution processes to be accelerated without having to code it completely end-to-end. RESOLVE combines easy-to-build process guidance and decision trees with automation to provide the contextual details required to make decisions and elimination of repetitive manual tasks.
The second challenge when attempting to drive broad adoption of automation is “cultural resistance to automation”. Although the automation team are trying to reduce the overwhelming workload on the operations support team, support technicians are keenly aware that the automation team are automating them out of a job. It’s no doubt why they are less than forthcoming when asked to assist in providing the necessary details for the resolution process to be automated.
With RESOLVE, we strongly believe in the Knowledge Centered Support (KCS) approach to incident resolution. The process content (and automation) is a by-product of solving problems and should be directly created and maintained by those that are responsible for solving problems, i.e. Level 2 and Level 3 SMEs. The content includes not only the process guidance but also the automation used to accelerate incident resolution.
RESOLVE Automation BuilderTM specifically targets L2 and L3 engineers as the developer for building automations. When coupled with our innovative approach to automate incident resolution, L2 / L3 feel that they are part of the solution to drive efficiency and not part of the problem. L2 / L3 are are key contributors to driving viral adoption of automation throughout the operational support organization.
Automating network health checks & diagnostics accelerates service restoration during severe weather