SLAs are an important part of any subcontracting and technology provider contract. Beyond expectations for type and quality of service, ALS offers remedies if requirements are not met. The service received by the customer as a result of the service provided is at the heart of the service level agreement. Most service providers provide statistics, often through an online portal. There, customers can check whether ALS is being met and whether they are entitled to service credits or other penalties under ALS. IT service organizations that manage multiple service providers may wish to enter into Operational Level Agreements (OLA) that explain how some parties involved in the IT service delivery process interact with each other to maintain performance. Service level agreements are also defined at different levels: this document proposes a new language for service level agreements (SLAs) for dynamic and spontaneous electronic services. In a multi-organizational environment, it is important for service customers to obtain, monitor and impose QoS (quality of service) guarantees from service providers, usually expressed in the form of SLAs. Since the monitoring and management of ALS and the availability of these systems should be automated for economic reasons, we need formal language to define ALS. In addition, if suppliers and customers wish to sign custom-made ALS, the ALS language must offer a high degree of flexibility. AlS should have two components: services and management.
Service elements include the specifics of the services provided (and what is excluded if in doubt), the conditions of availability of services, standards as well as slots for each level. B service (e.g., prime time and non-prime time) may have different levels of service, responsibilities of each party, escalating procedures and compromise costs/services. The SLA metrics required depend on the services provided. Many elements can be monitored as part of an ALS, but the scheme should be kept as simple as possible to avoid confusion and excessive costs on both sides. When selecting metrics, check the process and decide what is most important. The more complex the monitoring scheme (and associated corrective measures) is, the less likely it is to be effective because no one will have time to properly analyze the data. If in doubt, opt for the simple collection of metrics; Automated systems are the best, as expensive manual metric input is unlikely to be reliable. Management elements should include definitions of standards and methods of measurement, reporting processes, content and frequency, a dispute resolution procedure, a compensation clause to protect the client from third-party disputes arising from breaches of service (which should already be included in the contract) and a mechanism to update the agreement if necessary.