ITIL: Don't shoot the message
It seems to me that ITIL is often very badly done (zealous, anal, officious, misdirected, overblown, dogmatic, theoretical, detached...), and people's bad experience results in them blaming ITIL itself. I've recently seen the effect of ITIL on a neophyte and it was positive and enriching: new awareness, new models to help solve challenges, hope for order in the chaos, a resource to help.
I point the finger at book-carrying door-to-door consultants, hype-merchant analysts generating their own industry, and tub-thumping vendors selling out-of-the-box snake-oil to the credulous (yes they share the blame). Don't shoot the message, shoot the inept messengers. Discuss.
[Moved up from comment below:
Yes I think it is always someone's fault when ITIL fails:
- The vendor oversells the tool or promises out-of-the-box process
- The consultant preaches theory and transforms nothing
- Management set unrealistic goals (e.g. "all the ITIL processes in 12 months" as Troy says), or don't fund the efforts, or don't provide other support, or lose interest
- The work is handed to contractors whose measured deliverable is paper produced and project milestones passed
- The buyer-practitioner ignores expertise or doesn't seek any at all and goes it alone
- Everyone ignores the people aspects and changes nobody
We all agree ITIL isn't a formula or roadmap so by definition it can't lead us to failure. We walk there ourselves.]