Customer-Oriented Specification and Evaluation of IT Service Level Agreements

  • Wolfram Pietsch
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 3792)


Service Level Agreements (SLA) are used to determine required and actual performance of IT departments. According to current research and practice, SLA definitions are based on technical performance criteria that may be captured easily such as ‘system availability’; the specific needs of the IT system are not considered explicitly. Hence, high system performance does not lead to high customer satisfaction in practice. A methodology based on Quality Function Deployment (QFD) for the customer-oriented specification of SLAs for IT Services is presented and validated in a case study. At first, elementary service requirements of the customers must be separated from service functions and technical performance criteria. Then performance requirements are correlated with performance criteria and evaluated with regard to effectiveness. A case study employing the method is presented and finally, strategic options for the improvement and positioning of IT Services in an organisation are discussed.


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. 1.
    Sturm, R., Morris, W., Jander, M.: Foundations of Service Level Management, Indianapolis IN (2000)Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Bernhard, M.G., Lewandowski, W., Mann, H.: Service Level Management in der IT. Symposion Publishing, Düsseldorf (2001)Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Carr, N.G.: IT Doesn’t Matter. Harvard Business Review (May 2003)Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    ISO Standards Compendium: ISO 9000 – Quality Management, ISO bookstore, 10th edn. (2003)Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Herzwurm, G., Mellis, W., Schockert, S.: Joint Requirements Engineering. Using QFD for Rapid Customer-Focused Software and Internet Development. Braunschweig - Wiesbaden (2000)Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Herzwurm, G., Pietsch, W.: Risk-based Deployment of Standard Software Rollout Processes - a pragmatic approach. In: Transactions of the 11th Symposium on Quality Function Deployment. QFD-Institute (1999)Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Pietsch, W.: QFD Dissemination - Principles and Practice. In: Proceedings of the First National QFD-Conference, Izmir (2002)Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Office of Government Commerce (OGC): ITIL Planning to Implement Service Management. The Stationary Office (TSO), Norwich (2002)Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Kano, N., et al.: Attractive quality and must-be quality. The Journal of the Japanese Society for Quality Control (1984)Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Office of Government Commerce (OGC): ITIL The Business Perspective. The Stationary Office (TSO), Norwich (2002)Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Porter, M.E.: Competitive Advantage. New York (1985)Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Shillito, L.M.: Advanced QFD. Linking Technology to Market and Company Needs. New York u. a (1994)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2005

Authors and Affiliations

  • Wolfram Pietsch
    • 1
  1. 1.QFD-Institut Deutschland e.V.Aachen University of Applied SciencesAachenGermany

Personalised recommendations