Warning don't try ITIL V3's SKMS at work

ITIL V3's Service Knowledge Management System (SKMS) is something to aspire to. But it is seldom a good decision to do it right now. WARNING: don't try this at work.

I think the word for the SKMS is "aspirational", something to aspire to.

Me, I aspire to twelve hectares of native bush, a Mazda MX5, and riding every railway on Earth with my son. Not unreasonable but there will never be a "business case", any more than there will ever be a business case for the process geek's aspriation to have everything nice and tidy, done right. Nice to have but nothing my wife is going to sign off on right now (actually she WOULD sign off on "nice and tidy, done right").

I would also like a deck round three sides of the house, and some concrete for the hillside behind the house so the hillside doesn't come join the house. Those would add value to the house but probably not a good return on the investment. And they are beyond any rational budget right now.

Joe asked

Is there a case that can be made to sceptical managers and budget-holders? For doing each part - the bullets in the original post are a good list - and for doing the whole thing as an integrated system? At the very least, can we say "if you don't do the SKMS you will lose X"?

If you don't have a SKMS what will you lose? Well, you'll lose information. At times you'll make mistakes that could have been prevented with a SKMS, or have to rediscover information that could heve been preserved in a SKMS. Will the mistakes cost more than the SKMS? I doubt it but that is up to the business case - occasionally maybe.

Then there is a second, less-often-asked question. Even if the business case stacks up, we live in a finite world. Is this the best use of limited funds? I would say even less likely than there being a good business case.

An aspirational object gives us an optimal model - something to steer towards, a final objective perhaps never attained but at least providing shape and direction to what we do.

Finally the book does not warn us about6 this. it does nto say "Don't try this at work". No, it (Service Transition) just says "a consistent set of high-quality guidance", "world-class Service Management expertise", "The aim of this publication is to support ST managers and practitioners in their application of ST practices", "This publication supplies answers", "This publication explores industry practices", "document industry best practices". Nothing about "some of this has never been tried before". Section 4.7.5.1 and a few paragraphs elsewhere vaguekly allude to SKMS as a planned implementation over time, but nothing about "WARNING: the next bit is a highly speculative future vision".

So, let us beware those who equate SKMS with Configuration Management Database (CMDB) or ITIL V3's superset of that the Configuration Management System (CMS) ["Are you the People's Judean Liberation Front?" "No f*** off, we are the people's Liberation Front of Judea"]. SKMS is to CMS as Windows Vista is to MS-DOS. No, as Windows 2012 is to MS-DOS.

So SKMS is nice to have, but it is seldom a sensible decision to build it now. It gives us something to work towards so long as we don't see it as a blueprint for CMDB (just as Bill Gates' house gives me something to work towards as I plan my deck).

And as for CMDB, I think my views are clear. Just start at the top of this article and substitute "CMDB" for "SKMS": nice to have, seldom a good business case, almost never best use of funds.

The monthly newsletter of the IT Skeptic: all the news on ITIL, CMDB and other IT topics that is fit to print... and then some!
Subscribe here. Privacy respected. No registration required.