{"id":4463,"date":"2014-11-25T21:06:38","date_gmt":"2014-11-25T21:06:38","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/multiacademstg.wpengine.com\/20000academy\/blog\/2014\/11\/25\/itil-framing-the-value-of-services-part-ii\/"},"modified":"2025-06-13T14:15:21","modified_gmt":"2025-06-13T14:15:21","slug":"itil-framing-the-value-of-services-part-ii","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/advisera.com\/20000academy\/blog\/2014\/11\/25\/itil-framing-the-value-of-services-part-ii\/","title":{"rendered":"ITIL \u2013 Framing the value of services (part II)"},"content":{"rendered":"

In my previous article, ITIL \u2013 Framing the value of services (part I)<\/a>,\u00a0using the Help Desk (or Service Desk) as a service example, we\u2019ve established that value is a byproduct of service outcomes, and not the service itself. With both tangible and intangible service outcomes, value comes mainly from utility<\/strong> (fit for purpose) and warranty<\/strong> (fit for use) elements, and in today\u2019s article we\u2019ll explore that paradigm.<\/p>\n

Utility plus warranty equals value<\/h2>\n

In our Help Desk \/ Service Desk example from the previous article, effective incident resolution<\/a>\u00a0will eliminate any issues that prevent end-users (customers) from continuing with their daily operations. By fulfilling the need for quick service restoration when it gets down<\/strong>, our Help Desk service is providing utility<\/strong> (fit for purpose). If we look at performance across all of our end-users, we will see that there are always some whose issues weren\u2019t resolved in time (low performance), and some with minimum or no downtime in daily operations (high performance), but most of them will fall somewhere in between those two extreme conditions. When service is more fit for purpose<\/strong>, utility has a positive effect on performance, and consequently on service value (as shown in Figure 1).
\n

<\/div>