Service Level Agreements and Operational Level Agreements represent two complementary governance instruments whose combined management determines whether the organisation’s security architecture can sustain the service commitments that its commercial relationships demand and whether the internal operational dependencies that sustaining those commitments requires are governed with the coordination discipline that the service delivery chain’s end-to-end performance needs. The Security Consulting function must advise on both instruments with the understanding that the SLA’s external commercial commitment and the OLA’s internal operational architecture are inseparable in practice: the SLA defines the standard that the customer expects and the organisation has committed to meet, while the OLA defines the internal operational relationships and performance standards that must function correctly for the SLA’s fulfilment to be reliably achievable.
Service Level Agreements: Security as the Foundation of Service Commitment #
The SLA is the contractual instrument through which the organisation formally commits to the service performance standards that its customers and partners rely upon for their own operational planning, their regulatory compliance, and their commercial relationships. The security architecture’s quality is the foundational determinant of the organisation’s ability to sustain the SLA commitments it has made, because the security incidents that disrupt service availability, compromise service integrity, or impair the performance that the SLA’s metrics define are the primary source of the unplanned service degradation that the SLA’s architecture must be designed to prevent and whose occurrence the incident response capability must be designed to contain within the SLA’s tolerance thresholds.
Understanding the SLA Risk Landscape #
Keep reading with a free Eristotle account.
Every document across our Bodies of Knowledge is free to read once you are signed in. No payment, no tier.
