The IT Skeptic - Comments for "The ITIL syllabus is rubbish because the world doesn't care about quality"

Further evidence APMG is all about maximising profitability

skeptic — Fri, 01 Feb 2008 04:24:00 +0000

Further evidence that APMG is all about maximising profitability of each course, not maximising results for attendees:

This post on the itSMF Forum:

for IT Service Management courses two tutors should be present for at least 75% of the course duration ... Sat Jan 19th, 2008 The rules have just been changed to remove the requirement for 2 tutors

Case by case basis

JamesFinister — Fri, 18 Jan 2008 10:42:58 +0000

Hmm, perhaps, though if you look through a list of the ITIL 3 authors you'll see quite a few names who have the v1 qualification. The basic skill set that ITIL v1 promoted remains relevant today, and those who went through the training in the early days would probably claim that it was more focussed on passing on practical skills than in exam cramming.

It isn't the qualification which is out of date, but as you suggest in some cases thereis a lack of recent experience in both the actual delivery of IT services and also in the managment of out sourcing contracts.

Of course with CISA you only get the certification when you have both passed the exam, and got and retained logged practical experience. I passed the exam two years ago, so I'm running out of time to get the full certification.

Despite me earlier comment I will still be doing the bridging exam sometime this year despite the cost, really make me a better service manager than I am now having being promoting ITIL for 17 years? Well I hope it will give me a few ideas that I haven't got from reading the books yet.

V1 qualifications out of date

Visitor — Thu, 17 Jan 2008 15:37:03 +0000

Getting the bridge qualification would be a very good idea - the V1 qualification is about as relevant today as a qualification in loading quill pens with ink. It may have been impressive once, but it isnt today.

There are far too many people out there with V1 qualifications who claim to be experts in IT service management, many of them haven't done any hands-on service management activities for years!

Sixty bucks!?? What a ripoff

skeptic — Fri, 28 Dec 2007 18:14:56 +0000

Sixty bucks!?? What a ripoff when you can get them for ten

Foundation Certification

jjprunty — Fri, 28 Dec 2007 17:29:39 +0000

I discovered a website selling “study guides” for version 2 and 3 foundations exam from $20 to $60 that guarantee you will pass the first time. “You will receive 308 questions and answers - complete with thorough explanations. There is no better way to prepare for your Exin Certification and your upcoming EX0-100 Exam then with using our assembled Q & A package created by our certified Information Technology educational staff.”

Does this concern anyone?

Sums it all up

JamesFinister — Fri, 28 Dec 2007 14:37:28 +0000

We have a set of books that claim to be best practice but have been written with the minimum of public debate and exposure.

We have a number of individuals who are selling ITIL 3 as a personal success, no matter what anyone else says.

We have exams written without any regard to the needs of either students, employers, or trainers.

Happy New Year everyone!

My New Year's resolution - it was going to be getting the manager's bridging exam, after all I've got a V1 distinction and a sub 1000 certificate number....but perhaps I'll just finish off my CISA certification instead.

ATOs are not happy.

Liz Gallacher — Fri, 28 Dec 2007 13:44:34 +0000

ATOs are not happy. I attended a recent ATO meeting with ISEB as our EI, and the discussion was extremely frank. The vast majority of people there were very unhappy with the new certification structure, the syllabi, the poor quality mock papers etc. etc. However we were preaching to the choir - we all agreed with one another, but there was no-one there to take any notice. ISEB will pass on our comments, but that is all. There was a point, a year ago, when ISEB and EXIN were ion a position of strength as rewards APMG. That is when they could have had some influence. Once they both agreed to work with APMG, they lost any bargaining power.
Liz Gallacher
Freelance Trainer and Consultant

Managers Bridge results My

Visitor — Fri, 28 Dec 2007 13:35:58 +0000

Managers Bridge results
My source: I knew several of the people sitting it each time, and this was not the official figures, but what was being said by many afterwards.
As far as the distinction comment is concerned (and I too have a distinction and am dreading the exam) - I don't think that a V2 distinction means that a V3 pass is a foregone conclusion. The ITIL Expert is advertised as higher than the V2 Managers. It does mean, however, that the holder has a very good knowledge of Service Management, usually with a fair amount of personal experience. They have been able to write knowledgeably across the whole V2 syllabus, under pressure. They have achieved better than 95%(ish) of other V2 Managers exam candidates (already a group who mostly take service management seriously). So whatever the V3 exam is asking, these candidates are amongst the most thoughtful, knowledgeable, experienced service management practitioners anywhere. So you would expect them to apply all that experience to what they learn in the V3 books (which we were told built on and expanded V2, with a different approach to the same issues). If they are doing so badly, are the only people who will do well those without that depth of knowledge and experience, but with a slavish adherence to the V3 books? Why should you, as an expert in the field, have to "struggle to agree". Maybe you were right and the questioner-setter(s) wrong! Someone such as yourself may disagree with an answer, but not find questions "unfathomable".
I just do not have the confidence that the people setting the exam are the right people. They may have V3 knowledge, but not be expert in examination techniques.
The figure is expected to improve after moderation because it appears that even APMG realize that they have an exam that is virtually impossible to pass. If the majority of experienced service managers choose an answer other than the "correct" one then either the question is unclear, or their answer may really be better. So whatever method is used for moderation, results are improved.

The true purpose of a Foundation program

ianclayton — Sun, 23 Dec 2007 08:12:43 +0000

The true purpose of a Foundational program should be to test a person's grasp, recall and basic understanding of the key concepts and terms. It should validate the person knows what belongs where and what each what is by definition. Not how each what might be used. My own earlier blog on this topic Mission Impossible: Preparing Candidates for the V3 Foundation Exam?, and the blog entry made here at the Skeptic's site (Does simple math expose ITIL v3 Foundation exam flaws?) shout loud and clear on the inherent flaws within this syllabus and credential.

The syllabus is a dumping ground that despite a recent change and a promised overhaul amount to a simple need - READ EVERYTHING IN V3 and make a wish - your chances may depend once again on which exam paper you sit. The class should be 4 days. Following the simple math in the latter of the blogs mentioned earlier, given the vast difference in scope and application the Manager Bridge class should be two weeks in duration! The Manager Bridge syllabus should focus on the new approach and how to transform a serial process replacement strategy to one that is the size of Shamu the killer whale. Sometimes customer must feel like they are being seated in Shamu's red splash zone ("wear this, you are gonna get wet!").

The silence from ATOs, APMG, and the itSMF establishment is deafening.... does anyone care about the customer in all this.... our fellow 'professionals'....?

Manager Bridge - Kamikazes sign up here....

Ian Clayton — Sun, 23 Dec 2007 04:07:35 +0000

This is frankly as expected if proven true (source?). In accepting the comment as it is offered, I must ask why anyone would think a distinction at the V2 makes a jot of difference here (I too hold a distinction and approach the exam with trepidation). This is a new style of exam - 'complex multiple choice', with dramatically new content. A V2 Manager credential helps little here given the delta in both content and exam style.... and why is the figure "expected to improve after moderation"?

How many attempts does one get if the exam is not moderated....

The syllabus once again leaves it up to the ATO or individual instructor to develop materials to cover the vast philosophical difference between how a service manager would approach a service management strategy using V3 materials as opposed to V2. My comment back to APMG via our EI (ISEB) on the Bridge sample exam was that it required a rationale for each 'correct' answer in the answer key. I struggled terribly to agree with at least two answers and found two more questions unfathomable. Others were open to 'consultative license'.

There was no feedback or constructive comment from APMG. I have yet to find anywhere the collective comments of ATOs and any statement of what, if any adjustments were made. No new materials have been issued - thats a clue to me. The rumor was, from an instructor working for a company that helped author V3, that initial (pre-moderation) pass rates for the Foundation exam were 20%!! It seems the situation was saved by 'moderation', and here we go again it seems....

Needless to say, its going to be up to us 'seasoned instructors' to go first and actually build the bridge that others may use to cross. Does anyone at APMG realize that strong personal bonds are crafted between instructors and students during a Service Manager class. Many of my students become and stay very good friends. It is these folks I serve when preparing myself for this exam, knowing I shall soon have to commit to getting them through.

Whilst accepting the challenge I do feel rather like a kamikaze pilot strapping himself into a cheap jalopy..... goggles on!

Everyone is failing the Manager's Bridge Exam!!

Visitor — Fri, 21 Dec 2007 16:10:28 +0000

Rumour has it that only 1 person out of 17 from the managers marking panel(all distinction-level ) and only 3 of the 16 trainers who sat this passed it! That figure is expected to improve dramatically after moderation - but what does that say about the questions? And - if they are choosing the "wrong" answer with their depth of knowledge, maybe the "right" answer is wrong.

v3 Foundation = new awareness

tim.malone — Sun, 28 Oct 2007 23:07:25 +0000

Looking at all the material together (Foundation syllabus, exam samples, marketing material and draft syllabus for future courses) could it be an attempt to position the V3 Foundation program closer to what previously offered by V2 Awareness programs. Especially given the flavour of the actual V3 Foundation exams which are more concerned with your knowledge of the contents page rather than any actual meaning of the material. But criticism aside, I will admit it is a hard position to manoeuvre from. There was much missing from V2; with the V3 refresh now there simply isn't time in 3 days to cover the material well. From the OGC/APMG standpoint, if Foundation doesn't address all the major concepts then the material is being devalued.

It goes right back to basics by asking the question, what is the objective of the V3 Foundation program? Perhaps we will have to be happy with going partway to speaking a common language?

Amen to that!

Peter Brooks — Sat, 27 Oct 2007 06:56:59 +0000

You might add that the more competent you are in a role the more self critical you tend to be, even if you recognise that you are above average. I knew two guys who ran two restaurents in the UK. One was a black and white tourist trap and they ran it to suit an undemanding market "They are too busy looking at the beams to realise the food is c**p" the other was truly excellent, yet however much you tried to reassure tehm that you had had an excellent meal and dining experience they would still find fault with something themselves.
-------
I couldn't agree more! Humility, genuine humility, isn't about bowing and scraping (Uriah Heep wasn't in the least bit humble), that's for frauds.

Humility is an understanding that excellence is the only goal, but it can't be approached directly. Like happiness, if you try for it directly, and think you've got it, then you can be sure you haven't. Excellence and happiness are by products (epiphenomena, if you will) of the fight for the unattainable. It is a mark of greatness to acknowledge your own imperfections - anybody can be an expert in other people's failings.

Be fair, though, Version 3 is a very new baby and everybody is a bit protective of their new creations, it takes a saint to be happy with criticism of his most recent offering.

Zen works even in an imperfect world

Peter Brooks — Sat, 27 Oct 2007 06:38:30 +0000

Don't rail against the darkness - light a candle!

Yes, you are, I do agree, right about the decline in quality - though just how bad are Japanese products (that used to be the butt of many jokes about their poor quality) today?

I'm also a fan of Zen and the art of motorcycle maintenance, it's a great book (pity Lila isn't nearly as good).

Just because the world is going to hell in a handcart doesn't mean you have to follow. There is room for great quality. Remember, even Zen and the art of motorcycle maintenance was reacting against poor quality.

Capacity management isn't done enough, I agee, it is our responsibility to show the value of such long-term strategic planning to our clients.

Good craftsmen are coming back into fashion. My brother-in-law does well as a perfectionist furniture restorer, the tailor who made my djelaba in Dubai was no superficial air-head. Whilst you can get rubbish musical instruments from India, you can also get brand new instruments of stunning craftsmanship.

I do agree, though, that there is plenty of room for improvement. I don't understand how a business that would never hire a group of bungling amateur enthusiasts to build a bridge for it still allows such a group to produce its mission-critical software - it is up to us to show them the problem.

You might add

JamesFinister — Sat, 27 Oct 2007 06:29:00 +0000

Peter,

It would be nice to hear the odd suggestion of self criticism from those responsible for ITIL 3,in the same way that Jenny Dugmore is happy to point out possible shortcomings of ISO 20000.

Average is for the average.

Peter Brooks — Sat, 27 Oct 2007 06:23:38 +0000

The very sad fact of life is that despite are own estimation of how we compare to other people most of us are by defintion average at best.
---------
No, that isn't the fact.

From a statistical point of view it all depends on the population. Both the population you choose to measure yourself against and the population that you actually are part of.

Also, it isn't true that you 'average at best'. 'At best', you can, even if you are part of the population in statistical question, be two, three, or even seven (or more), standard deviations away from the mean. You can be so terribly bad as to be in the bottom one percent of companies or consultants - or you can be in the top one percent.

All shoemakers might form a normal distribution. Awl (sorry) of them are likely to be average.

If, however, you choose for your test population, the shoe makers employed by Lobbs of London, then even the most recent recruit is likely to be around two sigma better than the general average of shoe makers. Even though that individual, measured against other Lobbs shoemakers might still be at the very bottom of that distribution.

Don't let statistics fool you into thinking that you're just a number and it is in charge! It's the sole [sorry] that matters in the last [sorry again!] analysis. [Julius Caesar starts with a whole string of cobbler jokes along these lines]

IT content is to wisdom as McDonalds is to food

skeptic — Sat, 27 Oct 2007 03:44:00 +0000

Sorry I don't mean 'pap' to equate with "It is obvious. It's full of truisms. It's common sense.". Pap means crap. Mush. Worthless dross. Drek.

Any IT book has a lifetime of 2 or 3 years. Web content has a lifetime measured in weeks or months. All IT content is to wisdom as McDonalds is to food.

This is a malaise not limited to ITIL, nor to IT. People live in a leisure-suited, TV-informed fairyland. Try to get the average American to engage in a meaningful conversation for a full hour, or to read and comprehend an email of more than two paragraphs. Don't ever ask more than one question at a time. The modern world thinks in sound-bites, reads USA Today, gets sustenance from pizza, and finds personal fulfillment in Second Life, My Space or The Sims.

Read Shelley Gare's Triumph of the Airheads or Zen and the Art of Motorcycle Maintenance (aff). Once upon a time life was "nasty, brutish and short". Now it is stupid, superficial and far too long for the way it is generally employed.

Most of all, too few people care. Craftsmen starve under competition from nasty cheap imports. Nothing grows old because it is cheaper to replace than to repair. Who builds a house for their great-grandchildren to live in? Who wants to leave furniture for them? Who votes for an ugly politician who promises twenty years of austerity in order to build for the future? Who spends an afternoon reading and re-reading a really good chapter of a book?

And IT is at the forefront of such air-headed superficiality. Things change so fast nobody plans for the future. And people are so rushed and overworked nobody stops to really think about anything. IT people need their ideas pre-digested, packaged and professionally inserted. They rush from fad to fad, adopting them indiscriminately, chewing them like candy and discarding them half-finished.

I did try open content once

skeptic — Sat, 27 Oct 2007 03:15:00 +0000

I did try once and I'll revisit it in 2008.

But SM-CMM, OpenITIL, ITIL Wiki etc have all been spectacularly unsuccessful.

Quality is in the eye of the beholder

Ian Clayton — Sat, 27 Oct 2007 01:41:04 +0000

Skep

Well as you know I have not been slow in emphasizing the need for ITIL to aim higher in the quality stakes, especially when it comes to the Qualification Scheme (IQS). Don't put it all on the whole world. If you recall ITIL has had no competitor and a free run for all these years. When a competitor looms in the wings the itSMF crushes it, characterizing it as a renegade or unworthy alternative.

The ATOs, probably driven by the need to protect revenue streams, propogate the impression that its not the product but the customer! I can't tell you how many times since 1996 my questions regarding exam quality have prompted a response to the effect "no one else is complaining, therefore we must assume the problem lies with your students", or words to that effect.

I know of customer asking how and where they can complain and have numerous surveys implying the ITIL (v2) exams were suspect. The response has been the occasional quiet withdrawal of a sample or live exam paper - without explanation. This modus operandi has been repeated with the v3 Foundation samples (papers 1 and 2) being withdrawn.

The US customer has woken up to the rumors, the advice given by analysts, and the experiences of those sitting the v3 exams - they are aware quality is suspect, a likely victim of commercial interests. So its not the whole world.

As we expressed to our examination institute recently - a poor quality IQS directly impacts follow-on and associated business. The v3 market is flat and we have seen vendors involved in authoring the new books invest significant resources (that means money) in what amounts to a 'Lazarus marketing strategy', resurrecting the launch on hype that promises cures to almost any IT ailment.....

Quality will only improve when the pocket book gets hit.... we all know that fixing a product in production is an expensive proposition, so excuse us if we leave it to the owner of the product and instigator of the problem...

Average is for the average.

Peter Brooks — Fri, 26 Oct 2007 22:51:17 +0000

The very sad fact of life is that despite are own estimation of how we compare to other people most of us are by defintion average at best.
---------
No, that isn't the fact.

From a statistical point of view it all depends on the population. Both the population you choose to measure yourself against and the population that you actually are part of.

Also, it isn't true that you 'average at best'. 'At best', you can, even if you are part of the population in statistical question, be two, three, or even seven (or more), standard deviations away from the mean. Even if you are statistically part of the whole population, you can be so terribly bad as to be in the bottom one percent of companies or consultants - or you can be in the top one percent.

If a given population does have a normal distribution (in the statistical sense), we can be, individually ( and 'individually' can mean ourselves, or an organisation in the distribution) anywhere from N standard deviations from the norm in either direction to bang on the mean.

I agree, that, if you take the entire distribution you are more likely to be at the mean, but, as I say that depends on the population.

For example. In terms of measurable succes at Service Management we might have a normal distribution. That means that some organisations or people will be terribly bad, but others will be terribly good.

If, in this popuation, you are an ITIL, ISO20000, trained person with a long and sound management background behind you, then you are not a standard part of the distribution. Indeed, amongst your peers, you might be at the bottom end of the 'Service Management professionals' distribution. However, you may be far ahead of the overall norm for IT professionals.

In simple terms, you might be pretty bad compared to the membership of the ISM, but, compared to the norm of IT, as a whole, you might be two signa ahead of the mean.

So, if you are working in the general world of IT at the current state of play, you still have to see where you are in the distribution of Service Management professionals. It might be that the worst SM professional or company is still ahead of 90% of the general population.

In this last case, you are more likely to be around the mean of other Service Management professionals - but you may still be, in the wider scheme of things, 3 sigma better than any IT professional who isn't trained in Service Management.

In other terms, all shoemakers might form a normal distribution. So, if you choose any shoemaker at random that person is likely to be as good as the average.

In short, if you have a the Service Management certificate, there is no way you can be less than about 20% better than the general population of Service Managers. If, on the other hand, ITIL Service Managemen training was actually negative in producing good Service Managers, then, indeed, you might be, in your ineptitude, part of the bottom few percent of the Shoe Maker'a VILIRY.

Regards,

Peter

The IT Skeptic - Comments for "The ITIL syllabus is rubbish because the world doesn&#039;t care about quality"

Further evidence APMG is all about maximising profitability

Case by case basis

V1 qualifications out of date

Sixty bucks!?? What a ripoff

Foundation Certification

Sums it all up

ATOs are not happy.

Managers Bridge results My

The true purpose of a Foundation program

Manager Bridge - Kamikazes sign up here....

Everyone is failing the Manager's Bridge Exam!!

v3 Foundation = new awareness

Amen to that!

Zen works even in an imperfect world

You might add

Average is for the average.

IT content is to wisdom as McDonalds is to food

I did try open content once

Quality is in the eye of the beholder

Average is for the average.

The IT Skeptic - Comments for "The ITIL syllabus is rubbish because the world doesn't care about quality"