The IT Infrastructure Library www.itil.co.uk
It is always illuminating to use COBIT as a benchmark to study ITIL. In recent days, ISACA has announced another solid Board, whilst itSMF continues its infighting (see below), APMG expands its empire, TSO goes its own merry way unanswerable, and OGC tightens control over - and profit from - what everyone thought was public property (blog coming if I can ever unravel it all).
It's been a few days since I started to discover the world of ITIL and to study for the Foundation exam.
In the book(s) there is a number of "Business" words, and I cannot understand what side of business do they talk about: "Business Capacity Management", "Business Service (Management)", "Business Continuity Plan", "Pattern of Business Activity", etc. Their definitions are really puzzling.
Ever wonder why OGC is so commercially-motivated? It's unusual for a government department in a country with a committed goal to put publicly owned data into the public domain. For one clue, check out this list from the BBC of the UK's highest paid civil servants.
I am prepping to take ITIL v3 Intermediate- Rel, Control & Validation and am confused on the difference between CMS and SKMS. The Service Transition book gives me the impression that the CMS is only the data & information layer of the SKMS and therefore the knowledge processing layer and presentation layer are not in the scope of the CMS. Is this correct?
OGC released a Second Edition of The Introduction to the ITIL Service Lifecycle Book on 12th May. It is too soon for this to be part of the "v3.1" ITIL Update. So is it a major revision? No errata, no change-log (of this book), no way of knowing if you need to buy an updated version or not. This isn't Mills and Boone - these are reference books. The lack of information is ridiculous.
Oh dear it's an outbreak. I'm once again debating on a forum whether the services in the Technical Service Catalogue are different services from those in the Business Service Catalogue. And it shows up recently on a major website. I consider this concept of internal IT services as nothing short of tragic. Anyone who thinks the two catalogues could list different services clearly fails to grasp the whole fundamental point of service management, which is to get everyone to think in terms of the service delivered to the customer. And there are plenty of folk think that way, judging by early results in our latest poll.
In an announcement last week, APMG have appointed a ninth Examination Institute. Readers will recall these are the companies that are licensed by APMG and in turn accredit all the 350+ training organisations delivering ITIL training. The EIs also administer the exams using standardised question content but their own tests and their own delivery systems.
A couple of years ago I wrote about how ITIL was heading for the top of the Gartner Hype Curve . I feel it is now deep into the "Trough of Disillusionment" .
Some time ago I purchased the official OGC ITIL book Building an ITIL-Based Service Management Department but I have not got around to reviewing it until now. Part of my slowness stems from my disappointment with the book, and partly I was holding off to see what others thought. I hold Malcolm Fry in high regard: I expected much better and I wondered if maybe I had missed something. Apparently not.
There appears to be more vendors certifying their products against more processes on PinkVerify than the OGC scheme. Why is that? What can OGC learn from Pink about making it easier for vendors? or does it show that PinkVerify is too easy? Does it matter?