And the ASL offer was on the table

ITMaturity — Wed, 04 Jun 2008 11:55:12 +0000

I have it from a qualified source that the best practices from the ASL domain were presented to the authors of the books, specific Service Operation, and that they completely ignored the offer to fully integrate application management in the ITIL domain. We've had ongoing battles between application managers not willing to accept ITIL as a guiding framework and therefore splitting IT organizations down the middle on which would be the leading standard. Of course, some of the leading guru's in ASL are very opinionated (a quality very much approved in the Netherlands) and that might have clashed with the ITIL guru's.

I'm not a personal fan of ASL as such, I do not care much for the model. And I'm therefor very grateful to Mark Smalley (co-writer of the whitepaper from the ASL perspective) that he admits that ITIL3's lifecycle model can be considered overarching over the ASL version. That is a good start from the ASL BiSL foundation. And I am really disappointed that the authors of the ITIL3 books have not take the opportunity to return the favor and integrate the ASL best practices in the ITIL domain. That would have ended the discussion between application and infrastructure management and would have given the opportunity for a truly integrated approach to IT Service Management.

The IT Skeptic - Comments for "ITIL and ASL: divorced bodies of knowledge. How ITIL V3 failed to ask the experts."

And the ASL offer was on the table