People are starting to realise how different ITIL Version 3 ("The Refresh") is from ITIL Version 2, and how much more extensive the scope and ideas are. It is all good, but are the public prepared for it?

There is no doubt that the re-engineering has been extensive. My recent diagram makes that clear. A bit like a DOS-based command-line-driven utility being rewritten as a Windows GUI with workflow. The original routines are still in there somewhere but the manuals sure look different!

Personally I think it is a good move - there had to be a quantum step and one assumes it is aligned with the majority of the feedback (though how would we form our own conclusions on that?). People hate change so there will be much howling and gnashing of teeth, but in a few years I think we will view V2 as quaint.

What is interesting for me, and more questionable, is the soft-peddle approach to revealing all this. It may or may not be the best way to ease the public into V3. Certainly the party line is that it is "same old processes, a few more, certifications still count, and some lifecycle". I've looked closer at that in "Sharon Taylor's five common myths about ITIL Version 3". Sooner or later it is going to dawn on people that they do need to retrain (upgrade), they do possibly need to change the way they do things (service lifecycle), and there are more than twice as many processes to learn and implement. Is it best practice cultural change to play it down in advance rather than getting them used to the idea?