What additional KPA would you add to the list of 12?

[Saroj Kumar Mohanty]

I have no ideas as of now.

[Markus Allen]

I cannot think of one

[Warren Herrera]

Naturally, the 12 KPA’s seem to be focusing directly on the management of assets, as it should be; however, I believe as part of Asset Management, specifically hardware, it’s important to know the various states in which the hardware can exist at the beginning of it’s lifecycle. While it may not be in scope for some, knowing the method in which assets are imaged/configured within your organization as a result of the work done by a CPE (Client Platform Engineer), or equivalent, is important to understanding the state of an asset at any given time. So, I would say “Technical Deployment Management” could be something to add to the 12 KPAs.

[Sylvia Villaman]

I feel the 12 cover all areas needed to be successful. It is hard enough to make sure all 12 KPAs are met with each asset, that I don’t believe adding any more would be effective.

[Monika Vyletalova]

12 are sufficient.

[Kris Dysert]

Process development

[Richard Sitter]

Once I learn about the 12, I may consolidate and cut a few to streamline it.

[Charles Pellicane]

Perhaps people or security.

[William Harrington]

12 is enough.

[Darrin Dyches]

The list of 12 is enough gives enough information I believe.

[Brad Moore]

None to add here

[Uva Parameshwaran]

procedure

[Olawale Dada]

The 12 KPAs define the entire scope of processes within ITAM

[Sanjay Pandey]

12 is enough if applied used smartly

[Egor Kataev]

nothing

[Author]

Posts