Page 598 - Handbook of Modern Telecommunications

Network Organization and Governance 4-129

• Indicator 4: Percentage of correctly completed change request forms in comparison to all change
requests (incomplete forms delay the change execution process and risk successful execution)
• Industry average: 60%
• Own company: 20%
The indicated shaded area in Figure 4.7.2 is a clear sign for the company of where and how to improve.
The basic idea of auditing and benchmarking is to identify several organizations that represent best prac-
tices in the same functions and services where the interested company needs improvement. After the iden-
tification of comparative companies, several meetings are arranged, research done, questions answered,
and potential improvements are highlighted, in most cases, to the mutual benefit of the participants.
An additional goal is to prepare outsourcing decisions. Network management audits and benchmarks
give a good estimate on the value of existing network management processes, instruments, and person-
nel. Besides the actual value, top management receives detailed reports on the following items:
• Inventory of network components
• Inventory of network management instruments
• Organization structure of network management
• Skill levels, ages, and salary ranges for network management personnel
• Allocation of functions and instruments to network management personnel
• Statement of mission or list of objectives

Benchmarking helps to observe dynamic changes in the performance of certain network-related
indicators. Figure 4.7.3 shows the dynamic of one special indicator (percentage of proactive fault detec-
tion in comparison to all faults); starting at lower than the industry average at the initial benchmark-
ing study and overtaking the industry average at the second benchmarking study. This performance
change can be influenced by the level of investments into network management processes, instruments,
and education.
Benchmarking is of course not without problems. A number of items may cause problems and impact
the results of the benchmarks. The most important in this respect are:
• The industry average does not contain enough samples and thus the comparison with the specific
results of the company is not representative.

Percentage of proactive fault
detections compared to all faults
90%
80% Client profile
Over average performance
70% Industry average
60% Benchmark gap

50%

40%
30%

t
First benchmark Second benchmark

FIGu RE 4.7.3 Dynamic changes between two benchmarks.