What Is an Operational Level Agreement?

An Operational Level Agreement is a documented agreement between internal teams within an organisation. It outlines who is responsible for what action and when, in order to meet shared service goals. These agreements support SLAs by clarifying the internal processes and timelines that keep customer-facing promises intact.

For example, your service team may promise to resolve a client issue within four hours. That SLA depends on internal tasks being done on time. An OLA might require Tier 1 support to review incoming tickets within 30 minutes, infrastructure staff to respond to escalated cases within 60 minutes, and engineers to patch critical systems within 90 minutes of issue validation. While your customer never sees these internal steps, they are essential to meeting the external promise.

Difference Between OLAs and SLAs

OLAs and SLAs both define expectations around service levels, but they focus on different relationships and audiences. OLAs target internal collaboration. SLAs apply to external service commitments. The absence of well-defined OLAs often sabotages SLA execution because internal teams lack aligned responsibilities or clear timelines.

| SLA | OLA | |----------------------------------|-----------------------------------------------| | External agreement with clients | Internal agreement between internal teams | | Outlines service performance for customer needs | Defines internal timelines and roles that support the SLA | | Tied to customer satisfaction or legal outcomes | Tied to internal coordination and workflow efficiency |

Why OLAs Matter in Service Management

In large companies or service-heavy environments, multiple teams contribute to a single SLA. Without clear expectations on who does what and when, internal confusion grows. That is where OLAs offer structure.

OLAs help guide the specific actions different teams must take to ensure a smooth service experience. When defined properly, they reduce uncertainty and push accountability back to the right people. For example, if customer support hits a wall due to a slow infrastructure response, a clear OLA shows exactly where the disconnect happened.

OLAs also support service delivery by cutting unnecessary delays. When engineers, support agents, and monitoring staff each know their responsibilities and timelines, work moves forward without repeated clarification or finger-pointing. Operational efficiency increases, especially when tied into ITSM frameworks like ITIL, where coordinated actions have real impact on service metrics like Mean Time to Resolution.

Writing Effective OLAs

A good OLA does not simply assign vague responsibilities. It clearly spells out the internal chain of actions needed to uphold a customer SLA. A few principles help here.

First, tie every OLA back to the SLA it supports. If your SLA promises a response time, break that promise down into smaller internal tasks that must happen in sequence. Include input from all relevant teams so that each side understands their role and agrees on the expectations.

Avoid open-ended phrases like “resolve quickly” or “as needed.” Provide timelines and concrete actions. Keep the language simple and avoid jargon so that anyone reading the document understands what is expected. Make sure the OLA is accessible to the people involved and reviewed regularly when tools, teams, or SLAs change.

Tracking performance matters as much as defining it. OLAs are only helpful if you know when they are being met or missed. Without transparency into OLA compliance, gaps rarely get fixed.

Example of a Practical OLA

Consider an enterprise software company that guarantees clients 99.5 percent monthly uptime. To meet that promise, several teams must work together consistently and predictably.

The monitoring team is tasked with ensuring alerts function around the clock and must submit audit logs monthly. Cloud operations must respond to alerts in under five minutes, even overnight. The DevOps team has a clear task to fix infrastructure issues within four hours.

Each link in this chain is accountable. Without those measurements, the overall uptime commitment would hang on vague internal hopes rather than firm coordination.

Common Roadblocks to OLA Success

While OLAs seem logical, many companies either forget to create them or write ineffective ones. One common issue is over-reliance on SLAs alone. Teams invest time refining external promises but overlook whether internal workflows support them.

Another issue is organisational silos. If teams build their own processes without coordination with others, OLAs become difficult to establish. That leads to informal dependencies, missed handoffs, or situations where no one owns the final result.

In other cases, teams do try to draft OLAs but make the language vague or overly complex. That sets people up for confusion. Even a well-written OLA fails if there is no visibility into its real-world execution. This is where tooling becomes crucial.

Tracking OLAs with the Right Tools

For OLAs to work long term, they need to be embedded into daily operations. That includes having visibility and measurement tools in place. If teams cannot see how their internal performance tracks against broader goals, then problems only get spotted after the fact.

Using workflow management tools like SowFlow, teams can clearly define steps, assign responsibilities, and track execution. Each step along the service journey becomes measurable. This not only creates clarity but also enables real-time insights into where slowdowns occur.

OLAs integrated into automated workflows prevent bottlenecks, reduce blame cycles, and increase response speed without adding unnecessary bureaucracy.

Conclusion

Operational Level Agreements are key to delivering on customer promises in a consistent and reliable way. They are not add-ons to SLAs but the structure behind them. Internal trust, coordination, and accountability only work when each team knows what is required and when it must happen.

Successful service delivery depends on more than external commitments. It hinges on the clarity of internal ones. Well-written OLAs map out that clarity and translate promises into action. Without them, SLAs remain intentions that no one can reliably execute.

If your organisation suffers from internal misalignment, inconsistent handovers, or breakdowns in meeting SLAs, evaluate whether your OLAs are clearly defined, implemented, and tracked the way they should be.

Frequently Asked Questions (FAQs)

What is the difference between SLA and OLA?
An SLA defines a service promise between a provider and a customer. An OLA defines how internal teams will work together to meet that promise.

Why are OLAs important?
OLAs establish internal accountability and prevent misunderstandings about who is responsible for what. They make sure each internal team contributes effectively to the end result.

Who should create OLAs?
Department heads, service managers, and anyone responsible for service performance should be involved. All parties contributing to SLAs need to agree on their roles in OLAs.

Are OLAs used outside of IT?
Yes. While common in IT service management, OLAs are also used in operations, finance, HR, and customer support to organise cross-functional support processes.

What happens if an OLA is breached?
Breaching an OLA can delay service delivery and cause SLA failures. These breakdowns often lead to customer dissatisfaction, so tracking OLA performance is critical.

Can I have OLAs without SLAs?
You can, but OLAs without SLAs often lack clear purpose. OLAs work best when supporting an external goal that gives the internal tasks urgency and meaning.

How often should OLAs be updated?
Update OLAs whenever workflows, responsibilities, tools, or SLAs change. Avoid letting them go stale, as outdated OLAs undermine reliability.