The requirements specification for a new service management tool, especially one replacing an existing system, must be comprehensive. Option D is the best choice as it covers all critical areas from an ITIL perspective.

1. Utility, Warranty, and Service Acceptance Criteria (SAC): This correctly uses ITIL terminology to define what the tool must do (utility), how well it must do it (warranty), and the criteria to confirm it meets these requirements (SAC).

2. Data Migration and Integration: This is a crucial technical requirement when replacing an existing tool, as historical data must be preserved and the new tool must work with other corporate systems.

3. Licensing and Deployment Planning: This addresses the logistical and financial aspects of the rollout, considering the number of users and how they will access the tool.

4. Deployment and Training: This covers the implementation plan and, critically, the "training and education" needed for staff to use the tool effectively, which directly supports the scenario's goal of achieving a quick return on investment (ROI).

A: This option uses less precise terminology ("usability and functionality" instead of "utility and warranty") and omits critical requirements like data migration, integration, and service acceptance criteria.

B: While this option correctly identifies utility and warranty, it omits the crucial requirements for data migration and integration, which are essential for a tool replacement project.

C: This option correctly includes SAC but omits the vital requirement for integration with other tools and focuses on "documentation" rather than the more comprehensive "training and education" needed for rapid user adoption.

1. AXELOS, ITIL Service Design (2011 Edition). The Stationery Office, 2011.

Section 2.2.1, p. 14: Defines utility ('fitness for purpose') and warranty ('fitness for use') as the core components of value that a service (or supporting tool) must provide.

Section 3.1.4, p. 31: Lists the five aspects of service design, which include "The design of the management information systems and tools, especially the service portfolio and service catalogue," confirming that tool requirements are a formal part of service design.

Section 3.6.4.2, p. 77: Explains that Service Acceptance Criteria (SAC) are defined during service design to "ensure that all of the agreed service requirements have been met."

2. AXELOS, ITIL Service Transition (2011 Edition). The Stationery Office, 2011.

Section 4.2.4.3, p. 83: In the "Release and deployment planning" section, activities include planning for the "transfer, deployment, retirement and decommissioning of assets and service components," which encompasses data migration from the old tool.

Section 4.2.5.6, p. 88: Under "Release build and test," activities include the "development of documentation, work instructions and training," highlighting the importance of preparing users for the new tool to ensure a successful transition and quick ROI.

This option provides the most comprehensive and strategically aligned approach according to ITIL principles. It correctly recognizes that IT resources are shared and require a sophisticated costing model. It directly addresses the board's request by costing the various service provision options, calculating the Return on Investment (ROI) using projected revenues, and feeding this crucial financial analysis into the Service Portfolio Management (SPM) process. This enables an informed, value-based decision on which options to pursue and provides the foundation for a robust business case, which is the primary purpose of these activities.

A: The scenario states the organization has a "good appreciation of its IT costs," implying that foundational financial management processes already exist, making this option redundant.

B: Sharing investment costs equally is an arbitrary and inaccurate method of cost allocation that would lead to a flawed ROI calculation and poor investment decisions.

C: This option incorrectly introduces outsourcing, which is not mentioned in the scenario's scope, and misidentifies Service Level Agreements (SLAs) as the primary tool for usage-based costing.

1. AXELOS, ITIL® Service Strategy: 2011 Edition, TSO (The Stationery Office), 2011.

Section 4.3.5.3 (The Analyze phase): This section of the Service Portfolio Management process describes how potential services are analyzed to understand their value proposition. It states, "The business case is updated with more detailed cost/benefit information... This includes a detailed risk, resource and financial analysis." This directly supports costing options, calculating ROI, and using it for comparison within SPM, as described in option D.

Section 5.5 (Business Case): This section details the structure of a business case, emphasizing the inclusion of "financial analysis (costs, benefits, ROI)." This confirms that calculating ROI for different options is a standard and necessary step for making investment decisions.

Section 5.4.3.2 (Cost models): This section explains that cost models are used to calculate the cost of services, especially in environments with shared resources. This refutes the simplistic "equal sharing" approach in option B.

2. AXELOS, ITIL® Foundation, ITIL 4 Edition, TSO (The Stationery Office), 2019.

Section 5.2.11 (Portfolio management): This practice guide states that portfolio management involves "deciding where to invest" and "reviewing the active portfolio" to ensure it aligns with strategic objectives and provides value. The process described in option D is a core input to this practice.

Section 5.2.16 (Service financial management): This practice guide notes its purpose is to support "strategies and plans... by ensuring that the organization’s financial resources and investments are being used effectively." This includes activities like "funding" and "costing," which are central to the financial review described in the scenario and option D.

This option provides the most comprehensive and strategically sound application of ITIL Demand Management. It correctly begins by analyzing business activity to define Patterns of Business Activity (PBA). It then links these PBAs to the required IT capacity. Crucially, it distinguishes between predictable and unpredictable demand, proposing a cost-effective strategy: invest in resources for predictable peaks and engage in risk-based discussions with business managers for unpredictable peaks. This aligns with the core purpose of Demand Management, which is not just to provision for all possible demand, but to manage it in a way that is aligned with business needs and financial constraints.

B: This option is too narrowly focused on the call centre, ignoring the website which is also a source of bookings and uses the same back-end service, as stated in the scenario.

C: This option incorrectly states that PBA result from IT service metrics; PBA are patterns of business activity that drive IT service usage. It also proposes the unrealistic goal of meeting all demand at all times.

D: This option jumps to process implementation and a potentially wasteful strategy of acquiring resources to exceed demand, rather than first analyzing and managing the demand in partnership with the business.

1. AXELOS, ITIL® Service Strategy, 2011 Edition. The Stationery Office.

Section 4.4.4.1, Identifying patterns of business activity (PBA): "PBA are workload profiles of one or more business activities. They represent the dynamics of the business... It is important to understand that PBA are patterns of business activity, and are not generated by the IT organization." This supports the first step in option A and refutes the premise of option C.

Section 4.4.5.2, Managing demand: "For some patterns of business activity, it may not be cost-effective to have the capacity available to meet the peak demand... In these cases, demand management may be able to influence the demand for the service." This supports the differentiated approach in option A for unpredictable demand and refutes the "meet all demand" approach in options C and D.

Figure 4.16, Core services and supporting services: This figure illustrates how business activities (like holiday bookings) drive demand for core services, which in turn drive demand for supporting infrastructure. This reinforces the need to start analysis at the business level, as described in option A.

2. AXELOS, ITIL Foundation, ITIL 4 Edition. The Stationery Office, 2019.

Section 5.2.3, Capacity and performance management practice: "The purpose of the capacity and performance management practice is to ensure that services achieve agreed and expected performance, satisfying current and future demand in a cost-effective way." This principle of cost-effectiveness supports option A's balanced approach over the expensive strategies suggested in C and D.

This option presents the most comprehensive and strategic solution aligned with ITIL Demand Management principles. It begins by correctly identifying the need to analyze Patterns of Business Activity (PBA) to understand the seasonal demand fluctuations. It then proposes developing differentiated service offerings, a key technique to influence demand and align IT resource utilization with business cycles. Crucially, it addresses the outdated supporting service targets mentioned in the scenario. Finally, it incorporates a forward-looking, strategic approach by collaborating with Business Relationship Management and Capacity Management to plan for the future expansion, thus addressing both current and future challenges.

B. This option focuses too narrowly on differential charging as the solution. While a valid technique, it is only one aspect of demand management and may not be the best initial approach.

C. Proposing to "impose limits" on service usage is a restrictive and potentially business-damaging approach, which is less desirable than proactively managing demand through tailored service offerings.

D. This option suggests short-term, reactive measures like delayed processing. This fails to provide a strategic, long-term solution to the core problem of seasonal demand and future growth.

1. AXELOS. (2011). ITIL® Service Strategy: 2011 Edition. TSO (The Stationery Office).

Section 4.4.4, Activities: "The activities of demand management are to identify and analyse patterns of business activity (PBA) to understand the levels of demand that will be placed on a service." This supports the analysis of PBA in option A.

Section 4.4.5.2, Differentiated offerings: This section details how service providers can create different service offerings (e.g., service level packages) to meet the needs of different PBAs, which directly supports the core proposal in option A.

Figure 4.13, Demand management interfaces: This diagram explicitly shows the critical interfaces between Demand Management, Capacity Management, and Business Relationship Management, validating the collaborative planning aspect of option A.

2. AXELOS. (2011). ITIL® Service Design: 2011 Edition. TSO (The Stationery Office).

Section 4.3.4.1, Service level requirements (SLRs): "SLRs need to be established for all services... These requirements should be reviewed and revised as part of the service review process." This supports the need to amend outdated performance targets as described in option A.

This option correctly aligns the responsibilities with the standard definitions of each role within the ITIL framework.

The Service Catalogue Manager is primarily responsible for maintaining the service catalogue, which includes ensuring its accuracy (1), its consistency with the service portfolio (8), and that all services are published within it (9).

The Service Level Manager focuses on defining, agreeing, and monitoring service delivery. This involves negotiating Service Level Agreements (SLAs) (2) and supporting Operational Level Agreements (OLAs) (3), monitoring performance against targets (5), producing service reports (10), and assisting with the service catalogue (7) to ensure the services being managed are accurately described.

The Business Relationship Manager is the strategic link to the customer, responsible for establishing and maintaining the customer relationship (4) and acting as a point of escalation for complaints (6).

A: Incorrectly assigns OLA negotiation (3) to the Service Catalogue Manager and customer relationship management (4) to the Service Level Manager.

B: Incorrectly assigns core Business Relationship Manager duties like relationship management (4) and complaint handling (6) to the Service Level Manager.

C: Incorrectly assigns service reporting (10) to the Business Relationship Manager and the responsibility for publishing services in the catalogue (9) to the Service Level Manager.

1. AXELOS, ITIL® Service Design (2011 Edition), TSO (The Stationery Office), 2011.

Service Catalogue Manager: Section 4.2.5.2 describes responsibilities including "ensuring that the information in the Service Catalogue is accurate" and "consistent with the Service Portfolio." (Supports responsibilities 1, 8, 9).

Service Level Manager: Section 4.3.5.2 outlines responsibilities including negotiating SLAs and OLAs, monitoring and reporting on service levels, and "assists with the production and maintenance of an accurate Service Catalogue." (Supports responsibilities 2, 3, 5, 7, 10).

2. AXELOS, ITIL® Service Strategy (2011 Edition), TSO (The Stationery Office), 2011.

Business Relationship Manager: Section 4.5.5.2 details the role's responsibilities, which include "establishing and maintaining a constructive relationship between the service provider and the customer" and handling major incidents and customer complaints. (Supports responsibilities 4, 6).

3. University of Wisconsin-Madison, ITIL Roles and Responsibilities, DoIT Information Technology, 2018.

This document outlines ITIL roles for the university's IT services. It defines the Business Relationship Manager as the role that "Establishes and maintains a positive relationship with customers" and "Serves as an escalation point for customers." (Supports responsibilities 4, 6). It also defines the Service Level Manager as responsible for negotiating SLAs and monitoring/reporting on service levels. (Supports responsibilities 2, 5, 10).

This option proposes the most balanced and logical ITIL-aligned approach. It correctly identifies the need for a collaborative Service Improvement Plan (SIP) to formally manage the required improvements. Crucially, it advocates for a thorough investigation into the differing views on the cause, considering multiple possibilities: people (service desk understanding), process (SLA targets), or technology (the nature of the failure). This avoids jumping to conclusions and aligns with the Continual Service Improvement (CSI) principle of first understanding the current situation ('Where are we now?') before implementing corrective actions. This comprehensive investigation is necessary to identify the true root cause and ensure the resulting actions are effective.

B: This option prematurely assigns blame solely to the service desk, ignoring that their actions were based on the existing SLA.

C: This option jumps to the conclusion that the issue is clearly a misunderstanding of business periods, which is only one of several possibilities.

D: This proposes a very broad, process-level maturity review, which is less appropriate than a focused investigation into this specific, critical incident failure.

1. ITIL® Continual Service Improvement (2011 Edition), Section 5.5, "Service improvement plan (SIP)": This section describes a SIP as the formal mechanism for managing and implementing improvements to services and processes, which is the central action proposed in the correct answer.

2. ITIL® Continual Service Improvement (2011 Edition), Section 4.1, "The 7-step improvement process": The investigation proposed in option A aligns with the initial steps of this process, specifically Step 2 ("Define what you will measure") and Step 3 ("Gather the data"), which are essential for understanding the problem before acting.

3. ITIL® Service Design (2011 Edition), Section 4.3.5.5, "Service reporting, monitoring and review": This section states that a key activity of SLM is to "review and revise SLAs... in the light of any failures." The scenario describes a failure, and the proposed investigation is the correct precursor to any revision.

4. ITIL® Service Operation (2011 Edition), Section 4.2.4.2, "Prioritization": This section explains that incident priority is based on impact and urgency, which should be agreed upon in the SLA. The dispute in the scenario highlights a potential flaw in this agreement, justifying the thorough investigation proposed in option A.

This option provides the most comprehensive and strategic solution to the problems outlined in the scenario. Moving to a single supplier directly addresses the core issues of poor communication, lack of coordination, and the "blame culture" that arose from managing three separate suppliers. A long-term, risk-reward framework is the best approach to counteract the current supplier behavior of implementing short-term fixes to avoid penalties, encouraging sustainable improvements instead. Seeking strategic alignment and establishing a joint partnership team fosters a collaborative relationship built on mutual trust and shared goals, which is essential for supporting the organization's global expansion.

A: This option retains the complex and problematic multi-supplier structure. Simply choosing suppliers who have worked together before does not guarantee future collaboration under a new contract.

B: While advocating for a single supplier is correct, its focus on a risk-reward framework for "local issues" is less strategic than C's focus on long-term, sustainable improvements.

D: This is the weakest option as it recommends re-contracting with the current suppliers who are the source of the existing problems, failing to address the root cause of the issues.

1. AXELOS, ITIL® Service Strategy, 2011 Edition (ISBN: 9780113313044):

Section 3.6.3, Sourcing Models: Discusses the benefits of a single-source or prime contractor model in reducing the complexity of supplier management and providing a single point of accountability, which directly supports the move to a single supplier.

Section 4.6.5.2, Sourcing options: Highlights that single sourcing "simplifies the relationship and provides a single point of contact," which is the primary need identified in the scenario to overcome the blame culture and coordination failures.

2. AXELOS, ITIL® Service Design, 2011 Edition (ISBN: 9780113313051):

Section 4.7.2, Supplier management purpose and objectives: Emphasizes obtaining value for money from suppliers and ensuring they meet their commitments. A risk-reward framework, as suggested in option C, is a mechanism to align supplier performance with business value, moving beyond simple penalty avoidance.

Section 4.7.4.3, Supplier and contract evaluation and selection: States that evaluation should include the supplier's "willingness to be flexible and form a partnership," supporting the call for strategic alignment and a joint partnership team.

3. AXELOS, ITIL Practitioner Guidance, 2016 (ISBN: 9780113314874):

Section 3.3.3, Guiding principle: Collaborate and promote visibility: This principle advocates for working together across boundaries. The creation of a "joint partnership team" as described in option C is a direct application of this principle to overcome the communication silos described in the scenario.

The service portfolio provides a complete, strategic view of all services across their entire lifecycle (pipeline, catalogue, retired). It contains critical business information not typically found in a service catalogue, such as business cases, risks, investment priorities, and value propositions. For the company in the scenario, which is facing dipping profits and needs to control costs and investments, service portfolio management offers direct value. It enables a holistic view of resource utilization and lifecycle costs. Most importantly, it provides a structured framework for evaluating and comparing potential new services against existing ones, ensuring that limited investment funds are allocated to opportunities that offer the best value and support strategic objectives.

A. This option incorrectly includes operational details like "support terms and conditions" and "ordering and request procedures" as portfolio-specific elements; these are typically part of the service catalogue.

B. While the list of portfolio elements is largely correct, the described value focuses on sales opportunities rather than addressing the company's core problems of profitability, lifecycle cost management, and investment prioritization.

C. This option is fundamentally flawed as it lists elements (service level targets, supplier details) that the scenario explicitly states are already in the existing service catalogue.

1. AXELOS, ITIL® Service Strategy, 2011 Edition. The Stationery Office.

Section 4.4.1, Purpose and objectives: "The purpose of the service portfolio management process is to manage the service portfolio. Service portfolio management ensures that the service provider has the right mix of services to meet required business outcomes at an appropriate level of investment and risk." This supports the value statement in option D regarding making sound investment decisions.

Section 4.4.4.2, Define: This section details the activities of defining services, which includes creating a business case for each new or changed service. The business case should document costs, risks, and the expected value, aligning with the elements listed in option D.

Figure 4.16, Service portfolio: This figure illustrates that the service portfolio contains the service pipeline, service catalogue, and retired services, providing a view of the entire service lifecycle and the resources used, as mentioned in option D.

2. AXELOS, ITIL® Foundation, ITIL 4 Edition. The Stationery Office, 2019.

Section 5.2.10, Portfolio management: "The purpose of the portfolio management practice is to ensure that the organization has the right mix of programmes, projects, products, and services to execute its strategy within its funding and resource constraints." This directly supports the value proposition in option D of comparing investments and making decisions within a restricted budget.

This sequence represents the most logical and effective approach to implementing a new supplier management process according to ITIL principles. It begins with establishing the governing strategy and policy (Step 1), which is the correct starting point for any process implementation. It then defines critical inputs for the process design: accountability (Step 2), supplier categorization (Step 3), and the supporting information system (SCMIS) (Step 4). Only after these foundational elements are in place is the process itself designed (Step 5), ensuring it is practical and fit for purpose. The final steps involve a structured deployment and crucial integration with other key processes like Service Level Management (Step 7), ensuring alignment and end-to-end value.

A. The policy must be defined before the process is designed. This option incorrectly places process design before the policy that should guide it.

B. Designing the process (step 2) before defining accountability and categorizing suppliers is less effective, as these are critical inputs required for a robust process design.

C. This option starts with a redundant review, follows an illogical sequence (policy after design), and suggests an unrealistic single point of accountability for all global suppliers.

1. ITIL® Service Design (2011 Edition), AXELOS.

Section 4.7.2 (Supplier management policy and strategy): This section emphasizes that the initial step is to create a supplier policy and strategy, which will "contain the rules and guidelines for the IT organization in its dealings with suppliers." This supports Step 1 in option D being the correct starting point.

Section 4.7.5.2 (Supplier categorization): This section details the importance of categorizing suppliers (e.g., strategic, tactical, operational, commodity) to determine the level of management and attention each requires. This activity logically follows the establishment of a policy, as shown in option D.

Section 4.7.5.1 (The supplier and contract management information system (SCMIS)): The SCMIS is described as the central repository for all supplier and contract data. Establishing this system is a key implementation activity that provides the foundation for managing suppliers effectively.

2. ITIL® 4: Create, Deliver and Support, AXELOS.

Section 5.2.10 (Supplier management practice): This practice guide reinforces the need for a "supplier strategy" or "sourcing strategy" that defines the organization's plan for engaging with suppliers. This strategy guides all subsequent activities, including process design and execution, which aligns with the sequence in option D where policy precedes process design. The practice also highlights the importance of defining roles and responsibilities for managing suppliers.

This option correctly delineates the responsibilities based on ITIL principles. The Service Level Manager (SLM) is the primary point of contact for the customer regarding service performance. Their role is to manage the customer relationship, log complaints related to Service Level Agreements (SLAs), ensure the issue is addressed, and maintain communication with the customer.

The Supplier Manager (SPM) is responsible for managing the relationship with the supplier and ensuring their performance aligns with the Underpinning Contract (UC). Therefore, the SPM investigates the supplier's performance failure, reviews their overall service delivery, and reports back to the SLM, who then communicates the resolution to the customer. This division of labor ensures clear accountability and effective problem resolution.

A. The SLM's actions are premature and overstep their authority; imposing penalties is the SPM's responsibility after a thorough investigation. The SPM should not invoke penalties without first investigating the issue.

C. Waiting for the "next scheduled review meeting" shows a lack of urgency and is inappropriate for handling active customer complaints that have been ongoing for three months.

D. The roles are confused. The SLM should not be directly reviewing the supplier's performance (an SPM task), and the SPM would not typically log a customer complaint (an SLM or Service Desk task).

1. AXELOS, ITIL® Service Design (2011 Edition), TSO (The Stationery Office), 2011.

Section 4.3.4.1 (Service Level Manager): Describes the SLM role as the primary interface with the customer for service level matters, responsible for negotiating and ensuring SLAs are met, and handling any service level-related complaints. This supports the SLM's actions in option B (logging complaints, informing the customer, ensuring resolution).

Section 4.6.4.1 (Supplier Manager): Defines the Supplier Manager role as responsible for managing relationships with suppliers, ensuring contracts provide value, and managing supplier performance. This supports the SPM's actions in option B (investigating with the supplier, reviewing performance).

2. AXELOS, ITIL® Service Strategy (2011 Edition), TSO (The Stationery Office), 2011.

Section 4.5 (Supplier Management): This section details the process of managing suppliers and their services. It emphasizes that the Supplier Manager is responsible for "management of suppliers and their performance" and "review and renewal of contracts," which aligns with the SPM's investigative and review activities in option B. The process ensures that supplier performance supports the business needs and SLAs.