Business Process

Framework (eTOM)
For The Information and Communications Services Industry
Addendum Q:
Application Note: Frequently Asked Questions (FAQ)

GB921 Addendum Q
TM Forum Approved Version 11.4

May, 2012

TM Forum 2012

Business Process Framework Frequently Asked Questions (FAQ)

Notice
This material, including documents, code and models, has been through review cycles;
however, due to the inherent complexity in the design and implementation of software and
systems, no liability is accepted for any errors or omissions or for consequences of any use
made of this material.
Under no circumstances will the TM Forum be liable for direct or indirect damages or any costs
or losses resulting from the use of this specification. The risk of designing and implementing
products in accordance with this specification is borne solely by the user of this specification.
This material bears the copyright of TM Forum and its use by members and non-members of
TM Forum is governed by all of the terms and conditions of the Intellectual Property Rights
Policy of the TM Forum (http://www.tmforum.org/Bylaws/1094/home.html) and may involve a
claim of patent rights by one or more TM Forum members or by non-members of TM Forum.
Direct inquiries to the TM Forum office:
240 Headquarters Plaza,
East Tower 10th Floor,
Morristown, NJ 07960 USA
Tel No. +1 973 944 5100
Fax No. +1 973 944 5110
TM Forum Web Page: www.tmforum.org

GB921 Addendum Q, Version 11.4

TM Forum 2012

Page 2 of 16

Business Process Framework Frequently Asked Questions (FAQ)

Table of Contents
Notice...................................................................................................................................................................2
Table of Contents ..............................................................................................................................................2
Executive Summary ..........................................................................................................................................4
1. Introduction ....................................................................................................................................................5
2. Does my enterprise need to look like the Business Process Framework (eTOM) model? ...............6
3. Is it OK to use some but not all of the Business Process Framework (eTOM)? .................................7
4. How do I fit Business Process Framework (eTOM) processes into my business? ...........................8
5. What does alignment with the Business Process Framework (eTOM) mean? ................................ 10
6. How do I decompose a process element in the Business Process Framework (eTOM)? ............. 11
7. How is translation between products and services and resources handled in the Business
Process Framework (eTOM)?....................................................................................................................... 13
8. ITIL processes are now visible within the Enterprise Management area (Level 0) is this the only
part of the Business Process Framework (eTOM), and the actual business, where ITIL is used? .. 15
9. Administrative Appendix ........................................................................................................................... 16
9.1. About this document ..................................................................................................................... 16
9.2. Document History ......................................................................................................................... 16
9.2.1. Version History ...................................................................................................................... 16
9.2.2. Release History ..................................................................................................................... 16

GB921 Addendum Q, Version 11.4

TM Forum 2012

Page 3 of 16

Business Process Framework Frequently Asked Questions (FAQ)

Executive Summary
As with most things, there are recurring issues and questions that arise when using
the Business Process Framework (eTOM).
This document acts as a repository to collect some of these, as they arise, and so
can be regarded as a living document that develops and grows over time.
This document is an Application Note, aiming to document approaches based on
industry experience that can be used by a company and adapted to its business
needs.
Note that, as an Application Note, this material should not be read as normative i.e.
as representing a single standardised approach but rather as a representative view
that provides a useful base for others to build on. Other approaches are also possible.
It is the goal of work like this to assist convergence for the industry, but not to impose
a single approach, where there are other variations and alternatives that make sense.

GB921 Addendum Q, Version 11.4

TM Forum 2012

Page 4 of 16

Business Process Framework Frequently Asked Questions (FAQ)

1. Introduction
As with most things, there are recurring issues and questions that arise when using
the Business Process Framework (eTOM).
This document acts as a repository to collect some of these, as they arise, and so
can be regarded as a living document that develops and grows over time.
This document is an Application Note, aiming to document approaches based on
industry experience that can be used by a company and adapted to its business
needs.
Note that, as an Application Note, this material should not be read as normative i.e.
as representing a single standardised approach but rather as a representative view
that provides a useful base for others to build on. Other approaches are also possible.
It is the goal of work like this to assist convergence for the industry, but not to impose
a single approach, where there are other variations and alternatives that make sense.

GB921 Addendum Q, Version 11.4

TM Forum 2012

Page 5 of 16

Business Process Framework Frequently Asked Questions (FAQ)

2. Does my enterprise need to look like the Business Process

Framework (eTOM) model?
Many users are sometimes confused about the role of the Business Process Framework
(eTOM)structure - the familiar top-down view of the enterprise divided into the 3 Level 0 process
elements (OPS, SIP and EM), with each decomposed into Level 1 process elements, then Level 2,
etc.
This hierarchical process structure is the way that Business Process Framework is designed i.e.
it is a way of visualizing a generic view of the enterprise's processes, in more and more granular
detail as we move down the Levels. When an organization or company applies the Business
Process Framework within its business, it does not need to model the structure of the business so
that all this Framework structure is directly visible.
When we look at alignment with the Business Process Framework, we must first recognize that the
scope of some businesses may only involve some of the Framework process elements i.e. the
nature of the business may mean that some areas of process are out of scope. A VNO, for
example, may have little or no process support for the Resource Management & Operations area.
For more discussion, see later.
Next, for the process elements which are in scope sometimes referred to as the footprint of the
business on the Business Process Framework we may find that these are not contiguous within
the Business Process Framework framework. In other words, the business footprint involved
several islands of process elements from different parts of the Framework. Obviously, the choice
of what is in scope would need to make business sense, but this is a matter for the organization or
company concerned.
Finally, the process elements that are in scope may be mapped in whatever arrangement is
wanted into the organizational structure of the business i.e. the business units, departments, etc,
may be arranged as desired, and as long as each of the process elements has a home within this
organizational structure (and, of course, is properly implemented), then the business is considered
to be aligned with the area of the Business Process Framework concerned.
As a result, for some company it may be that there is no single area of the business that
represents the Service Management & Operations Level 1 process element, but every Level 2
process element defined by the Business Process Framework within this Level 1 might still be fully
supported, but in various different parts of the business, This would mean that there was alignment
with all these Level 2s, and as a consequence there was alignment also with the Service
Management & Operations Level 1, even though it itself was not visible as a single department
within the business.
So, regard the Business Process Framework structure as representing the design structure, and
when applying this within your business, you can select process elements at various
decomposition levels (i.e. Level1, 2, 3, etc) and map these into your business. As long as the ones
you use are there, and supported, you are aligned with them. How all this is arranged and
organized within your business is not something that the Business Process Framework constrains.

GB921 Addendum Q, Version 11.4

TM Forum 2012

Page 6 of 16

Business Process Framework Frequently Asked Questions (FAQ)

3. Is it OK to use some but not all of the Business Process

Framework (eTOM)?
The Business Process Framework (eTOM) is a framework this means it is expected that
users will apply it where its works for their businesses, but may find that in some areas it needs
to be adjusted to work for them, or that some parts of the Business Process Framework are
not needed for their business scope.
This flexibility is one of the design principles of the Business Process Framework, and users
may choose freely what to use directly, what to modify, and what to exclude form their
application.
Remember though that a major value of the Business Process Framework is that it represents
an industry-wide standard and that therefore the business judgment for each user organization
or company is to decide on the balance between applying the standard and creating a
proprietary alternative. This is not a single decision, as the choice is there for each part of the
Business Process Framework i.e. some process elements might be adopted directly while in
some other area of the framework and the business the decision might be to make some
changes.
Since the Business Process Framework is recognized and used so widely, the value
proposition is that the language and structure of the Framework will make it much easier and
quicker to understand and negotiate about processes and subsequent implementations both
inside your business, and between your business and your suppliers, peers, and customers.
Additionally, the Business Process Framework represents a working process structure that is
the result of a huge amount of analysis and design effort from the whole TM Forum
membership, and has been extensively tested in the field. These are enormous benefits for an
organization or company trying to establish a comprehensive process view within its business,
so the judgment on whether to use the Business Process Framework or introduce proprietary
aspects needs to take this into account. Of course, in the end these are decisions for users to
make for themselves, but a clear view of the implications will help here.

GB921 Addendum Q, Version 11.4

TM Forum 2012

Page 7 of 16

Business Process Framework Frequently Asked Questions (FAQ)

4. How do I fit Business Process Framework (eTOM) processes

into my business?
An issue that often arises for organizations and companies applying the Business Process
Framework (eTOM) in their businesses is how to decide which process elements belong
where. This is an issue that can't be answered uniquely since the whole idea of the Business
Process Framework is to provide a generic process view that can be recognized in whole or in
part by every business. As a consequence, different enterprises will map the available process
elements in the way that works best for them, and may sometimes choose to use some
process elements and neglect others based on this. However, we can provide some general
guidance that hopefully assists users.
Although it is a Business Process Framework design principle that process detail is not
replicated within the framework, and important point in mapping this into your business is that
replication is allowed and can arise as you do this. For example, the Framework contains one
set of Product Lifecycle Management process elements (under the PLM column in SIP) but it
is typical within organizations to have several product departments, each focusing on different
product sets or regions, and the expectation would therefore be that each of these
departments runs the same (or similar) processes but that they operate separately. Thus, the
single PLM process area can thus be mapped into several replicas within the organization.
Also, there are cases where the Business Process Framework defines process areas that
have similarities, but different focuses, and an enterprise may choose to apply these according
to the best fit within the business.
For example, if we consider how network build might be handled we can look across the
Resource layer in the Business Process Framework and observe that there is a focus in
Infrastructure Lifecycle management (ILM) in SIP, and in OPS there is a focus both in OPS
and FAB for this. How does a company choose which process area fits best? The answer is
that there is flexibility. The philosophy in the Business Process Framework design is that ILM
plans the network installation, contracts with suppliers (as necessary) and managed the
physical deployment of network kit. OPS then takes over the "potential" resource set
represented by this physical capability and through OSR manages any pre-configuration.
Fulfillment then instantiates the actual resource entities that make use of the resource pool
gathered in ILM/OSR, and makes the association with services/products/customers.
Thus, on this basis, physical network is in place within ILM, but in an unconfigured, even
unmanaged, state, with OPS having the responsibility for bringing this into use.
To be sure this is unambiguous, if we focus for the moment on what happens within the
enterprise's own network, this suggests that OPS does not directly manage deployment of
major network capability (like core exchange switches, SDH rings, etc) as this is done in ILM,
although minor network resources (like access elements for individual customers or premises)
could be handled directly there. OSR, and then Fulfillment, would "take over" the ILM network
capabilities and pre-configure/configure them for use.
However, where the enterprise draws a line on this must be up to them. One company might
regard a street cabinet installation as infrastructure build in SIP, while another handles as part
of OPS. As long as they support the process elements involved as defined, then both are
aligned with the Business Process Framework, but have made different organizational choices
in now the processes map into their business.

GB921 Addendum Q, Version 11.4

TM Forum 2012

Page 8 of 16

Business Process Framework Frequently Asked Questions (FAQ)

Just to build a little on the example, the workforce management process area (i.e. Manage
Workforce) might be called upon in both these scenarios since it is defined to support
workforce management across the enterprise.

GB921 Addendum Q, Version 11.4

TM Forum 2012

Page 9 of 16

Business Process Framework Frequently Asked Questions (FAQ)

5. What does alignment with the Business Process Framework

(eTOM) mean?
Many organizations and companies want to assess their alignment with the Business Process
Framework (eTOM), or need to assess how companies they are working with align. This is not
an obvious issue, since this Business Process Framework is designed to be a framework and
hence for a specific enterprise, some Business Process Framework areas may be directly
applied, some may be modified in use, and some may not be considered relevant and
excluded.
The crucial insight in addressing alignment with the Business Process Framework is to follow
the text in other words, the framework is defined by the process descriptions, both Brief
Description and Extended Description, that are published for the Framework process
elements. Alignment must be assessed against this text, which can be viewed as setting out a
series of process requirements, that can be considered one by one. If support is provided for
all these requirements, then the relevant Business Process Framework process element is
aligned. If any or the process requirements are not supported, then that process element is not
aligned (or might be regarded as partially aligned, although the formal TM Forum Business
Process Framework Conformance Assessment scheme does not distinguish this).
Note that assessment may be made at any level of decomposition and it is the process text for
the level concerned that applies. So, a Level 1 assessment might be made against, say, the
Customer Relationship Management Level 1 within the Business Process Framework, and it is
only that Level 1 process description and not the detail within the Level 2 process elements
within this that applies. This produces the interesting implication that a Level 1 process
element might be assessed as aligned, even though some of the contained Level 2 process
requirements are not aligned (and hence the affected Level 2s are not aligned). At first sight,
this may appear odd, but this allows a progressive assessment mechanism and avoids
existing assessments at higher levels being destabilized by the later publication of lower level
detail in new decomposed process elements. Another implication is that if assessment is made
at, say, Level 2, and if all the Level 2 process elements within a Level 1 are aligned, then
alignment follows automatically for the Level 1 and no explicit assessment need be made for
that Level 1. This applies throughout the Business Process Framework decomposition
hierarchy.

GB921 Addendum Q, Version 11.4

TM Forum 2012

Page 10 of 16

Business Process Framework Frequently Asked Questions (FAQ)

6. How do I decompose a process element in the Business

Process Framework (eTOM)?
We'll look here at what happens when an individual user (e.g. within a company applying the Business
Process Framework (eTOM) in its business) wants to decompose a published Framework process
element, and so create a new set of process elements within the published element. This might arise in
defining Level 4 process elements for existing Level 3s (note that we are beginning to define and publish
some Level 4s within the TM Forum collaboration program currently). Note that any such decompositions
represent a proprietary extension to the Business Process Framework until, and if, the company brings
these candidate decompositions back to TM Forum for review and potential agreement for publication as
new Business Process Framework detail.
There are a number of techniques that can be used to identify candidate decomposed process
elements. For example, often the process element being decomposed may address some or all of a
lifecycle that may be visible within the process description. This lifecycle may be expressed in terms of
process detail, or may be related to the lifecycle of related information (and this can be seen through the
mappings between the Business Process Framework and the Information Framework (SID) that are
published). Another very useful technique is to parse the text of the process description for the existing
process element, and look for words and phrases that represent more granular process activities (each
of which can then become the focus for one of the decomposed process elements) this is an
application of the technique known more generally as semantic analysis.
There are other ways of tackling this as well it is a human design judgment how to decompose a
process element, so what we will concentrate on here is how you can decide if the decomposition you
choose is valid.
There are some design principles for process analysis and how this is used in the Business Process
Framework that support us here.
1. The decomposition must be complete. Every process requirement (i.e. from the full description of
the process element being decomposed) must be represented within the scope of the
decomposed process elements so there can be no orphaned process details.
2. The decomposition must be disjoint. Each process requirement (i.e. from the full description of
the process element being decomposed) must be represented in one and only one of the
decomposed process elements so there can be no duplicated process details (note though,
that it is permissible to map a part of a process requirement to one decomposed process
element, and another part to a different process element).
3. The decomposition must be consistent. There can be no new process requirements in the
decomposed process elements so every process detail must be traceable back to the
description of the process element being decomposed (note though, that it is expected that the
decomposed process elements will reveal more detail, but this must be consistent with the
higher-level view from the level above).
Note that a decomposition exercise like this usually involves some iteration i.e. the first pass that
produces a set of candidate decomposed process elements is rarely found to be ideal, and it is
generally useful to go around the loop several times. For example, it may be found that the
description for the process element being decomposed leads to a poor choice for the decomposed
process elements, when applying the semantic analysis technique mentioned above. This might be
because of some intrinsic issue with the original description, or may be because other influences
(perhaps related to the organization or company concerned) need to be accommodated. This arises
frequently, and the decomposition activity as indicated above is a human design one where
balancing such issues is part of the exercise. Note that where the original process description is

GB921 Addendum Q, Version 11.4

TM Forum 2012

Page 11 of 16

Business Process Framework Frequently Asked Questions (FAQ)

found to have issues, an obvious route is to feedback these concerns to TM Forum, so that the
published Business Process Framework can be improved in line with this.

GB921 Addendum Q, Version 11.4

TM Forum 2012

Page 12 of 16

Business Process Framework Frequently Asked Questions (FAQ)

7. How is translation between products and services and

resources handled in the Business Process Framework
(eTOM)?
The Business Process Framework (eTOM), and the rest of Frameworx, distinguishes Products from
Services from Resources. Products are seen as being built from one or more Services, with a
Service defined as essentially the technical core that is then packaged into a Product. The Product
wraps around this technical core of Service, typically with non-technical aspects such as a tariff, an
SLA, support arrangements, etc. This separation between Product and Service creates useful
flexibility: a given Product may be supported by different Services (say, using different technologies)
over time, but the end-user need not be aware of this if the Product they buy and use remains the
same. Equally, a given Service may be sold as different Products (say, with different tariffs). Also, of
course, several Services may be bundled into a single Product.
Services map into Resources in a similar way. The Resources typically represent physical or logical
elements that are building blocks - say, routers or modems in a network. Some combination of
Resources then supports a given Service.
With all this in mind, an issue that then arises is how to manage the association or mapping between
given Products in use, the Services that support these, and then the underlying Resources?
Here, we can see an influence from another set of decisions, intended to clarify and simplify the
mappings between the Frameworks within Frameworx. One aspect of this, is an important
Frameworx design principle that we avoid having elements of the lifecycle of individual informational
elements managed from different areas of the business processes. The result is that all the active
operations on a given information element (Create, Update and Delete from the familiar CRUD
view, with the passive operation Read of less concern) are concentrated in a single Level 2
business process. So, for example, the Order Handling Level 2 process element in the Customer
Relationship Management Level 1 has been defined to be the Level 2 that manages the Product
information element, and so it is Order Handling that creates, updates and deletes instances of
Product. Note that this principle has been followed in most cases, but there are a few exceptions in
the existing process/information mappings.
We can look at an example of how this works. As a result of this approach, if we consider how a
customer order is processed, then as part of Order Handling (i.e. within the Customer Relationship
Management Level 1 layer), the stage will be reached where it is necessary to translate or map
from the product (instance) associated with this customer order into one or several service orders
(instances), that will then be fulfilled to support that product (instance). Because of the design
principle above, the decision is that the entire lifecycle of a service order (instance) is handled not in
the Customer Relationship Management Level 1 layer, but rather in the Service Management &
Operations Level 1 layer and specifically (in this case) in the Service Configuration & Activation
Level 2 process element. So, the result is that, in process terms, the translation between Product and
Service is positioned at the lower layer (i.e. Product is mapped to Service within Service
Management & Operations rather than Customer Relationship Management).
This is a general principle, and applies to all areas of process mapping between Products and
Services. A similar approach is taken at other layers, and so mapping between Service and
Resource is handled within Resource Management & Operations rather than Service Management
& Operations.
Note that this all this applies for the process view, and an important flexibility is that when processes
are mapped into a specific organization, it is permissible to map the same process area to several

GB921 Addendum Q, Version 11.4

TM Forum 2012

Page 13 of 16

Business Process Framework Frequently Asked Questions (FAQ)

areas in the enterprise (if this makes sense in business terms). For example, a company may use
the same PLM processes in several separate product groups within a real enterprise. As a result, it
would be valid to map the content of, say, the Product/Service translation process into several
enterprise areas (of course, the company would need to ensure this remains manageable in their
business). This would allow a customer-facing part of the organization still to retain the ability to
directly manage the relationship between Product and Service, by absorbing and supporting this part
of the service-management processes.

GB921 Addendum Q, Version 11.4

TM Forum 2012

Page 14 of 16

Business Process Framework Frequently Asked Questions (FAQ)

8. ITIL processes are now visible within the Enterprise

Management area (Level 0) is this the only part of the
Business Process Framework (eTOM), and the actual
business, where ITIL is used?
NO! This is not the only area where ITIL is used.
The influence of ITIL can extend across the entire enterprise, depending on how the company
concerned wants to use it and how far they apply it in their business. The reason we see ITIL in
Enterprise Management within the Business Process Framework (eTOM) is that ITIL defines Good
Practice, and this represents a kind of business policy that a company decides to adopt, and then
uses this policy to modify behaviour across the business. Enterprise Management is the natural
place within the Business Process Framework to position this kind of corporate approach. However,
the reality is that any policy or good practice doesnt stay as just a corporate view, but becomes a
direct influence on the way that the rest of the business behaves.
So, ITIL will impact, in principle, on the whole of the enterprise, and thus the whole of the Business
Process Framework. Of course, individual companies may not choose to use ITIL everywhere, or
may not choose to use all ITIL process areas in their businesses, but potentially ITIL can impact
almost anywhere across the enterprise.
This is acknowledged in the Business Process Framework, within the definitions for the ITIL process
elements. Within the Process Decompositions (in Addendum D of the Framework), for each ITIL
process element, there is a list of the potentially-impacted Business Process Framework process
elements, i.e. the processes elsewhere in the enterprise, and what this impact can be. For example,
in ITIL Change Management (within Enterprise Management), one of the identified impacted
process elements is Service Capability Delivery (within Service Development & Management), and
the identified impact is:
Where ITIL Change Management is employed as a guiding mechanism, then the Service
Capability Delivery processes operate in line with this, so that they are then aligned with the ITIL
approach. The Service Capability Delivery processes work with ITIL Change Management to plan
and deliver changes within business services, which typically includes IT services.
So, the visible positioning of ITIL within Enterprise Management is just a bridge between the two
frameworks, and the intent is to define the whole range of impacts, across the whole enterprise, that
ITIL involves. It is therefore important to recognize that the Business Process Framework does not
limit ITIL to just the Enterprise Management area, but intends to address the full range of ITIL
impacts across the whole of the enterprise and the whole of the Business Process Framework. The
visible ITIL processes within Enterprise Management are just the placeholder or bridge for how ITIL
is brought into the rest of the Business Process Framework.

GB921 Addendum Q, Version 11.4

TM Forum 2012

Page 15 of 16

Business Process Framework Frequently Asked Questions (FAQ)

9. Administrative Appendix
This Appendix provides additional background material about the TM Forum and this
document.

9.1. About this document

This document is an Application Note, aiming to document an approach based on
industry experience that can be used by a company and adapted to its business
needs.

9.2. Document History

9.2.1. Version History
Version Number

Date Modified

Modified by:

11.1

Sep 2011

Mike Kelly

11.2

Sep 2011

Mike Kelly

11.3

Oct 2011

Alicja Kawecki

11.4

May 2012

Alicja Kawecki

Release Number

Date Modified

Modified by:

11.1

Sep 2011

Mike Kelly

Description of
changes
first draft of
document
Tidying for
publication
Minor cosmetic
corrections prior to
web posting and ME
Updated to reflect TM
Forum Approved
status

9.2.2. Release History

GB921 Addendum Q, Version 11.4

TM Forum 2012

Description of
changes
first issue of
document

Page 16 of 16