2013 itsmf usa project of the year assurant’s unconventional approach, uncommon results

ACT Integrated Managed Support

2013 ITSMF USA Project of the Year

Assurant’sUnconventional

Approach, Uncommon Results

AIMS


Agenda

• About Assurant

• A Little History

• Unconventional Approach

• Uncommon Results


About Assurant

• Assurant, Inc. is a provider of specialty insurance products and services in the U.S. and select worldwide markets.

• Assurant is a publicly traded, Fortune 500 company, and is a member of the S&P 500.

• There are approximately 14,000 employees globally.


About our businesses


How did we get here?

• In the beginning… (Early 2000’s)– IT organizational structure:

– Most within the business units– Some shared services (centralized)

– IT atmosphere:– Lots of redundancy– Us vs. Them


A need to provide value• Shared Business Services perceived as overhead• IT Service Management proposed as framework for

delivering high quality service• ITIL embraced

– Consultants– ITIL training for managers & select staff– New ITSM tool– KPI & Metrics– Process Architects– Process Owners– Maturity Assessments– Continuous Process Improvement Program

• Results were great… but the businesses (our customers) were skeptical


Ch..Ch..Ch..Ch..Changes• Reorganization in 2007 creates

“Assurant Corporate Technology” (ACT)– Limit variability, redundancy– Leverage economies of scale

• No Service Management organization


ITIL is a four letter word

• “Process” had a negative connotation

• We still executed processes (incident, change)– Inconsistent– Inefficient– Expensive– Wrong motivation

• Recognition that ACT was not fulfilling our promise to operate as a single IT organization


• Service Management again proposed as a solution to delivering high quality services

• Support granted to:– Establish common processes– Hold all staff accountable to common goals

• Support NOT granted to:– Fund ITSM efforts– Staff ITSM efforts

A need to provide value


Enter the Matrix

• Virtual organization created in late 2009, functioning by 2010– Real accountability– Specific goals

• Representation– Function– Role– Location

• Hand-picked participants– Leaders– Process advocates– Devil’s advocates– Rock Stars


ACT Senior Management

Server Data CenterNetworkApplication

Development

Problem Management

Change Management

Availability Management

NameTitle

NameTitle

NameTitle

NameTitle

NameTitle

NameTitle

NameTitle

NameTitle

NameTitle

NameTitle

NameTitle

NameTitle

NameTitle

NameTitle

NameTitle

NameTitle

IT Security Admin

NameTitle

NameTitle

NameTitle

NameTitle

Incident Management

NameTitle

NameTitle

NameTitle

NameTitle

NameTitle

Configuration Management

AIM

S

Man

agem

ent

Process Structur

e (examples)

Functional

Structure (examples)

AIMS: Assurant Integrated Managed

Support

Dual Accountability


Not eating the elephant

Initial Focus (2009)

•Incident Management•Problem Management•Availability Management•Quality Program

Next Phase (2011)

•Change Management•Configuration Management•Release Management

New to the Party (2013)

•Request Management•???


The reward for doing great work? More work.

• Performance goals for AIMS team members– Each team has a Service Improvement Plan– Members are evaluated on participation and

contributions– Members are responsible for being a liaison to/from

their functional team (communications)– All in addition to their “real jobs”

• Time commitment– Each team meets regularly– Entire AIMS team meets quarterly– Members volunteer for assignments based on

availability and interest


• We’re all in this TOGETHER– All ACT employees have shared AIMS goals

on their Performance Plan– Metrics are determined by Steering

Committee

• Use a lot of communication and a little peer pressure to help maintain focus– Targeted, actionable reporting – Review meetings twice a week– “In Sight” message quarterly

Making AIMS stick


Slow and (mostly) steady progress

• Service Improvement Plans– Living document– Targeted improvements– Prioritized, owned, scheduled

• Start with Quick Wins– Quick, easy to implement– Set stage for collaboration and change– Create culture of process improvement

• Evolution of Changes– Becoming more complex, intricate– Target relationships between processes


Tangible Results65% Reduction in MTTR

* from previous year

Jan

Feb

Mar

Apr

May Jun

Jul

Aug

Sep

Oct

Nov Dec Jan

Feb

Mar

Apr

May Jun

Jul

Aug

Sep Oct

Nov Dec Jan

Feb

Mar

Apr

May Jun

Jul

Aug

Sep

Oct

Nov Dec Jan

Feb

Mar

Apr

May Jun

July

Aug

Sep

Oct

Nov

2011 37% Decrease*

2012 19% Decrease*

2010 201325%

Decrease*

ACT Mean Time To Repair


Tangible Results27% Reduction in Major Incidents

(since 2011)ACT Major Incidents

January

2011

Febru

ary

2011

Marc

h 2

011

April 2

011

May 2

011

June 2

011

July

2011

August 2011

Septe

mber

2011

Octo

ber

2011

Novem

ber

2011

Decem

ber

2011

January

2012

Febru

ary

2012

Marc

h 2

012

April 2

012

May 2

012

June 2

012

July

2012

August 2012

Septe

mber

2012

Octo

ber

2012

Novem

ber

2012

Decem

ber

2012

January

2013

Febru

ary

2013

Marc

h 2

013

April 2

013

May 2

013

June 2

013

July

2013

August 2013

Septe

mber

2013

Octo

ber

2013

Novem

ber

2013

ACT Volume Trend


Tangible Results99.2% Successful Changes


The one our customers like…

Cost of Major Incident - Hours

0

2000

4000

6000

8000

10000

12000

2011 2012 2013

Ho

urs

Productivity Hours Support Hours

Per Month


…And even better!

Cost of Major Incident - Dollars

0

50000

100000

150000

200000

250000

300000

2011 2012 2013

Do

lla

rs

Productivity Dollars Support Dollars

Per Month


Intangible Results

• Working on AIMS is a “Badge of Honor”

• Shift to proactive, solution seeking• Cross-organizational collaboration –

including Business Unit IT• Learning environment• Reward/motivate successes • Accountability


Why AIMS works and what we still need to work on

Strengths• Diverse, deep pool of talent with

extensive knowledge and experience

• Representation from across the org ensures many perspectives are considered

• Stakeholders are informed and engaged

• Promotes cross department collaboration and improvement which extends beyond AIMS

• Drives increased accountability through shared goals

• Reduces the chance that initiatives become IT centric or siloed

• Rotation of membership ensures fresh perspective and high engagement

• Cultural effect - AIMS members want to make a difference

Opportunities• Obtain a more even level of

commitment and contribution from members

• Develop better mechanisms for communication and collaboration across a large organization

• Difficult to gain priority standing for AIMS work with other work going on

• Drive Service Management discipline and benefits beyond ACT


Questions?

People

Process

Tools

Contact Meri Shanahan:[email protected]

651.361.5210

2013 itsmf usa project of the year assurant’s unconventional approach, uncommon results

Documents