classic Skeptic

As I have said before, probably the biggest gun in the ITSM skepticking field right now is Aidan Lawes. Once again he has turned the flamethrower onto the ITIL Software Scheme, with a blistering post on his blog: "people with vested interests increasingly seem to find a ready platform for their propaganda... The software assessment service springs to mind as a prime example. Purported to be launched in the interest of the procurer, it seems to be much more in the interests of the small group (OGC, APMG and SMCG) involved in its secretive development." I'll let you read it there. Apart from agreeing with Aidan that a standard that is secret is lunacy (the kind of lunacy that only the British could invent), I'd like to pick up on some points that Aidan didn't address.

[Update: For the record, the IT Skeptic does not believe that there is anything illegal or dishonest about the ITIL Software Scheme. I do allege that it has been conducted in a manner that is inept, naive, unnecessarily secretive and without proper consideration for most of the stakeholders. It seems to me to be about as far from best practice in setting standards as one can imagine.]

[Updated: I thought of a few more] Is anyone else troubled by the racial overtones of the current wave of anti-outsourcing and especially anti-offshoring sentiment? If you have read Introduction to Real ITSM you will know how scornful I am of outsourcing. What troubles me is that the recession-fuelled backlash going on right now in the USA seems to be focused on how you can't trust Indians and all foreign places are dangerous. This seems ignorant and racist. Anyone who reads the papers knows what an unsuitable country the USA is for doing business...

There is much excitement about the potential for Web 2.0, in particular what is known as the Wisdom of the Crowd. Wikipedia becomes the repository of all knowledge, Google search statistics are the zeitgeist of the times and MySpace is the face of the world. Page rank is a measure of authority. Corporations appeal to the public for solutions to problems. The ivory tower is replaced by the democracy of the commons; the proclamations of the cathedral displaced by the hubbub of the bazaar. Not so fast.

[Updated 28th February 2009]
Of course not. To look and listen around the IT industry these days one would think so, but there is actually more than one game in town.

The IT Skeptic’s little brother is so excited by the iPhone he wrote an article about it.

This article has been podcast

OK I'll bite. One of the nice folk at Evergreen, Jill Landers, posted "Top 10 reasons to implement a CMDB". I'll do the right thing and not quote it in full here so you need to go read that first. Then you can enjoy my "Top 10 reasons NOT to implement CMDB"

If you are a visual person like me you may find a diagram helpful in understanding just what ITIL Version 3 means, what has changed. The diagram has been moved to here (it's still free!).

This article has been podcast.

This recent comment on this blog "the OGC could have done a better job of communicating during the process" comes from someone - if it is who I'm pretty sure it is - who is well placed in the ITIL "elite". That is my #1 point in all my ITIL V3 postings.

All this British public service "you'll know when we decide it is time to tell you" stuff is not how new versions of all standards/frameworks are developed, and I don't think it is best practice.

This article has been podcast

At the US Pink Elephant conference, Sharon Taylor, the Chief Architect and Chief Examiner of ITIL, listed five common myths about ITIL V3. I thought I'd make it clear that none of them came from this blog.

A recent patent application appears to indicate that Microsoft is applying to patent CMDB. This issue is not attracting the outrage that it ought to. Next time you see your Microsoft rep, ask him/her WTF they are up to. And if you get anything like a rational answer, post it here so we can all understand.