The IT Skeptic - Comments for "The IT Skeptic's Unofficial List of ITIL Version 3 Processes"

There are 35 'subject areas'

ianclayton — Sun, 14 Mar 2010 01:33:54 +0000

Can't resist this - the ITIL Qualification Scheme documents 35 subject areas, most of which can easily be confused with 'processes'. I urge you to contact an examination institute, APMG, or OGC/TSO support and lodge a question on how many processes if it is important to your professional career. This after all should be the process given the IQS is in fact a system sold to us punters on it providing feedback mechanisms....

I also highly recommend you take similar queries, concerns and items of confusion back to the source. The carbon footprint of the effort put in by joe public and volunteers to attempt to address misunderstandings and confusion regarding ITIL would shame the UN and Al Gore.

Why do professionals in the field assume its for us to solve - after all - its a commercial product offering.

Whic processes need to be 24/7

aroos — Sat, 13 Mar 2010 08:53:55 +0000

James

With the fresh shared pain of studying for V3 Expert exam I think I know how you feel about it. You are again right, ITIL does not say capacity management must be running 24/7. That was my interpretation and me being a foreigner could have misunderstood the meaning. I suppose we better leave it at that, I may have got the wrong impression but I suppose neither of us are very keen to start studying the damned books.

But this discussion leads to an interesting question. Which ITIL processes and functions need to be working 24/7 if the SLA requires that services run 24/7?

Aale

ITIL v3 Fanboy

JamesFinister — Fri, 12 Mar 2010 16:17:09 +0000

Aale,

You know what a big fan of v3 I am ;-)

I don't think ITIL says they will be managing it 24/7, but there are times when they have to intervene/ assist either because they have the specialist skill needed to carry out a non routine activity or, and this argument is stronger, they have the DIKW needed to make or contribute to an informed decision. What you don't want, I agree, is for them to be swamped by routine events.

I suppose there is an argument about the expected skill levels within operations on a par with the usual one about skill levels of the service desk.

I've never forgiven the operator who loaded the same tape twice when I was running London's crime statistics one month.

All right

aroos — Fri, 12 Mar 2010 14:06:21 +0000

James
All your points are good but somehow we seem to have a different view on the outcome, interesting.

a) yes, but this is planning
b) yes, I suppose so but not just capacity, there could be several reasons, thats why we have PM.
c) yes, I mean problem management, the process. As Diarmid pointed out, these are management processes, not doing processes
d) yes, capacity is involved in change

My point was that it should be a planning process and not an operational activity. It will be involved in planning event management and other operational activities but not be managing those activities 24/7.

Vinod
I agree with you too, partly you are saying the same as James, or he is repeating you as you were first;-) I would say that these processes are primarily planning processes but naturally they have to react if plans go wrong. In my opinion that does not make them operational processes as ITIL describes. Operational reaction is different from a quick update of plans. Or am I splitting hairs?

Aale

The role of capacity

JamesFinister — Fri, 12 Mar 2010 11:12:50 +0000

Ops aren't going to know what to monitor without someone telling them what is important, but even then they rely upon the specialist knowledge of capacity management to know how to react - for instance you don't want to end up with a domino failure.

As for your example - well I can see lots of reasons for capacity management involvement.

a) Capacity management should have determined the capacity requirements for the back ups and been receiving reports to let them know if their estimates of the space required and the space available were still valid.

b) The first time it happens should have triggered some capacity management activity to determine whether or not there was a potential problem, rather than just waiting for it to happen again.

c) "Problem management finds an error" Do they? Do you know problem managers who carry out code reviews? The problem management investigation, which will involve capacity management in this case, will find an error, but problem management is reliant on the relevant specialists to do the investigating.

d)Capacity management will obviously need to be involved in testing and approval of the new change to ensure it has eradicated the adverse impact on capacity management, and has not introduced new ones. They would also probably want to reconsider the trigger points for event management.

Threshold and exception

vinodka — Fri, 12 Mar 2010 09:26:35 +0000

Hi Aale,

I think there is a slightly difference in scenarios where the ITIL description fits in:

it says : "Responding to all capacity-related ‘threshold’ events and instigating corrective action"
So in the same scenario what you have described, let me add this perspective:
Capacity management has put in place thresholds for the disk space on the critical server - let us say 75% - on reaching that they need to (proactively) plan and implement upgrade to the server. Thus they can avoid an incident (and associated business impact) from occuring.
Now, they pass it on to event management to monitor. Once the event has occured, (i.e, the disk utilization reaches or crosses 75%), event management process will understand the significance and alert Capacity managment - so that they can plan and upgrade the disk space (or do some tuning/optimization, if feasible). So the actual response to this event is happening within Capacity management.
i think in this scenario, the flow of process will be: Event management --> Capacity management --> Change management.

The example that you mentioned is an 'exception' scenario, and hence it is moving to Incident management. The scenario I am adding above is a 'threshold' event scenario which (in my interpretation) is the intention of the above responsibility mentioned by ITIL.

Considering such scanrios (there are many), I dont think processes like capacity , availability, continuity and security can simply be restricted to planning perspective alone...

Vinod
www.itserviceview.com
www.wings2i.com

Clarity, please

aroos — Fri, 12 Mar 2010 08:44:04 +0000

No, I think there are quite enough operational processes in there without capacity management getting in. Monitoring is a ops job and reacting is event management. And who can say that a capacity event is a capacity issue? Let's look at an example. Critical application runs out of disk space during backup operation. Ops fixes situation and documents the incident. The situation repeats and a problem tickect is created. Problem management finds an error in application code. Code is fixed by change. What is the role of capacity management here?

This is not straight ITIL V2 or V3 but I think it would make a lot of sense to have capacity management in a pure planning role. It should be a function and/or a capability which ensures that there is enough capacity to run the business and also to handle unusual situations. It's connections to ops would be via problem and change management. Nothing prevents the capacity expert acting in an incident or problem management role if necessary but they should then be following the rules of that process.

Aale

The new training scheme

JamesFinister — Thu, 11 Mar 2010 19:20:19 +0000

Even a process centric view would allow capacity management to do the monitoring and detection part of incident management, wouldn't it? Functionally I would see ops doing the actual monitoring with capacity management, as a technical team, intervening when required to take corrective action or promote changes.

With four out of nine of the new intermediate courses based around capabilities I hope somebody understands they are important.

They are talking about process

aroos — Thu, 11 Mar 2010 17:10:34 +0000

That chapter is about process activities. If we were talking about a capability, then it would be ok. But is there any talk about capabilities outside Service Strategy book? I have a strong suspicion that the authors of the books did not have access to the other books.

Maybe it could even work as a function but I would not have two functions monitoring Ops.

Aale

You can make it fit, sort of.

JamesFinister — Thu, 11 Mar 2010 15:50:35 +0000

As usual we could debate whether capacity management as referred to here is a process,a function or capability. Incidentally is it just me or has the move to thinking about capabilities in v3, which I thought was a real advance, been quietly forgotten about by everyone who doesn't get it?

Anyway someone has to monitor the operational capacity levels - functionally I suppose that is Operations operating with procedures provided by capacity management, which could include needing to refer it back to capacity management as part of event management - and if the event is an "exception" then they get involved as part of the incident management process.

Aargh

aroos — Thu, 11 Mar 2010 08:30:58 +0000

Very true. Here is one more example: (I'm again trying again to write V3 Foundation which seems to be a never ending story.)

Did you know that Capacity Management has a reactive part that does Monitoring and Event Management?

"The reactive activities of Capacity Management should include:
■ Monitoring, measuring, reporting and reviewing the current performance of both services and components
■ Responding to all capacity-related ‘threshold’ events and instigating corrective action"

The lifecycle concept of separating design and operation was not clear to the authors. I mean the route should be more like: Event & Incident management -> Problem management -> Change management -> Capacity management.

Aale

unfortunately have to agree

Michael Speller — Sat, 06 Mar 2010 22:53:06 +0000

Unfortunately the lack of homogeneity and differing maturity levels in V3 go along with a lot of inconsistencies which cause a lot of additional problems and misunderstandings during process "real life" implementations and usually lead to a very time consuming process of re-co-ordination ....

OGC outsourced the writing

aroos — Mon, 10 Aug 2009 11:14:08 +0000

Agree with your comment.

I believe the outsourcing was the problem. Five different companies created very different books and ignored each other. Reviewers had very little time to comment and generally they saw only one book. The number of stupid errors proves that the review was not very efficient. I suppose at that time it was a question of lack of time, they were already delayed.

In the end Sharon Taylor & co had to publish a mess and declare it a success. By that time the Industry (training & consulting) were selling the new stuff so there was no way anobody could back out. I see a glimmer of light in the new 3.4 Foundation curriculum which tries to sort out the material in to valuable, useful and scrap.

Aale

only explanation

skeptic — Mon, 10 Aug 2009 08:34:00 +0000

My only explanation is this one
... or maybe this one

Clarity

David Pratten — Mon, 10 Aug 2009 07:46:36 +0000

Hi Skep,

'been enjoying reading your blog with the comment trail often being very informative. I have just finished studying for the Service Capability OSA exam with Marco at Charles Sturt University and highly recommend it.

You wrote: "ITIL V3 .... processes .... are avoided and obfuscated, sometimes called elements, jumbled up with functions." My experience of the ITILV3 SO book is in line with this. The SO book is a "dog's breakfast" with mixing of categories and inconsistent usage of terminology. Your post on processes above showed me that the issues are not limited to the SO book!

I am puzzled. ITIL is now in its third generation. How is it possible that these kinds of issues exist?

Is it lack of resources?
Lack of interest in consistency? Is there a benefit to the publisher in confusion?
Is it a symptom of lack of unity of governance in the ITIL development process?

Is the ITIL jumble a feature or a bug?

ITIL processes and functions categorized

aroos — Wed, 29 Jul 2009 08:43:06 +0000

The 2009 syllabus edition of ITIL V3 Foundation handook gives a list of V3 processes and Functions and what is best: it categorizes them in three classes, Key, Required and Pass.

The processes to be passed are these:
7-step Improvement process
Evaluation
Service Measurement
Service Portfolio Management
Service Reporting
Service Validation and testing
Service Strategy
Transition Planning and Support

Important processes and functions are these:
Change Management
Incident Management
Problem Management
Configuration Management
Service Desk

I would have added one or two to the Pass list but I think this is actually a great step forward and I fully agree with list of important processes.
Aale

Hmmmm

Miles N — Mon, 13 Jul 2009 09:57:53 +0000

Maybe we should apply a process (or a function) to work it out - maybe some CSI perhaps!

CSI Process Elements?

skeptic — Sun, 12 Jul 2009 09:49:00 +0000

Hmmm. Which are the three processes in CSI KEG then? There are five headings under section 4.6 CSI Process Elements.

The ITIL authors opinion on processes.

Michael Imhoff Nielsen — Sun, 12 Jul 2009 09:11:36 +0000

The only source I've seen where the 10 authors of the five core publications clearly has stated what they think are the processes is in the 5 Key Elemet Guides. The sum is 26 (SS 4, SD 7, ST 7, SO 5 and CSI 3). In addition the 4 functions.

The IT Skeptic - Comments for "The IT Skeptic&#039;s Unofficial List of ITIL Version 3 Processes"

There are 35 'subject areas'

Whic processes need to be 24/7

ITIL v3 Fanboy

All right

The role of capacity

Threshold and exception

Clarity, please

The new training scheme

They are talking about process

You can make it fit, sort of.

Aargh

unfortunately have to agree

OGC outsourced the writing

only explanation

Clarity

ITIL processes and functions categorized

Hmmmm

CSI Process Elements?

The ITIL authors opinion on processes.

The IT Skeptic - Comments for "The IT Skeptic's Unofficial List of ITIL Version 3 Processes"