The IT Skeptic - Comments for "Is ITIL there to describe what the experts know? Or is it there to guide those setting out on the ITSM journey?"

USEFUL advice

skeptic — Fri, 18 Sep 2009 21:16:31 +0000

Several responses here and on Twitter said effectively "ITIL shouldnt have to name every team". Once again the dumb users ought to be able to infer it for themselves that ITIL covers their own tools as well as the businesses. Well duh! RTFM dumbcluck - the answers are all in there.

True but if it is a common error (I sure see it a lot) and ITIL is supposed to be USEFUL advice...

comes up through the middle

skeptic — Fri, 18 Sep 2009 20:43:57 +0000

I forecast ISO20000 having a run at the front of the pack, possibly for several years, until COBIT 5 finally makes a strong surge and comes up through the middle. If they're smart, they'll make COBIT 5 compliant with ISO20000 to provide the substance behind the sketchy standard. And if they put enough meat on the bones, they'll whup ITIL too.

I sell ITIL

AndyIvey — Fri, 18 Sep 2009 20:31:05 +0000

“The instructor was stumped – why? – because he had never setup or even been involved in the change management process at an organization.”

This obviously isn’t universally true, but it sure does hit a cord with me. I see an issue with some consultants that parallel this. They’ve done plenty of implementations, but they leave before the full weight of maintaining an ITSM framework is felt by the organization. These are generally the same folks that consult/teach as if it is possible to be “ITIL-compliant.”

I try to substitute ITSM for ITIL in discussions with clients/employers, but the folks at FrontRange deployed a tool called ITSM that has muddied those waters. I now include MOF is almost any ITIL/ITSM discussion I have. I feel like “speaking MOF” is the best way to convey that there is more to ITSM than ITIL and that these are best practices and not products you buy and install.

Coming up on the inside

JamesFinister — Fri, 18 Sep 2009 17:26:18 +0000

I believe sales of the standard itself have been very healthy, and the associated training schemes are expanding.
The OGC model contract for IT services now presumes suppliers with be certified, and there are lots of interesting additional guidance in the pipeline that hopefully will make it more attractive to a wider audiences, for instance those who have not yet implemented all the processes or are unlikely to do so.

At the same time it is hasn't fallen into the ITIL, and possibly COBIT, trap of trying to be all things to all people.

On the downside the improvements are very slow to come to market, and it is light on the "how to"

Interesting discussion –

Visitor — Fri, 18 Sep 2009 16:09:18 +0000

Interesting discussion – especially regarding newbie’s and veterans of the IT business. I have always held the opinion that ITIL is an institutionalized framework with certifications available to anyone that pays to write the exams. ITIL education delivery is designed so that the student can pass the exam and get the certification. Experience is not a factor in ITIL certification.

I took the ITIL v.3 foundation course and during a discussion someone asked a question regarding the practical implementation of change management. The instructor was stumped – why? – because he had never setup or even been involved in the change management process at an organization. What does a newbie take away from the foundation course? – nothing but a piece of paper stating he/she is certified. They can speak the words – but they don’t understand them. This is not a criticism of the newbie, and it is not a criticism of ITIL, it is a criticism of the certification process.

ITIL is a wonderful framework -- but that is all it is. Developing ITIL/ITSM processes takes experience of successes and failures.

dark horse

skeptic — Fri, 18 Sep 2009 11:22:44 +0000

yeah ISO20000 guidance is the dark horse in the race. Right now COBIT has form

Don't forget the standards

JamesFinister — Fri, 18 Sep 2009 11:12:06 +0000

There is good and useful stuff being generated in the standards area as well, it just takes a lot longer to come to market

clear & standardized ITSM

skeptic — Fri, 18 Sep 2009 10:37:41 +0000

You're right.

As for a "group promoting clear & standardized methods and object of IT service management" - I'm betting on ISACA and COBIT 5.

ITIL is none of the above

mbuzina — Fri, 18 Sep 2009 10:10:01 +0000

For one part it not the sacred text of the ITSM consulting cliques, since the consulting cliques are not united enough to have a single sacred book.

It is also not the clear guidance for the learning, since it is written by members of the consulting cliques.

It is something in the middle, as anything that is pulled by so many different parties. At the moment the exploitation pull has increased. Vendors, some consulting companies and lets not forget APM are pulling hard to make ITIL the marketing fad they need to sell their wares. The itSMF should have been the representer of the usefullness faction, saying ITIL should be a clear guidance. Since itSMF seems to be conquered, their pull has decreased.

Maybe we should band together and form a new group promoting clear & standardized methods and object of IT service management.

Marc - http://buzina.wordpress.com

I agree that many IT

David Ratcliffe — Fri, 18 Sep 2009 06:58:32 +0000

I agree that many IT departments seem to regard themselves as "above the law" (my provocative way of saying "separate from the rest of the user herd").

But let's not blame ITIL for that. ITIL does not provide a definitive list of all user groups (departments). To anyone who thinks about this for more than a few minutes surely it's easy enough to connect the dots. The implication is clear in ITIL that anyone who uses IT services should be regarded as a user. I guess the key is to ensure that IT resources and services are treated the same way as everything else (put them in the CMDB? ooops!)

Having said all that, I suppose there would have been no harm in finding half a page somewhere in ITIL to make it crystal clear - "Don't put yourself above the law. Remember, you IT folks are users too and what's good for the goose (blah-de-blah-de-blah) ...."

Hey, now you're on to something. I'm all for any tactic that reminds IT folks they're not really special after all!

blinding flash of the obvious

skeptic — Fri, 18 Sep 2009 01:31:00 +0000

Here's another fundamental point newbies need to know that I can't find in the books: operational tools should be production apps like any other. IT are users too. Seemingly obvious but seldom the case in actual sites.

that would be a valuable addition to Service Operation 7.1

Another way of saying this is that IT provides services to itself: service desk tools, monitoring tools etc should be services in the Catalogue, managed and measured like any other