The Post-Implementation Review takes place after a Change or a Project has been implemented. A Post-Implementation Review determines if the Change or Project was successful, and identifies opportunities for improvement.
If you like our site please spread the word by telling your friends about us. We like to be Liked.
MS Word Adobe PDF
1. Executive Summary
[Write a brief summary of the content of the Post-Implementation Review. The executive summary is produced for business purposes, with the objective that an executive can read it and understand the message without having to read the whole document.
Use concise language, summarizing ideas in the same order that they appear in the detailed contents. The summary must be able to be read separately from the rest of the document and transmit the message.]
This document is a report with the findings of the Post-Implementation Review that has been conducted to evaluate the results of the project to migrate the server infrastructure of the organization to Windows Server 2008 R2. The high-level goals of the project were to reduce IT costs, simplify management, improve security and increase application performance.
From the findings, the conclusions obtained have been:
The following recommendations arise from this report:
[The Post-Implementation Review report is a document intended to capture the results of an ITIL Post-Implementation Review. The Post-Implementation Review is aimed at determining to what extent a change or project has been successful, and to identify opportunities for improvement.
In this section you explain the background, objectives, scope of the Post-Implementation Review, and members of the team who executed the review.]
[Expose the background to this change/project, including why it was launched and how it was implemented. You can also explain how the Post-Implementation Review was conducted and how its results are feeding this report.]
After an extensive analysis of benefits and cons was conducted, a decision was taken to migrate all the infrastructure servers in the organization to Windows Server 2008 R2. Some of the benefits expected were:
At that time, most of the servers in the organization were based in Windows Server 2003 and Windows Server 2008. Virtualization was not still implemented although several proposals were made calling to virtualize either using Hyper-V from Microsoft or ESX from VMWare. The approved project called for a phased migration of all Microsoft servers to Windows Server 2008 R2 and the implementation of a Hyper-V solution.
After successful implementation of the project, a Post-Implementation Review was conducted to evaluate results six months after successful migration. The findings from this review are documented in the current document.
[An ITIL Post-Implementation Review is performed to confirm that the change/project has met the stated objectives; that customers, users and stakeholders are happy with the results; and that there have been no unexpected side-effects. It is also an important tool to correct course if needed and to improve the change/project process in future recurrences.]
The objectives of this Post-Implementation Review have been:
[Explain here which elements of a review have been included and which others have been excluded. Some of the elements to define the scope may be:
This document reviews the results of the implementation of the project “Migration to a Windows Server 2008 R2 infrastructure”. The elements included in the review have been:
This document does not include:
2.4 Post-Implementation Review Team Members
[Include here the members of the team who conducted the Post-Implementation Review. If possible, members of the Post-Implementation Review Team should not have participated in the actual implementation of the change/project, although people who defined the original requirements or gave technical advice could be included. They should have been selected as impartial reviewers without any interest or benefit in the positive or negative outcome of the review.]
The personnel that participated in the Post-Implementation Review are shown in Table 1. Post-Implementation Review Team Members, below:
Table 1. Post-Implementation Review Team Members.
[The central part of the Post-Implementation Review is to compare the original goals of the change/project with the achieved outcomes and then learn any lessons from results to improve the success of future changes/projects. Comparisons are to be held following the scopes defined in the section 2.3 above. Select subsections in your document accordingly]
3.1 Accomplishment of Project Goals
[Determine whether the implemented system has achieved its proposed outcome and has provided the desired benefits in support of the mission and goals.]
To measure effectively the intended benefits of the project against the actual outcome, several Key Performance Indicators (KPI's) and measurements were previously defined. The results are shown in the Table 2. Initial, projected and real outcomes of the Migration.
Table 2. Initial, Projected and Real Outcomes of the Migration.
The deviations observed in each of the defined key indicators are within the accepted ranges as defined in the design of the project.
The indicator of security improvement may appear to indicate an over-investment because measurement is far better than predicted. This behavior is expected and is the result of the adoption of strictest controls through Federation Services in a parallel project.
3.2 Performance Metrics
[Check that the system turns to be or continues to be fit for purpose as defined in the ITIL Service Level Agreement, Contract or other agreements. Metrics can describe performance factors like availability, capacity, continuity or security. Provide metrics for as much areas as can be affected by the change/project.]
To ensure the stability of the network services provided after the project, the main KPIs from the Service Level Agreement (SLA) were selected to check their behavior before and after the implementation of the migration project. Results are shown in the Table 3. Performance metrics.
Table 3. Performance Metrics
Results show that stability of the system has been guaranteed after the migration and even improved. Some important problems were also solved as a result. Previous breaches in Web access services were solved through migration of servers to 64-bit architecture. General availability was also improved thanks to the implementation of Live-Migration techniques.
Time to solve incidents slightly deteriorate at first as a result of the learning curve, but later has been improving.
[Explain unexpected or undesired side-effects that might have been appeared as a consequence of the change/project.]
One unexpected side-effect arising from the migration is a temporary freezing in the proprietary client-server application that manages the CRM of the organization. This effect was not detected during the Evaluation phase of the change and is currently been investigated by the Development Team. A workaround has been put in place to be executed each time the incident occurs until a final resolution can be manage through Problem Management.
3.4 Residual Risks
[The purpose of this section is to evaluate how risks identified as part of the change/project have been mitigated through the selected countermeasures and which residual risks remain. Validate that all risks have been identified, that a plan exist to mitigate them and that individual risks have been mitigated if they occurred.]
As part of the Evaluation process, the proposed change was evaluated under business, financial and technical impacts. Several risks were identified in the document (Doe, "The Client". IT Service Migration. Risk Assessment Report., 2012) and countermeasures were designed to mitigated them during the transition, early life support and operation phases.
The risks of instability during the transition phase were addressed through remediation and undo plans. Risks during early life support and operations phases were addressed through a knowledge plan aimed to better prepare the personnel to face unpredicted consequences. It has not been necessary until the current date to activate any of the remediation or undo plans except for test purposes.
Residual risks remain that some instability could still arise from the use of the new technologies. Those hypothetical events could defy the capacity of the personnel to deal with them, putting at risk the achievement of the guaranteed services levels. The probability of such scenario has been calculated as been below 0.1% under the assumptions in the aforementioned document.
[Assess whether the project was completed within planned budget and that financial estimates were as predicted.]
The costs incurred as part of the migration project has been as shown in the Table 4. Costs.
Table 4. Costs.
As seen in the table, capital costs due to project design, implementation and commissioning exceeded their budgeted figure. This happened due to some delays in the time spent in implementation. This figure was compensated in some extent by a decrease in the price of hardware.
The operational costs to operate the migrated services have been behaving as predicted.
[Assess whether the change/project was executed within the scheduled timeframe. Check if all key milestones and deliverables were met in the predicted time.]
The predicted and actual completion date for each milestone is shown in the Table 5. Milestones Completion.
Table 5. Milestones Completion.
As indicated in the table, project execution got delayed during the deployment phase. Reason for that setback was an unexpected failure in support from a third party supplier of the hardware equipment.
3.7 Customers and Users Satisfaction
[Surveys are conducted to sense whether customers and users perceive the results of the project/change as satisfactory. While customers are the final receivers of the services, users are those who directly interact with the interfaces of the service.]
In order to measure satisfaction with the migration process and with the services after completion of the project, separate surveys were delivered:
A scoring system was defined to measure satisfaction:
Global results are shown in the Table 6. Customers and users satisfaction.
Table 6. Customers and users satisfaction.
Since the threshold defined for acceptable satisfaction is 4, it can be concluded that the migration process has been accomplished with acceptable customers and users satisfaction.
More emphasis must be put into future transition procedures in order to further minimize the impact on users.
[Describe how the change/project met (or did not meet) the objectives initially stated. Here you can include lessons learned and recommendations.]
4.1 Lessons Learned
[Describe any lessons learned in this change/project that can be helpful for future changes/projects. The easiest way is to capture events as they occur and write down what can be learnt from them.]
From the findings, the following lessons can be extracted to serve as a feedback into future changes or projects:
[Here you may include both change/project-specific recommendations and recommendations to improve the overall IT change/project management processes. Recommendation must be as much actionable as possible.]
To solve the problems detected in this Post-Implementation Review and to improve results in future changes and projects, the following recommendations are given:
[Insert here anything you may like to attach to support the document.]
[This section provides the definitions of terms, acronyms, and abbreviations required to understand this document.]
Table 7. Glossary.
5.2 List of Tables
Table 1. Post-Implementation Review Team Members.
Doe, J. (2012). "The Client". IT Service Migration. Risk Assessment Report.
Copyright © 2012 The Corporation, Inc.