Regional Manager/ Service Delivery Manager at a tech services company with 201-500 employees
14
Published:Aug 12, 2021
1. Don’t Start with a List of the Available ITSM Tools
Some people might tell you to start with the latest Forrester Wave or Gartner Magic Quadrant as a long list (rather than a short list). These will help, eventually, but in my opinion, they shouldn’t be your first port of call. Instead, start closer to home by understanding what you actually need to achieve.
Now, this might be going back to basics, assessing what you need for optimal IT service delivery and IT support, or it might merely be deciding upon the ITSM processes you need to support. So it could be relatively easy. Take your existing processes and consider how they could be improved upon through the use of more modern, fit-for-purpose ITSM technology.
If, however, your various IT operations activities are not aligned to or expressed in terms of, ITSM best practice, then you’ll most likely need to undertake some form of process maturity assessment. This could be an ITIL assessment or an alternative. If this is the case for your organization, you should probably opt to look at only a few processes in detail to start with, so as not to have unrealistic ambitions of increased ITSM maturity and tool utilization. But there’s no reason why you can’t create high-level requirements related to what you would like to do or to achieve, in terms of additional processes and tool utilization, in the future.
2. Aim for a Single Corporate ITSM Tool and Consistency of ITSM Processes
The selection and purchase of a new ITSM tool is a great opportunity to consolidate things—whether multiple service desk teams, multiple tools, or variant processes. If appropriate, first ensure that the ITSM tool project sets out to accomplish more than just buying another piece of technology and adding to the associated technology management overhead.
Second, ensure that the initiative gets executive or senior management approval not only for the new tool spend but also for the consistent utilization of processes throughout the organization. This might be, for example, not only the establishment of a single corporate IT service desk but also a single corporate change management process for all IT-related changes that straddles both run the business (IT ops) and change the business (app dev) activities.
3. Be Clear About Which ITSM Tool Requirements Are “Must Haves” and Those That Are Merely “Nice to Haves”
Any process design work you undertake will form the basis for a new toolset’s features and functions requirements. And it’s important you divide these requirements between those that are must-haves and those that are merely desirable.
Once agreed upon, these must-have requirements should not be compromised in favor of any other requirements, especially when based on the goal of getting more for your money. Sadly, this is the proverbial quantity over quality dilemma—the ITSM tool selection equivalent of asking the wrong questions and thus getting the wrong answer—i.e., a tool with lots of capabilities that you’ll probably never use (but of course you’ll still be paying for them).
Plus, tool vendors with products that don’t meet all of the must-have requirements might try to convince you that some of your must-haves or mandatory functionality is not really necessary. They might be right, but they might not. Stay focused on what you wish (and need) to achieve, and ensure that people and process needs continue to drive the technology requirements rather than the other way around.
4. Don’t Let Integrations with Other IT and Business Systems Be an Afterthought
When specifying ITSM tool requirements, an organization must consider their current and future needs for integration with other corporate systems. Plus, now that the use of cloud service providers and the service integration and management (SIAM) approach is more popular, there is also the need to integrate into third-party IT systems.
If multiple, non-suite ITSM tools are being considered as a solution, then this also includes the integration between different tools and processes, for example, integrating a third-party CMDB with the tool or tools for the incident, problem, and change management as a minimum.
Plus, don’t undersell the importance of the ability to easily integrate the tool with existing IT management tools—from the submission of monitoring (or event management) data to the ticketing system through to network discovery data auto-populating the CMDB (if these activities are not part of the new tool).
Finally, the integration requirements must also be created with the future in mind. So look at the tool’s API approach and the number of available pre-built integrations to common IT management and business applications.
5. Weigh Your Requirements Appropriately
All your ITSM tool requirements should be prioritized, using a suitable weighting system. For instance, you can make each requirement group a percentage element of 100 percent so that some requirements count more than others, or you can use multipliers so that some scores count double, triple, etc., which factors in the importance of each process and activity. Thankfully, since many, if not all, tool vendors have used ITIL as a blueprint for the creation of their ITSM product, most modern ITSM tools will deliver against the key elements of the most commonly asked for ITSM capabilities.
Some requirements will be straightforward, such as the nuts and bolts features needed to support the incident management process. The other will not be, especially elements related to the ITSM tool as a whole rather than individual processes. For instance, requirements around ease-of-use can be subjective and multidimensional—where a tool that’s very easy to use on a day-to-day basis might not be so easy to configure and customize. And don’t forget the scoring of attributes related to reporting; workflow, automation, and notifications; and security—where a prospective tool might meet all the ITSM-related requirements but fail to meet mandatory, governance-related criteria.
6. Score ITSM Tool Vendors Beyond the Offered Tool Functionality
This includes obvious vendor capabilities such as how they are able to assist with more than just the core ITSM technology need, such as assisting with the people- and process-based changes associated with the introduction of the new tool. So do they have proven methodologies and accelerators to deliver the new technology, plus the required organizational change, successfully and at a rapid pace?
However, your organization might want so much more than a new version of the status quo. You might want to improve ITSM capabilities and maturity, both within already-adopted ITSM processes and with the introduction of new ones. So how will the tool vendor help to up your organization’s ITSM game? Will they be able to assist in the delivery of new best practice processes, tweaked to suit your organization’s peculiarities?
Plus of course, we have other requirements to score in addition to process support, such as integrations and interoperability, technical requirements (e.g., performance, security, and resilience), supplier background, implementation parameters (including training), and support and maintenance arrangements. But another important requirement is easy to miss, which leads me to my next tip.
7. Assess ITSM Tool Vendors from a Relationship Perspective
This might seem like a strange thing to state, so stop for a moment to think back to the issues you’ve had with previous tool vendors and their products. The issues might be varied, but I’d be willing to bet that many of them stem from the lack of a relationship, or a very limited relationship, often merely financial, between seller and buyer.
It’s a common complaint from ITSM tool customers, with relationships now second only to support in customer frustrations with tool vendors according to Service Desk Institute (SDI) research. ITSM needs, and the technology that supports them, are complicated and require more than a single business transaction where the customer’s money is exchanged for the vendor’s ITSM tool (or a payment schedule set up for the contract duration for SaaS). And it also requires more than a one-time project to get the technology up and running.
So use both formal and informal channels to understand how the tool vendors are being considered to build and maintain relationships with their customers. To want such a relationship is not an excessive demand of a vendor, especially in the days of SaaS-delivered ITSM when it’s so much easier to walk away and start again. In fact, smart tool vendors will be wanting a relationship with you.
8. Let the Real Users of the ITSM Tool Play a Key Role in Tool Selection
So a prospective ITSM tool looks great on paper (or on your screen), scoring highly across the board. You thus require a proof-of-concept to see the tool working in the wild and not just in the hands of the seasoned vendor demo person.
Such a proof-of-concept, if well used, can make or break (sometimes literally) a tool for your organization. And at this point, it’s important to allow the real users to get their hands dirty. Importantly, these days, this is not just IT staff, as some functionality, such as self-service and self-help, will require appropriate end-user use and feedback.
IT staff, in particular, will need to be provided with very focused evaluation criteria to almost scientifically rate each tool rather than just being allowed to be subjective, for instance stating, “There was something about it I didn’t like.” These criteria should include intuitiveness and user-friendliness, the speed of time-critical activities such as incident logging, and the breadth and depth of reporting capabilities, among others.
Hello peers,
I am a General Manager at a large healthcare company.
I am researching EAM tools. There are several tools in the market but there aren't any really good ones for importing data.
Which EAM tool are you using? What are the pros and cons of that tool?
Thank you.
Here are some of the EAM tools people use and their pros and cons:
IBM Maximo is a comprehensive EAM solution for managing assets, maintenance, and operations. It may be a good choice for large organizations with complex assets.
Pros:
Wide range of features
Scalable and flexible
Strong integration with other IBM products
Cons:
Can be complex to implement and manage
Some say it is expensive
SAP EAM is cloud-based and can be used to manage assets, operations, and maintenance. It may be suitable for organizations that want a scalable and flexible solution.
Pros:
Has comprehensive reporting capabilities that can help you track and analyze your assets
Scalable and flexible
Strong integration with other SAP products
Cons:
It is reported that the cost of SAP EAM can be high
Not as many features as some other EAM solutions
Oracle Asset Management is a comprehensive asset management solution that helps organizations manage their assets across their lifecycle, from procurement to disposal. It provides a single view of assets, their condition, and their performance and allows organizations to optimize their asset utilization, reduce costs, and improve compliance.
Pros:
Comprehensive and customizable EAM solution
Supports a variety of data import formats
Robust reporting capabilities
Cons:
Some find it expensive
Can be complex and requires significant resources to implement and maintain
If you are looking for an easy-to-use EAM tool with a built-in data import wizard, then SAP EAM or IBM Maximo may be a good choice. If you are looking for an EAM tool that supports various data import formats and allows you to customize the data import process, then Oracle Asset Management may be a good choice.
Hello,
Below there are views on the pros and cons of Internal SOC and SOC-as-a-Service.
Pros and cons of outsourced SOC:
Outsourcing pros
Trained personnel. The MSSP has experienced personnel immediately available, saving the organization the time and expense of hiring and training the dedicated people needed to do the analysis.
Infrastructure. The MSSP also already has the facilities and too...
Regional Manager/ Service Delivery Manager at a tech services company with 201-500 employees
Oct 31, 2021
Hello,
Below there are views on the pros and cons of Internal SOC and SOC-as-a-Service.
Pros and cons of outsourced SOC:
Outsourcing pros
Trained personnel. The MSSP has experienced personnel immediately available, saving the organization the time and expense of hiring and training the dedicated people needed to do the analysis.
Infrastructure. The MSSP also already has the facilities and tools required to do the job, saving more time and the upfront expense of building out an internal SOC.
Continuous threat monitoring. MSSPs should provide SIEM capabilities that filter false alerts so forensics are only conducted on legitimate threats. This type of proactive, continuous threat hunting and monitoring may be difficult for a company's cybersecurity team to conduct on its own.
Intelligent analysis. Outsourcing cybersecurity operations can provide security analysis capabilities while an organization builds its own in-house SOC.
Outsourcing cons
How much analysis is the MSSP going to provide? Outsourcing the cybersecurity operations function does not usually provide features such as multi-tier analysis of alerts or an incident response service. Instead, many outsourced cybersecurity operations only provide the equivalent of a Level 1 cybersecurity operations analysis.
What happens to alerts that the MSSP cannot clear? The MSSP may only be able to analyze a subset of alert logs generated by an organization. Alerts from applications like databases and web applications may be outside of its area of expertise. If the MSSP is also a tools or hardware vendor, it may only be able to analyze logs from its own products.
Who is going to provide a detailed analysis of potential threats? An organization still needs some internal analysis capabilities to deal with the smaller number of alerts that cannot be easily cleared by the MSSP and thus returned to the client.
Does the MSSP provide compliance management? The SOC must operate in compliance with regulations and standards that the company must conform with. The MSSP should provide templates for required and recommended compliance processes and consider regulatory standards when developing vulnerability assessments for the company.
For some organizations, complete and permanent outsourcing of cybersecurity operations is a desirable option. This is a reasonable approach for governmental organizations, in particular, where obtaining, training and managing people and facilities, as well as predicting cost-effectiveness, are preferably handled under a services contract rather than in-house. Governmental organizations may also have significant compliance obligations regarding cybersecurity where it may be convenient to transfer regulatory mandates to a contractor.
In-house cybersecurity operations center
Building an in-house cybersecurity operations center provides the greatest degree of control over cybersecurity operations and the best opportunity to get exactly the services that an organization needs. Building an in-house cybersecurity operations center can also provide the foundation for building future comprehensive cybersecurity services, including vulnerability management, incident response services, external and internal threat management services, and threat hunting.
Compared to outsourcing the cybersecurity operations function, building in-house capability has the following pros and cons.
Pros and cons of internal SOC
In-house pros
Tailors the operation to meet demands. Design the security operations and monitoring capabilities that best meet the organization's requirements.
Tracks capabilities that are stored on-site. Storing event log data internally lessens the risks that come with the external data transfer required to report security incidents.
Improves communication. Breach transparency and coordinating incident response are typically much easier and faster when the processes are conducted in-house.
Builds a unified security strategy. An in-house cybersecurity operations center can be the foundation for comprehensive security, threat and incident response capability.
In-house cons
Planning and implementation. The time required to get an in-house cybersecurity operations center up and running can easily be a year and is likely longer. CISOs and other security personnel will face a significant time investment in planning and implementing the SOC.
Costs. Establishing an in-house SOC requires a significant budget, with upfront IT and personnel investment.
Finding appropriate personnel. Hiring people who have the right skills, training and experience or developing and training existing in-house staff can be time-consuming and expensive.
Acquiring multiple security technologies. Continuous threat detection and compliance monitoring across several departments likely will require purchasing several AI-driven security tools. This may be out of reach for security departments budget-wise, especially in smaller organizations.
As with many cybersecurity decisions, the right approach for many organizations is to find the correct balance between managing the cybersecurity operations function in-house and outsourcing it to an MSSP.
One reasonable option -- particularly for companies that intend to build an internal cybersecurity operations function -- is to take advantage of the speed that outsourcing provides while the organization builds its own cybersecurity operations. Outsourcing can provide at least some of the cybersecurity services needed today, and the organization can take advantage of the trained, experienced staff that an MSSP has at its disposal while building the services that it wants to provide on its own.
When Should you Consider SOC as a service?
There are many reasons why your business could benefit from a SOC as a service company:
Having your own SOC is expensive: If you’re a small business owner, keeping your SOC in-house may be too expensive, as it can cost a lot to hire security specialists. Not only this, but you’ll also have to increase your office space to cater to them, which can take even more of a toll on your budget.
Most SOC as a service companies offer 24/7 monitoring: Having an in-house SOC will only benefit you so much, as you can’t have your security specialists monitoring your systems for 24 hours a day (unless you pay them a lot to do so). Most SOC as a service companies offer 24/7 monitoring to their clients, so you’ll always be protected from cyber threats.
They offer state-of-the-art protection: SOC as service companies offer the most up-to-date cybersecurity protection, and it’s likely that you will have a higher level of security if you outsource your SOC. It’s a lot easier for hackers to get into your systems if they are self-contained, and you are a lot more at risk if you decide to keep your security in the office.
The security engineers are highly skilled: You could hire some security specialists in-house, but the likelihood is that they aren’t as highly skilled as those in SOC as a service companies, who deal with current threats on a daily basis. By going through SOC as a service companies, you can get access to these specialists, without paying the premium costs that you’d have to fork out if you were going to hire them directly.
It offers you a good balance of human and tech support: Not only do SOC as a service companies offer the best technology that you can get when it comes to detecting issues, but they also have skilled people on hand to identify any potential issues, too. These companies offer a good balance between the two types of cybersecurity protection, for any type of business.
They offer training to your members of staff: These SOC as service companies also can take the time to educate your staff members, so that they can identify any issues, and react appropriately. This means that you’ll have people on hand who can notice problems immediately.
Peace of mind: When you outsource to a SOC as a service company, you can rest easy knowing that your cybersecurity is being looked after by expert analysts who know exactly what they’re doing. Having in-house cybersecurity has the tendency to be more unreliable, and it’s difficult to know that you’re hiring the right people for your business's needs.
Regular reports: Some of these companies will send you regular reports on the status of your services (even hourly reports, in some cases) so that you are always up-to-date with the status of your cybersecurity.
Flexibility: Some SOC as a service companies offer full support to your business and its cybersecurity needs, whereas others take a bit more of a backseat when it comes to your SOC. You can choose the level of support that you require, and tailor your SOC as a service plan to your budget, and your needs as a company.
A SOC is something that could secure any organization and provide immense value, whether you decide to manage your cybersecurity in-house, or with an external SOC as a service company. However, SOC as a service companies offer an array of extra benefits for the business owner… if you partner with the right company.
If you would like to operationalize the cost of running an SOC, you may go for SOC as a Service.
It is also save to assume that the Cloud Service Provider of SOC as a service has specialized skills that you ordinarily would not have. The SOC as a service operator is able to have these specialized skill because they serve several customers and so the are able to distribute the cost of ownership across all customers.
Understand that you would cede some level of governance to the SOC-as-a-service operator. For example assessment or audit, you may have to rely on third party assessment or audit report.
Download our free IT Service Management (ITSM) Report and find out what your peers are saying about ServiceNow, Atlassian, ManageEngine, and more! Updated: March 2026.