Exhibit 2.9 Integration with MSI Plan Table of Contents

Contract No. VA-160926-HPEN, Exhibit 2.9 (Integration with MSI Plan) September 26, 2016

Exhibit 2.9 (Integration with MSI Plan) Page 1 of 22

Exhibit 2.9

Integration with MSI Plan

Table of Contents 1.0 Introduction ..........................................................................................................................................................2

2.0 Service Integration Experience .............................................................................................................................2

3.0 Integration Overview ............................................................................................................................................4

3.1 Integration Guiding Principles and Critical Success Factors .............................................................................4

3.2 Critical Dependencies and Assumptions ..........................................................................................................6

4.0 Integration Plan ................................................................................................................................................. 10

4.1 Approach and Methodology .......................................................................................................................... 10

4.1.1 Integration with MSI Governance & Organization ................................................................................. 11

4.1.2 Integration with MSI Processes & Procedures ....................................................................................... 13

4.1.3 Integration with MSI Automation & Tools ............................................................................................. 14

4.1.4 Integration with MSI Implementation Approach ................................................................................... 15

4.2 People, Skills, and Training ............................................................................................................................ 16

4.3 Process ........................................................................................................................................................... 17

4.4 Assistance Support ........................................................................................................................................ 17

5.0 Other Integration Elements ............................................................................................................................... 20

5.1 Roles and Governance Alignment ................................................................................................................. 20

5.2 Communications Management ..................................................................................................................... 21

5.3 Risk Management .......................................................................................................................................... 21

5.4 Additional Information .................................................................................................................................. 22



1.0 Introduction

Supplier (“HPES”) provides this Exhibit 2.9 (Integration with MSI Plan) to describe the experience, capabilities and views of HPES working in and with service environments similar to the Managed Environment that VITA anticipates developing. Notwithstanding any other provision of this Exhibit 2.9 (Integration with MSI Plan) or of the Agreement, this Exhibit 2.9 (Integration with MSI Plan) in no manner limits or qualifies HPES’ obligations, the Requirements or scope of the Services to be performed by HPES, or any of VITA’s rights under the Agreement.

HPES recognizes the importance of the VITA vision to create an Integrated Service Platform. The Multisourcing Services Integrator being a cornerstone of the new delivery model, is critical to the overall success of the program. HPES response to the Integration with MSI Plan below demonstrates the following:

• HPES understanding of the new model that VITA intends to implement • HPES ability to thrive as an Integrated Supplier in the new model and; • Insights and experiences from Supplier working as an MSI in many environments for your consideration

as you move forward HPES looks forward to discussing this information and working with you as you embark on this critically important initiative.

2.0 Service Integration Experience

As one of the leading IT services suppliers in the market, HPES has gained solid experience working in a service integrator operating model. HPES has been a key contributor to the Office of Government Commerce (OGC), the founder of ITIL. HPES was also a key contributor in the development of COBIT version 5 with the Information Systems Audit and Control Association (ISACA). HPES is a co-founder and key contributor to the innovative IT4IT™ reference model, hosted by The Open Group. This value-chain-driven approach is being further developed by a strong community of market leaders, HPES clients, and partners. HPES experience is based on common scenarios in which HPES acts as an integrated supplier, as shown in Figure 1.

All four scenarios have specific integration aspects from the perspective of a service supplier that are critical not only to the success of HPES as a service supplier, but also to the Managed Environment of Supplier clients.

HPES offers global and diverse industry experience as a successful integrated service supplier in a variety of situations. Table 1 outlines the four common scenarios and HPES’ relevant experience in each.

Table 1. HPES Experience as an Integrated Service Supplier

# Scenario and case Specifics Relevance to VITA 1 HPES as a service supplier

integrated by a competitor at global automotive company in the US and a

• Service integrator role outsourced to a third party acting on behalf of the client

• Contracts/Master Services Agreements (MSAs) are held by the client, not by the MSI

• Collaboration and integration grounded on cross-supplier

Highest relevance to VITA because of the collaboration and integration requirements with an envisioned outsourced SI capability to a third party

Figure 1. HPES as an Integrated Service Supplier

The four most common scenarios in which HPES has gained experience as an integrated service supplier



# Scenario and case Specifics Relevance to VITA telecommunications provider in Europe, Middle East, and Africa (EMEA)

agreements with the MSI • Service integrator is a direct competitor of HPES (an HPES peer

in the market) • HPES as a service supplier follows the global integration

standards and policies established by the MSI with the mandate of the client

2 HPES as a service supplier integrated by the client’s own retained service integrator (SI) capability for a global chemicals company in the EMEA

• MSI role retained within the client IT organization • Contracts (MSAs) are held by the client, including all cross-

supplier collaboration agreements • HPES as a service supplier follows the global integration

standards and policies established by the client MSI

Low relevance to VITA as the MSI role will be outsourced; however, there will still be integration aspects retained with VITA, especially on the tactical/strategic level

3 HPES as a service supplier integrated by HPES in the role of the SI for a large electric utility services provider in EMEA

• All specifics of Scenario #1 apply to this case, with one exception: HPES as a service supplier is being integrated by HPES as the SI

• HPES as a service supplier follows the same global integration standards and policies established by the HPES MSI with the mandate of the client as other integrated service suppliers

• HPES as an MSI establishes “ringfencing mechanisms,” which enable a strict separation of duties between the two roles of HPES (see Section 5.4 (Additional Information))

High relevance, only relevant if VITA awards HPES with the MSI role in addition to the mainframe services supplier role

4 HPES as a service supplier not integrated by a mature or formal SI capability

• HPES as a service supplier is not being formally integrated, or the service integrator role, regardless of whether it is outsourced or retained, is not performing/has low maturity

• HPES as a service supplier anticipated on best effort to compensate for the missing SI capability

• Focus was mainly on business-critical services (of which HPES is the owner or impacted) and related basic operational procedures (such as Critical Incident Management) to keep business downtimes to a minimum

• Cross-supplier agreements, roles, accountabilities, and activities are mostly agreed and followed on best effort

• HPES’ focus would be to manage to the defined contract requirements

• This scenario was more common in the past; HPES as a service supplier raises relevant risks when entering a Managed Environment without an SI role, regardless of whether it is outsourced or retained

Low relevance, only relevant if inadequate support capabilities from VITA and the MSI or other Integrated Suppliers (see Section 4.4 (Assistance Support), Contingency Plans narrative)

Also for consideration is the timing when an integrator role is introduced into the IT eco-system of HPES clients. Table 2 outlines the two most common scenarios related to timing.

Table 2. Timing of introducing an SI into the client environment

# Case Specifics Relevance to VITA 1 MSI role introduced in an

existing multi-sourcing environment

• Existing sourcing model and packages outsourced to service suppliers

• MSAs, schedules, Service Level Agreements (SLAs), and 1:1 governance/vendor management models already in place

• Only a few contracts due for re-negotiation; most outsourcing contracts have a significant duration

• HPES as an existing service supplier (among others) collaborated with the new player (SI supplier) to adjust existing processes, procedures, governance models, reports, and SLAs to reflect the SI role

• Once the adjustments were stable and operational, changes to

Low relevance to VITA because VITA is only going to award a few sourcing packages during the tactical procurement phase to services suppliers before having introduced/fully described the new Service Integration Platform



# Case Specifics Relevance to VITA the existing contracts were made to reflect those as well as from the commercial perspective

2 SI role introduced in a changing or new multi-sourcing environment

• A significant change to sourcing strategy, sourcing packaging, and sourcing model

• And/or a move from single-sourcing to multi-sourcing • The new / changed Managed Environment foresees a formal SI

role and a related Service Integration Platform as part of the future operating model

• HPES as a service supplier (among others) must reflect the new SI operating model from Day One based on a new / renewed service relationship with the client

• Integration and collaboration requirements are considered in the solution and contracts

High relevance to VITA, as VITA is driving toward a dramatic improvement of the sourcing model by establishing an MSI role from the beginning and engaging service suppliers who are not only aware of but experienced with the Service Integration Platform

The experience gained in the scenarios and cases described above uniquely positions HPES to emphasize the following features of HPES integration readiness as a service supplier to VITA:

• HPES as an experienced, integrated service supplier will establish a collaborative relationship with VITA’s selected MSI and will not engage in competitive behavior. HPES will put forth an attitude of partnership with the MSI, jointly serving VITA to provide value from an end-to-end service perspective based on a common vision and shared objectives for all parties to succeed.

• HPES, as one of the leaders in the IT outsourcing industry, has not only accepted but embraced the market evolution from sole-sourcing to multi-sourcing in the most complex, hybrid IT environments by pioneering the development of Multisourcing Service Integrator (MSI) operating models and delivering MSI as a service to HPES clients worldwide (see Gartner research article: Market Guide for Multisourcing Service Integration, published: 21 March 2016).

• HPES offers experience and lessons learned as a service integrator that HPES clients and the wider HPES Enterprise Services community use to continuously improve HPES MSI approaches and practices.

• HPES has changed and improved processes, automation, and governance models, as well as commercial dependencies, for managed services to reflect and support integration and collaboration requirements with other IT service suppliers and client IT organizations from an end-to-end service dependency perspective.

HPES as a service supplier will leverage not only the best practices and experience of being integrated, but also HPES insights on being an integrator: HPES can put ourselves in the shoes of the MSI and anticipate and proactively support the MSI plans of VITA’s selected MSI.

The following sections describe a valuable approach to VITA with regard to the integration ability and readiness of HPES as a service supplier for mainframe services.

3.0 Integration Overview

HPES, as a mainframe services supplier, understands the guiding principles of a Managed Environment containing a central Integrated Services Platform and will make certain that all critical success factors are considered when entering VITA’s future integrated environment. The subsequent sections provide an overview of the principles tied to critical success factors; followed by dependencies and assumptions.

3.1 Integration Guiding Principles and Critical Success Factors

As HPES has reviewed the information contained in this RFP and other documents, HPES guiding principles are aligned with VITA’s:



• Working together toward the common goal of uninterrupted, high-quality services to VITA and other customers, the Managed Environment requires coordination, cooperation, and integration among the Integrated Suppliers, notwithstanding the fact that they may otherwise view themselves as competitors.

• In addition, HPES as an Integrated Supplier, will fully cooperate with and work in good faith with VITA, VITA customers, and other Integrated Suppliers to support and promote the operation and objectives of the Integrated Services Platform.

• HPES understands that the foremost guiding principle is that HPES must perform the Services, and interact and cooperate with others within the Managed Environment in a manner that first considers the best interests of VITA and its Customers.

Table 3 offers a further breakdown and categorization of HPES’ guiding principles as a future Integrated Supplier and explains how HPES follows VITA’s overarching principles.

Table 3. Alignment of guiding principles to critical success factors

Area Principles Critical Success Factors MSI Operating Model and Vision

• Grounded on collaboration, integration, and optimization: Competitive behavior to be fostered between service suppliers where meaningful; not to be tolerated between service suppliers and service integrator

• Strive for “Plug and Play Maturity”: Quickly respond to market trends and business demand by faster and de-risked service / supplier on- and off-boarding

• Drive horizontal integration: Between service suppliers where end-to-end service dependencies exist

• Drive vertical integration: From COVA strategies to VITA strategy to related MSI policies, processes, and standards to be followed by service suppliers, such as HPES

• Future-proof: Service Integration Platform to lay the ground work for and encompass innovative service provisioning and integration mechanisms, such as Cloud Service Brokerage and open interface standards

VITA’s vision of an Integrated Services Platform, its objectives and requirements are communicated and understood by all key stakeholders, including Agencies in the roles of Recipient Users and Delivery Participants, and other integrated service suppliers to which HPES as a mainframe services provider will have collaboration and integration dependencies Involvement and continual commitment of all parties with significant support through executive level buy-in to apply top-down approach

MSI Governance and Organization

• Shared goals: Will foster collaboration and avoid competitive behavior

• Shared Service Integration Platform: Enabling an industrialized way of service consumption and provision

• Drive end-to-end service improvement: Key principle to aim for and realize the benefits of the SI and HPES as an Integrated Supplier

• Establish clear accountabilities: Separation of roles and duties • Agreed Operational Level Agreements (OLAs): Collaboration and

integration commitments grounded on OLAs • Aligned Service Levels: Service level definition and terminologies

aligned end-to-end

Establish a governance regime that promotes collaborative behavior among HPES as a service supplier, other service suppliers, and the SI Collaborative SI agreements and implemented standard procedures consistently adhere to and are grounded on existing or new contracts between all parties dependent on each other to provide an end-to-end service Transparent control objectives and value proof points based on COBIT 5® or IT4IT™ to show the value of HPES as a service supplier in the integrated eco-system – correlated to superior value drivers on MSI-level up to the strategic sourcing objectives of VITA and COVA Clear documentation and reporting procedures to create a call to action and to measure value added and optimization aspects Cross-supplier governance meetings to foster collaboration, especially at the operational level



Area Principles Critical Success Factors To align supplier service levels end-to-end, suppliers must collaborate and define service profiles across providing suppliers especially those services that have dependencies from multiple suppliers (e.g. email) Once service levels for service profiles are defined, suppliers must establish shared SLA’s and OLA’s metrics for collection potentially crossing multi supplier management boundaries. Governance defining these processes are created and maintained within the MSI and with collaboration from the Mainframe supplier

MSI Processes and Procedures

• Standards based, grounded on ITIL: HPES as a service supplier to focus on a process from the service supplier perspective, such as content-and resolution-related, and to contribute to the process activities at the SI level, including those related to coordination and orchestration

• Unambiguous delineation at interfaces: Treat HPES mainframe services supplier and other suppliers as a “black box,” focusing only on the process touchpoints

• Clear RACI definitions: Identify roles for each process and procedure at an activity level from the perspective of VITA, SI, HPES as a service supplier, and other service suppliers

Seamless interoperability of all SI service lines and in combination with ITIL and cross-functional disciplines for a holistic approach

MSI Tools and Automation

• Enable service integration: Automation to enable end-to-end service monitoring for availability and capacity, and related aggregated reporting/dashboards

• Enable process integration: Automation to enable end-to-end integration of cross-functional processes where meaningful based on volumes and interface complexity, and related key performance indicator (KPI) reporting/dashboards (i.e., ability to share tickets is vital in an MSI operating model)

• Enable technical integration: Avoid peer-to-peer connections; leverage a central technical integration bus

One single point of truth for all IT-related aspects influencing the quality and quantity of business-critical services along the Managed Environment Leverage open interface standards as much as possible

MSI Implementation Approach

• Iterative build: From “Incumbent Realignment” to “Plug and Play” and continual service improvement capability

Continuous alignment with the transformation speed and organizational capacity of VITA, the MSI supplier, other service suppliers, and the overall sourcing and procurement strategies of VITA

The principles and success factors mentioned above are based on HPES’ understanding of VITA’s strategy and guiding principles for the Service Integration Platform and HPES’ best practices for service integration. The latter represents one of the key HPES assumptions when answering the requirements of VITA during this tactical procurement stage.

3.2 Critical Dependencies and Assumptions

Figure 2 highlights the role of HPES as a services supplier and its dependencies, toward VITA’s selected MSI along an MSI transformation approach. As a performing Mainframe supplier, HPES would expect to integrate the following architectural cornerstones from a MSI for the governance of mainframe services in a MSI construct (The numbers and levels of integrations would be dependent on the MSI and its particular operating model).



• IT Service Management (ITSM) (Case Exchange (Incident, Problem, Change etc.))

• Business Service Management (BSM) (Event forwarding, security forwarding (Syslog, SNMP post/pre-enriched etc.)

• Project Portfolio Management (PPM) (Microsoft Project import/export, Asset Management, Financial Metrics etc.)

• Configuration Management Database (CMDB) (Asset import/exports, CI relationships etc.)

• ITIL Process development and workflow integration (MSI/SI) for supported operational process governance

Figure 2. Activities overview for SI phases

HPES as an Integrated Supplier will interact with the MSI and other stakeholders during the execution of MSI plans.

* Not each cornerstone is needed to successfully deliver MSI services however, HPES strongly considers each pillar valuable in the delivery of IT services like those within the Mainframe supplier.

The following major dependencies are to be expected and are seen as critical by HPES as a service supplier during the Integration Planning phase:

• Established project management and governance mechanisms needed to execute MSI and other plans as indicated in VITA’s Infrastructure Services Sourcing Update. At the working level, staffed with delegates from HPES as a service supplier (among others) who have the mandate and seniority to drive key integration decisions at the process, governance, and tool levels.

• HPES as a service supplier to be informed by VITA and/or VITA’s MSI supplier in as timely a manner as possible about the detailed requirements of the future Managed Environment. – HPES is aware that these requirements might be “evolving”; however, the basic architectural principles

and cornerstones of the future Service Integration Platform must be understood by HPES as a service supplier in order to fulfil VITA’s integration requirements in the short term and drive service improvement in the long term.

• HPES as a service supplier to be informed by VITA and/or VITA’s MSI supplier in as timely a manner as possible about the integration roadmap, planning, and milestones, which are relevant to HPES as a supplier of mainframe services.

• Regular and unambiguous communication from VITA and the selected about expectations, contribution, and outcomes for each key integration milestone on the implementation roadmap.



• VITA’s tactical procurement plans (for example, HPES as the mainframe services supplier) to be synchronized with HPES solution development plans for mainframe services, especially in the cross-functional area and the Service Integration Platform development and implementation plans.

• Furthermore, HPES would be able to offer MSI advisory and consulting services to VITA, especially during the Planning phase – if desired by VITA and accepted by the MSI partner.

The following major dependencies are to be expected and seen as critical by HPES as a service supplier during the Solution Development phase:

• VITA and the MSI supplier to facilitate and communicate the guiding architectural principles for the Service Integration Platform to HPES as a service supplier.

• Description of integration requirements at the governance, process, and tool levels, including timelines for service and supplier onboarding, are in compliance with the overall guiding principles: Generic enough to allow a common integration platform for all current and future service suppliers, yet specific enough for HPES to successfully integrate mainframe services into VITA’s managed environment.

• MSI to coordinate and facilitate the alignment of the integration solution based on regular workshops and integration sessions with the HPES service supplier team and other relevant service suppliers.

• Common integration blueprints for processes, governance, and tools documented in the Service Management Manual are agreed on with HPES as a service supplier and other relevant service suppliers. – Integration is a key input for the OLAs to be signed off on during the next phases.

• MSI to provide an overview of end-to-end service dependencies where HPES will be contributing to the one mainframe services element of the end-to-end service. This has a key impact on the touchpoint definitions and collaboration needs of agencies and other service suppliers who are impacted by mainframe services and vice versa.

The following major dependencies are to be expected and seen as critical by HPES as a service supplier during the Integration Readiness Assessment and Assurance phase:

• MSI to conduct structured readiness assessment with clear proof points to confirm that HPES as a service supplier is “ready for onboarding” to provide a risk-less onboarding of the HPES Team’s mainframe services into the Service Integration Platform of the Managed Environment.

• Prefilled OLA template based on integration blueprints to be provided by the MSI to HPES and other related service suppliers, see Figure 3 for an example.



Figure 3. OLA Base Template - Example

• Service and supplier onboarding strategy and timing to be shared with HPES as a service supplier, including

which services and related service supplier are to be on boarded in which order and when.

The following major dependencies are to be expected and seen as critical by HPES as a service supplier during the Onboarding of Services and Suppliers phase:

• OLAs finalized and approved by VITA, MSI, HPES as an Integrated Supplier, and other Integrated Suppliers. • MSI to provide a structured and professional approach during the on-boarding of HPES as an Integrated

Supplier, flanked by strong risk management procedures to make sure of COVA’s business continuity and reduce risk of on-boarding at the process, tool, and governance levels.

The following major dependencies are to be expected and seen as critical by HPES as an Integrated Supplier during the Operations in the Managed Environment phase:

• MSI to manage integration on operational level and to steer HPES as an Integrated Supplier on regular and ad hoc levels as needed.

• MSI to handle escalation and foster collaboration in case a peer of HPES is not compliant with agreed on service integration standards and procedures.

• MSI to take over responsibility for measurement and reporting of end-to-end service provision metrics which feed the end-to-end Continual Service Improvement (CSI) process.

• MSI to provide and manage continual improvement procedures and effective mechanisms to HPES so that HPES as an Integrated Supplier (among others) can help improve end-to-end service to VITA for the Commonwealth.

HPES treats the fulfilment of the dependencies mentioned above as an overall assumption, including the consideration of critical success factors and compliance with the principles addressed in Section 3.1 (Integration Guiding Principles and Critical Success Factors) above. In addition, HPES sees the following as impactful critical assumptions that VITA’s selected MSI will:



• Follow best practices for service integration on governance, process, and tool levels that are common in the IT industry and recognized by analysts, such as Gartner and Forrester.

• Implement and run a shared MSI governance model on different levels, including strategic/relational, tactical, and operational.

• Own/lead the operational integration governance via Operational Councils to be established and led by the MSI.

• Implement and run MSI-ready cross-functional processes and procedures based on ITIL and best practices. • Provide and operate the central service desk function (single point of contact) from the IT end-user

perspective. • Provide and operate on a central ITSM platform, to which HPES as an Integrated Supplier must be connected

based on open standards. • Jointly agree with VITA on the implementation strategy, approach, on-boarding plans, and timelines and

involve HPES as an Integrated Supplier in a timely manner. • Have the full mandate of VITA to act toward HPES as an Integrated Supplier. • Lead and facilitate the OLA agreement process in a professional and collaborative manner, and provide the

necessary unified template which fulfills all critical requirements to such a document. • Lead and facilitate the shared SLA alignment process in a professional and collaborative manner from the

end-to-end perspective aligned with VITA, other agencies, and other involved service suppliers. • Follow a phased, maturity-related/iterative implementation approach to onboard HPES as an Integrated

Supplier into the future VITA Service Integration Platform.

Assumptions are also made due to timing constraints. Tactical procurement of mainframe services has begun before procurement of the MSI services, leading to the following dependencies:

• HPES does not have a full description of VITA’s future Service Integration Platform, which is needed to derive the exact integration requirements and related MSI plans.

• Without the information mentioned above, HPES can provide valuable answers by leveraging HPES MSI best practices as the baseline, further described in the next sections.

As soon as VITA releases detailed requirements and descriptions related to the Service Integration Platform, during due diligence at the latest, HPES as an Integrated Supplier will continue to fine-tune the solution to make certain of integration readiness.

4.0 Integration Plan

VITA has a clear vision about the future integrated operating model and HPES will contribute to the Service Integration Platform as VITA’s preferred supplier for mainframe services. The following sections describe Supplier approach leveraging HPES’ own best practices for service integration.

4.1 Approach and Methodology

HPES understands VITA’s future IT environment, which will include a Service Integration Platform as an integral element, as shown in Figure 4.



Figure 4. VITA’s Envisioned Integrated Services Platform.

(Diagram reusing collaterals of Integris Applied © 2015.)

The envisioned Integrated Services Platform resonates with current best practices in the industry, which HPES reflects as well in the MSI frameworks and implementation approaches. This enables HPES to describe the overall approach and methodologies aligned with best practices in the area of MSI from the perspective of a service supplier to be integrated.

• Best practice: “Plug and Play” offers higher flexibility and agility of IT service provisioning, lower change risk, faster time-to-market, and lower cost. As an Integrated Supplier, HPES will: – Follow the basic principles of VITA’s desired future operating model by embracing the MSI role, which

may be provided by another service supplier, for effective collaboration and integration. – Consider integration on all relevant areas of an SI operating model: Governance, Organization,

Processes, Tools.

The following sections describe the methods and approaches for all key areas by outlining SI best practices and responding to them from the perspective of HPES as an Integrated Supplier.

4.1.1 Integration with MSI Governance & Organization

This focus area is about a holistic but pragmatic governance framework that satisfies the requirements of an IT operating model with a Service Integration Platform at its core.

Figure 5 translates the high-level vision of VITA into an MSI governance framework that puts the role of HPES as a supplier (among others) in the integration context.

The following best practices that can be applied to the VITA program are a result of HPES’ experience as an integrated service supplier:

• Best practice: One unified governance model is integrated in VITA’s governance framework and covers relational/strategic, tactical, and operational aspects, hosting decision rights, compliance criteria, OLAs, consolidated SLAs, and end-to-end reporting.

• Best practice: End-to-end governance mechanisms, such as cross-supplier meetings on MSI process level, cross-supplier meetings for business-critical service clusters, cross-supplier meetings for innovation and



continual service improvement, are currently covered in VITA’s governance model through Operational Councils established by the MSI. As an Integrated Supplier, HPES will: – Accept and support all MSI-led governance forums, even without any participation of VITA

representatives. In doing so, the MSI supplier will be able to truly relieve VITA from operational effort, if so desired.

– Accept and leverage the formal communication and multi-level escalation procedures agreed to by VITA, MSI, and the service suppliers.

– Provide the MSI meeting owners with the necessary governance and management reports to be aggregated by the MSI role for review by VITA’s decision-makers.

• Best practice: An MSI forum to maintain and improve all Service Integration Architectural Standards and Policies. As an Integrated Supplier, HPES will: – Contribute content as needed and agree on compliance criteria, which are regularly measured and

reported on at the MSI governance level.

• Best practice: For OLAs, the MSI supplier will jointly identify the VITA service dependencies along end-to-end business-critical services to pinpoint critical needs for integration and collaboration between suppliers who are depending on each other and the MSI supplier to provide high-quality, reliable service to VITA and its customers. As an Integrated Supplier, HPES will: – Support the MSI supplier to identify service dependencies from mainframe services to other services

and suppliers based on HPES’ experience related to this type of service (in this case mainframe services). – Provide a strict end-to-end service-orientation to significantly increase integration and collaboration

efficiencies; to help the MSI with end-to-end service improvements and to identify additional need for collaboration, such as at the process and governance levels.

• Best practice: MSI and VITA will strive for shared service levels among the Integrated Suppliers. This will drive a measurable end-to-end service integration quality and put the MSI role in the best position to identify areas for service improvement. As an Integrated Supplier, HPES will: – Contribute to the MSI long-term initiative and VITA’s strategy to establish shared services levels.

Figure 5. SI Governance and Organization

HPES as an Integrated Supplier in the holistic context of VITA’s envisioned future governance model, amended with HPES best practices.



– Support the MSI supplier to align KPIs, metrics, and related terminology from end-to-end to establish similar metric descriptions and targets for each supplier in the same service cluster, setting the groundwork for shared service levels. For example, HPES provides Mainframe supplier support to an MSI for the Australian Taxation Office. In this construct, the MSI provides notification of an Incident ticket assignment leveraging its organizational incident management workflow. This notification triggers the SLA for incident response regarding Mainframe service incident remediation, see Exhibit 3.2 (Service Level Definitions and Measurements). The overall incident workflow is governed by the MSI OLA between the MSI and HPES as the Mainframe tower supplier. Shared levels of service restoration from incident notification (MSI) to service restoration (HPES) is an example of shared service levels within and MSI construct.

Evolving, further detailed integration requirements toward HPES as an Integrated Supplier in the area of Governance and Organization will be jointly addressed with VITA and the designated SI supplier.

4.1.2 Integration with MSI Processes & Procedures

This section provides an overview of standardization of cross-functional processes and procedures hosted by an enabling automation layer. Figure 6 details the touchpoint-oriented integration approach based on the principle of treating a service supplier as a black box and focusing only on the interfaces and touchpoints.

Figure 6. SI Processes and Procedures Incident Management Example

Illustration of a touchpoint-oriented integration approach for ITSM processes.

The following best practices, the result of HPES’s experience as a service supplier, can be applied to the VITA program:

• Cross-functional processes and procedures based on ITIL and/or COBIT 5®, IT4IT™ as basic process reference model; however, processes are amended with the “MSI-dimension” by the MSI, focusing more on integration and collaboration activities for each process and less on content/resolution activities – following VITA’s overall policies.

• MSI processes and procedures come with predefined, standardized interfaces and collaboration touchpoints, documented in VITA’s Service Management Manual and agreed upon by all service suppliers. Process-specific touchpoints are addressed in Exhibit 2.3 (Description of Services: Cross Functional). As an Integrated Supplier, HPES will:



– Service management teams will make sure that the touchpoints are aligned following the requirements of the MSI partner.

– Contribute to the content, maintenance, and continual improvement of VITA’s service management manual.

• MSI processes and procedures are measured by KPIs from end-to-end; KPIs align with MSI’s and VITA’s IT value chain based on IT4IT™ to show value and relevance of end-to-end IT services to VITA and its customers. As an Integrated Supplier, HPES will: – Use the HPES-built KPI library for ITSM processes, which is interconnected between supplier view, MSI

view, and end-user view of KPIs, grounded on the IT4IT™ value chain architecture. – Support the MSI to correlate KPIs and SLAs end-to-end, providing insights into HPES’ KPIs for the

contracted services in a timely manner and offering guidance as needed to identify service-specific dependencies, in this case for mainframe services, toward other suppliers.

As a Mainframe supplier, HPES will make sure it’s contracted SLA’s in Exhibit 3.2 (Service Level Definitions and Measurements) are integrated and managed in the overall KPI for service delivery in an MSI construct. As VITA’s MSI maturity evolves over time, HPES will work with the MSI to define demarks of service delivery contributing to the overall shared performance of service delivery impacting Mainframe Services. For instance, incident creation (MSI), incident assignment (MSI), incident service restoration (HPES), successful incident closure with feedback (MSI) is an example of a full life cycle service restoration activity between and MSI and a mainframe supplier partner like HPES.

Evolving, further detailed integration requirements toward HPES as an Integrated Supplier in the area of Processes and Procedures will be jointly addressed with VITA and the designated MSI.

4.1.3 Integration with MSI Automation & Tools

Integration with MSI Automation and Tools at the technical level (Reference Exhibit 2.3 (Mainframe Solution), Section 1.4 (Technical Support)) is necessary for the SI to be successful and to provide the required transparency for VITA and VITA customers. Figure 7 shows a possible automation scenario enabling the role of SI for VITA and putting HPES as service supplier in the context of an Integrated Supplier.

Figure 7. SI Automation

Illustration of an SI automation scenario and the resulting integration requirements to HPES as an Integrated Supplier.

The following best practice is a result of HPES’ experience as a service supplier that can be applied to the VITA program:



• Single point of truth from service, process, and technology integration perspectives consisting of an ITSM ticketing and platform, an end-user friendly self-service portal, critical business service monitoring (BSM) platform, a universal, central Configuration Management Database (CMDB), and a technical integration service bus to avoid point-to-point interfaces. As an Integrated Supplier, HPES will: – Make certain information is shared (electronically) based on VITA’s requirements for technical

integration. – Leverage the experience of HPES software subject matter experts to understand and fulfil technical

integration requirements, regardless of the chosen central platforms, assuming that VITA and the MSI will adhere to common industry standards.

Evolving, further detailed integration requirements toward HPES as a service supplier in the area of standard Tools and Automation will be jointly addressed with VITA and the designated SI supplier.

4.1.4 Integration with MSI Implementation Approach

As a service supplier, HPES understands that VITA and the MSI will follow an iterative, waved approach toward the future mode of operations. The iterative approach will reflect maturity elements to reduce the risk of the change by first building the foundation of the Service Integration Platform, then stabilizing the new platform, which is run in parallel with the previous state, and ultimately expanding the SI integration platform based on lessons learned during the previous phase and further disentanglement of the incumbents, as shown in Figure 8.

Figure 8. SI Implementation

HPES as an Integrated Supplier will support VITA’s journey toward a mature Service Integration Platform.

HPES will support the journey from the beginning as one of the first service suppliers to be integrated in the new Service Integration Platform as a result of early tactical procurement of mainframe services. VITA and the designated SI will benefit from HPES’ experience not only for mainframe services but especially as an Integrated Supplier.

Section 3.2 (Critical Dependencies and Assumptions) above describes the dependencies for each MSI implementation phase, outlining the activities and contributions of HPES as an Integrated Supplier. Table 4 outlines additional considerations throughout the implementation waves.

Table 4. Implementation Approach Waves

Implementation Wave

Wave 1 – Building the • HPES as a service supplier experienced with integration will be able to accelerate integration planning,



Implementation Wave

foundation architectural decisions and solution development (assuming that the other tactical procurement suppliers are similarly experienced in acting as an Integrated Supplier)

• HPES as a service supplier will participate during the MSI-led integration sessions with the right level of audience (with the mandate and experience) for effective and efficient process, governance, and tool integration sessions

Wave 2 - Stabilizing and learning

• Based on the delineation as one of the key outcomes of the MSI-led integration sessions for each process, function, and activity, and based on the direct service dependencies as a mainframe services supplier to other suppliers, HPES will develop operational level agreements with those suppliers, that could include internal VITA service delivery teams, and with the MSI role, following the facilitation and unified templates provided by the MSI

• HPES as service supplier will participate in typical supplier interaction and onboarding sessions/workshops and will jointly accelerate the integration process by sending experienced participants with the necessary mandate to agree on MSI procedures, processes, and governance requirements from the HPES service supplier perspective

Wave 3 – Optimizing and expanding

• HPES as an Integrated Supplier will further improve integration toward the MSI supplier by recording improvement actions identified during the onboarding and initial operations as part of the initial governance

• HPES as an Integrated Supplier will integrate additional ITSM/cross-functional processes and procedures based upon the process onboarding strategy of the MSI supplier, assuming that not all SI cross-functional processes will go live at once

Evolving, further detailed integration requirements toward HPES as an Integrated Supplier in the area of standard MSI Implementation Approach will be jointly addressed with VITA and the designated SI supplier.

4.2 People, Skills, and Training

HPES is selecting the current skillsets and capabilities for USPS based on the requirement for integration as communicated by VITA. In addition, HPES has triggered the global capability for MSI to leverage the experience gained through other clients for whom HPES is acting as a service integrator and/or as an Integrated Supplier to

anticipate identifying the exact skillsets, including technical and soft skills as shown in Figure 9.

In general, HPES’ cross-functional services and mainframe service delivery resources are experienced and familiar with the concept of service integration. HPES has developed a series of mandatory training sessions for HPES employees on the basic concepts of MSI. Delivery teams are also trained on using ITIL-based ITSM tools and processes.

Additionally, HPES will make sure that personnel working in

Figure 9. Skillsets

Levels of skills and capabilities related to service layers and the capability of leveraging global experience and expertise.



the VITA environment will be trained on the VITA MSI specifics as required by their future role. HPES has handover and on-the-job training standards defined to provide the same high quality of work. Furthermore, HPES’ open door culture promotes sharing among colleagues who are fulfilling integration roles at other HPES global accounts for knowledge transfer on a daily basis.

The narrative offered in Exhibit 2.4 (Implementation Plan) in Section 2.2 (People, Skills, Training), applies to the integration plan as well.

4.3 Process

As the tactically procured supplier for mainframe services, HPES will have the opportunity to contribute to the integration planning and solution development of MSI from Day One – if desired by VITA and accepted by the MSI.

HPES is aware that this situation might lead to the need to deliver mainframe services before implementation of the Service Integration Platform. As a mainframe services supplier, HPES will prioritize the delivery of the service in a manner that first considers the best interests of VITA and VITA customers, following VITA’s guiding principles. As an Integrated Supplier, HPES will:

• Make sure HPES highest priority is providing the delivery of service quality and quantity as agreed • Fully leverage HPES cross-functional ITSM processes, procedures, and tools to make certain the delivery of

service as committed • Start acting as an Integrated Supplier on governance and organizational levels together with VITA and the

designated SI supplier, following the interim governance model.

During the initial phases of Integration Planning and Solution Development, HPES as a service supplier will actively collaborate and coordinate with the MSI and other performing suppliers to evolve the integrated services platform.

However, the design of the HPES cross-functional services, or integration by design, will facilitate a de-risked, iterative shift into an Integrated Supplier as one of the early adopters of VITA’s Service Integration Platform, following the integration into the MSI Implementation Approach described in Section 4.1.4 (Integration with MSI Implementation Approach) above.

4.4 Assistance Support

Table 5 provides an overview of the organizational support needed from VITA, the MSI, and other Integrated Suppliers.

Table 5. Personnel Support

Build / Run Role Short description

From MSI Supplier

Build MSI Program Manager Leads the MSI implementation project

Build MSI Lead Architect Owns the overall MSI architecture and provides compliance

Build MSI Reporting Lead Drives the end-to-end reporting requirements and mechanisms



Build / Run Role Short description

Build MSI Process Lead Facilitates process and governance integration sessions

Build MSI Tool Architect Facilitates tool integration sessions

Run MSI Delivery Lead Holds accountability for MSI delivery of services to VITA

Run MSI End-to-End Process Coordinator(s)

Coordinates processes end-to-end from the MSI perspective

Run MSI Security and Compliance Analyst

Drives compliance and fulfills security requirements

Run MSI Reporting Analyst Consolidates, aggregates, improves end-to-end reporting and maintains dashboards

Run MSI Service Onboarding Lead Facilitates the on-/offboarding of services and suppliers from the MSI perspective

Run MSI Service Desk Manager Holds accountability for delivery of service desk services to VITA

From VITA

Build MSI Program Sponsor Coordinates the MSI program from VITA’s perspective, acts as escalation point if needed

Build/Run Chief IT Architect Owns, maintains, and improves the global VITA IT standards

Build/Run Business Service / Application Owner(s)

Owns, reports on, and improves services end-to-end for VITA customers (can be an MSI role)

Build/Run Supplier / Vendor Manager(s) Manages relationship and contracts toward HPES as an Integrated Supplier

Build/Run Process Owner(s) Owns VITA’s global process(es)

From other Integrated Suppliers (to whom HPES as a mainframe service supplier has dependencies)

Build Cross-Functional Lead Has authority to decide on the alignment of processes between HPES and the supplier

Build Process Subject Matter Expert(s) Provides supplier-specific process knowledge and supports touchpoint definition

Run Account Service Manager Responsible for cross-functional services

Run Process Manager(s) Responsible for the execution of processes

Please note that the role terminology might be different from VITA’s as these are based on HPES’ standard reference framework for service integration.



The dependencies outlined in Section 3.2 (Critical Dependencies and Assumptions) above indicate the information needs HPES will have as an Integrated Supplier to be integrated throughout the different phases. Table 6 summarizes the critical information.

Table 6. Critical Information through integration phases

Phase Information Integration Planning

• Project charter • Project / program organization and structure • Roles and contact lists • Project plan, timelines, and milestones • Communication plans/management of change plans

Solution Development

• Architectural standards and principles • Reporting requirements (KPI, Metrics, Data, and Format) • SI Operating Model Blueprints (MSI Governance Framework, MSI Procedures and Process Model, MSI

Automation/Tool Architecture) • Service Management Manual, Policy and Procedures Manual(s) • Identified mainframe service dependencies (to VITA, to other Integrated Suppliers) • Refined implementation plan • Refined communication plan

Integration Readiness

• Evaluation and decision criteria (compliance procedures) • OLA templates (Content, Format) • Staffing requirements • Mitigation plans

Supplier Onboarding

• Refined communication plan • Signed OLAs • Training on MSI-owned processes, procedures, tools to the HPES staff working directly on MSI-led processes and

tools • Initiation of the MSI governance and reporting cycles

Managed Operations

• Established reporting procedures • Established communication and escalation • Established continual service improvement procedures • Compliance procedures • Contact data for MSI and related, Integrated Suppliers requiring collaboration on a regular basis, such as Contact

Matrix, centrally published and maintained

The information needs in Table 6 are based on HPES’ framework for Service Integration and HPES’ experience as an integrated supplier. The list will be further amended and refined during the next stage of the procurement.

HPES will leverage the experience gained in scenario #4 introduced in Figure 1, where HPES as a service supplier was not integrated by a mature/formal SI capability. There is a risk this scenario can occur if the MSI is not identified in a timely manner or if the MSI is not performing adequately.

In this case, HPES sees VITA in the role of the Service Integrator and, jointly, HPES and VITA will focus on rapid, pragmatic best effort procedures to partially absorb the missing MSI capability to provide business continuity to VITA customers:

• Procedures for all business-critical incidents, problems caused by business-critical incidents, and major/critical changes involving HPES as the supplier of mainframe services and demanding collaboration with the service desk, VITA, and all other service provision involved parties, including communication/ escalation procedures.

• Communication and engagement plan for all in the business-critical, service involved parties. In this case, HPES expects VITA to facilitate and agree on the conditions for the participation of all required suppliers.



If an Integrated Supplier is not performing as agreed with regards to integration, HPES will seek the advice of the MSI (and VITA if recommended by the MSI) to jointly identify a way to improve the situation. Until then “best-effort procedures” will remain in effect.

5.0 Other Integration Elements

The following sections describe integration elements which are seen by VITA as additional, covering governance, communication, risks, and additional information. HPES has kept this section short because its experience as an integrated supplier is detailed in the previous sections.

5.1 Roles and Governance Alignment

Section 4.1.1 (Integration with MSI Governance & Organization) above, Integration with MSI Governance & Organization, describes how HPES intends to handle responsibility and management over the integration of services into VITA’s future Managed Environment. Figure 10 shows key roles involved in relational and operational governance.

Figure 10. SI Governance and Organization

Illustration of how HPES will integrate into VITA’s governance model, key roles, and procedures.

HPES will integrate into VITA’s envisioned governance model and related forums as mentioned in the various strategic sourcing sessions and documents VITA has published. HPES uses VITA’s terminology on relational governance level and further detailed the MSI operational council level based on HPES best practices.

The roles displayed at the operational level, such as the HPES Account Service Manager and HPES Process Managers, will participate in the MSI-led forums with other Integrated Suppliers. Within the process forums, participants will be able to report process performance, identify process or structural issues within the process or at the borders to other suppliers, and commit to an action plan for removing issues and improving the process end-to-end.



The HPES Service Delivery Manager will participate in the service forums, led by the MSI and staffed with other suppliers’ service managers who are jointly contributing to the performance of an end-to-end service to VITA customers. Within the integrated service forums, the participants will be able to report service performance, identify service or structural issues within the service or at the borders to other suppliers, and commit to an action plan for removing the issues and improving the service end-to-end.

At all levels predefined, agreed-upon, and mandatory governance procedures, such as escalation management and reporting, must be used to confirm compliance, enable auditing, and avoid shadow governance.

5.2 Communications Management

HPES as an Integrated Supplier will follow the communication plans and related mechanisms as expected by the MSI and harmonized across all other suppliers to be integrated. This will avoid differing communication channels, media breaks, and formats which might lead to inefficient communication, ultimately increasing the risk of integration.

HPES as an Integrated Supplier will leverage the formal governance forums during “Build” and “Run” and communicate via the designated roles as foreseen in the forums. HPES sees the following as mission-critical with regard to communication:

• A clearly defined communication and escalation path embedded across the multi-supplier governance model that follows a defined logical hierarchy to provide a managed, targeted, and efficient flow of information.

• Agreed on, formal escalation mechanisms available to all stakeholders to drive faster decisions with clear escalation paths and progress tracking.

• A supporting tool to efficiently manage all communication and escalations across all service suppliers that integrates directly into the existing governance structures.

• Tracking and documentation of all communication and escalation transactions through the governance bodies, making this information available for audit and review.

HPES as an Integrated Supplier (among others) will rely on unambiguous, efficient communication procedures introduced by the SI supplier.

5.3 Risk Management

HPES as an Integrated Supplier will establish proven risk management procedures during “Build” in the context of project risk management and during “Run” in the context of operational risk management.

Both risk management procedures will be integrated into the overall risk management procedures of VITA and the SI supplier, in order to:

• Establish a central multi-supplier security and risk management capability to enable end-to-end cross-supplier security policies and aggregated risk management in alignment with the global VITA’s risk management policies.

• Monitor and improve security compliance across all Integrated Suppliers by defining mutually agreed upon security policies and procedures.

• Integrate security and risk management into the MSI governance model to establish a regular forum and a joint escalation pathway.



HPES will limit the high-level risks mentioned at this stage to the residual risks implied in every assumption (being false), dependency (not being fulfilled), and critical success factor (not being considered). These are further discussed in Section 3.0 (Integration Overview) above.

5.4 Additional Information

For the case that HPES as a mainframe services supplier is going to be integrated by HPES in the role of VITA’s future MSI, HPES will leverage proven mechanisms which will remove conflicts of interest and protect VITA’s strategic objectives related to the future Service Integration Platform. Figure 11 shows the different isolation levels.

Figure 11. Ensuring independence of the Service Integration function

Different isolation levels of the SI role when a supplier is performing both roles (SI and integrated service supplier).

The selection of the “right level” is based on the client’s compliance requirements. In HPES’ experience, when fulfilling both roles at the same time, isolation up to the Functional and Organizational level provides the best balance between complexity and compliance for most of HPES clients.

Date post:	16-Feb-2022
Category:	Documents
Upload:	others
View:	1 times
Download:	0 times

Exhibit 2.9 Integration with MSI Plan Table of Contents

Documents