<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8"?>
<rss version="2.0" xml:base="http://www.itskeptic.org"  xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/" xmlns:wfw="http://wellformedweb.org/CommentAPI/" xmlns:itunes="http://www.itunes.com/dtds/podcast-1.0.dtd">
<channel>
 <title>The IT Skeptic - analysts</title>
 <link>http://www.itskeptic.org/taxonomy/term/15/0</link>
 <description></description>
 <language>en</language>
<item>
 <title>Don&#039;t go DevOps with a big bang</title>
 <link>http://www.itskeptic.org/content/dont-go-devops-big-bang</link>
 <description>&lt;p&gt;When I see organisations move to agile ways of working using a big bang approach I always wonder to myself just how profound a grasp of Agile they have.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;And when I hear analysts recommending such an approach it is hard to understand where they come from.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;http://www.itskeptic.org/content/dont-go-devops-big-bang&quot; target=&quot;_blank&quot;&gt;read more&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;</description>
 <comments>http://www.itskeptic.org/content/dont-go-devops-big-bang#comments</comments>
 <category domain="http://www.itskeptic.org/taxonomy/term/234">agile</category>
 <category domain="http://www.itskeptic.org/analysts">analysts</category>
 <category domain="http://www.itskeptic.org/taxonomy/term/129">Chokey</category>
 <category domain="http://www.itskeptic.org/devops">devops</category>
 <wfw:commentRss>http://www.itskeptic.org/crss/node/2556</wfw:commentRss>
 <pubDate>Fri, 26 Jan 2018 21:38:04 +0000</pubDate>
 <dc:creator>skeptic</dc:creator>
 <guid isPermaLink="false">2556 at http://www.itskeptic.org</guid>
</item>
<item>
 <title>Abolish the CAB at your peril</title>
 <link>http://www.itskeptic.org/abolish-cab-your-peril</link>
 <description>&lt;p&gt;There seems to be a fashion for &lt;a href=&quot;http://www.itskeptic.org/dev-needs-understand-what-ops&quot;&gt;analysts to make rash revolutionary statements&lt;/a&gt;.  I reckon it is in their KPIs.  The normally-temperate &lt;a href=&quot;http://community.forrester.com/message/15756&quot; target=&quot;_blank&quot;&gt;Glenn O&#039;Donnell said:&lt;/a&gt; &quot;Abolish the CAB!&quot;.  That is - to put it mildly - a bit rash.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;http://www.itskeptic.org/abolish-cab-your-peril&quot; target=&quot;_blank&quot;&gt;read more&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;</description>
 <comments>http://www.itskeptic.org/abolish-cab-your-peril#comments</comments>
 <category domain="http://www.itskeptic.org/analysts">analysts</category>
 <category domain="http://www.itskeptic.org/taxonomy/term/283">CAB</category>
 <category domain="http://www.itskeptic.org/taxonomy/term/153">change</category>
 <wfw:commentRss>http://www.itskeptic.org/crss/node/2078</wfw:commentRss>
 <pubDate>Mon, 12 Dec 2011 05:53:45 +0000</pubDate>
 <dc:creator>skeptic</dc:creator>
 <guid isPermaLink="false">2078 at http://www.itskeptic.org</guid>
</item>
<item>
 <title>Dev needs to understand what Ops is for</title>
 <link>http://www.itskeptic.org/dev-needs-understand-what-ops</link>
 <description>&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;http://blogs.forrester.com/mike_gualtieri/11-02-07-i_dont_want_devops_i_want_noops&quot; target=&quot;_blank&quot;&gt;A recent blog post made me angry&lt;/a&gt;.  This is one cause of the Dev-Ops divide: ignorance of what the other side does.  I expect some of that in the trade, down at the coalface amongst Dev and Ops practitioners.  I don&#039;t expect it from Forrester analysts.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;http://www.itskeptic.org/dev-needs-understand-what-ops&quot; target=&quot;_blank&quot;&gt;read more&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;</description>
 <comments>http://www.itskeptic.org/dev-needs-understand-what-ops#comments</comments>
 <category domain="http://www.itskeptic.org/taxonomy/term/234">agile</category>
 <category domain="http://www.itskeptic.org/analysts">analysts</category>
 <category domain="http://www.itskeptic.org/devops">devops</category>
 <category domain="http://www.itskeptic.org/taxonomy/term/249">Forrester</category>
 <wfw:commentRss>http://www.itskeptic.org/crss/node/2006</wfw:commentRss>
 <pubDate>Thu, 10 Mar 2011 01:10:16 +0000</pubDate>
 <dc:creator>skeptic</dc:creator>
 <guid isPermaLink="false">2006 at http://www.itskeptic.org</guid>
</item>
<item>
 <title>Hornbill ITIL State of the Nation survey: Viewer discretion advised</title>
 <link>http://www.itskeptic.org/hornbill-itil-state-nation-survey-viewer-discretio</link>
 <description>&lt;p&gt;Hornbill has released &lt;a href=&quot;http://www.hornbill.com/itilstate/&quot; target=&quot;_blank&quot;&gt;an ITIL State of the Nation survey&lt;/a&gt; [registration required].  I think it is a good report, relative to the usual &lt;a href=&quot;http://www.itskeptic.org/crap&quot;&gt;Crap Factoids&lt;/a&gt; we see.  It doesn&#039;t try to get all worked up about any one number.  Sadly I think it still suffers from all the flaws we see in these industry &quot;research&quot; reports.  It does however point to one interesting result: ITIL V3 doesn&#039;t seem to be taking the world by storm. &lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;http://www.itskeptic.org/hornbill-itil-state-nation-survey-viewer-discretio&quot; target=&quot;_blank&quot;&gt;read more&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;</description>
 <comments>http://www.itskeptic.org/hornbill-itil-state-nation-survey-viewer-discretio#comments</comments>
 <category domain="http://www.itskeptic.org/analysts">analysts</category>
 <category domain="http://www.itskeptic.org/taxonomy/term/211">Hornbill</category>
 <category domain="http://www.itskeptic.org/topic/itil">ITIL</category>
 <wfw:commentRss>http://www.itskeptic.org/crss/node/1630</wfw:commentRss>
 <pubDate>Thu, 24 Sep 2009 09:21:48 +0000</pubDate>
 <dc:creator>skeptic</dc:creator>
 <guid isPermaLink="false">1630 at http://www.itskeptic.org</guid>
</item>
<item>
 <title>CMDB federation - making a dead elephant dance</title>
 <link>http://www.itskeptic.org/cmdb-federation-making-dead-elephant-dance</link>
 <description>&lt;p&gt;The analysts can beat the drums all they like - they won&#039;t make &lt;a href=&quot;http://www.itskeptic.org/itil-cmdb-skeptic&quot; target=&quot;_blank&quot;&gt;the CMDB dead elephant&lt;/a&gt; dance [I&#039;m in training for the World Mixed-Metaphor Championship].  I&#039;ve talked before about how the analysts are in a symbiotic relationship with the vendor industry: they have to talk new ideas up so as to have some change to write about.  Never has this been more clearly illustrated than around CMDB.  For one wonderful moment I thought an analyst was going to be skeptical about CMDB but then he beat the drum, or perhaps flogged the dead elephant [there I got another one in!]&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;http://www.itskeptic.org/cmdb-federation-making-dead-elephant-dance&quot; target=&quot;_blank&quot;&gt;read more&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;</description>
 <comments>http://www.itskeptic.org/cmdb-federation-making-dead-elephant-dance#comments</comments>
 <category domain="http://www.itskeptic.org/analysts">analysts</category>
 <category domain="http://www.itskeptic.org/cmdb">CMDB</category>
 <category domain="http://www.itskeptic.org/taxonomy/term/55">federation</category>
 <wfw:commentRss>http://www.itskeptic.org/crss/node/1570</wfw:commentRss>
 <pubDate>Wed, 29 Jul 2009 00:10:40 +0000</pubDate>
 <dc:creator>skeptic</dc:creator>
 <guid isPermaLink="false">1570 at http://www.itskeptic.org</guid>
</item>
<item>
 <title>Those who would promote CMDB should promote CMDB</title>
 <link>http://www.itskeptic.org/those-who-would-promote-cmdb-should-promote-cmdb</link>
 <description>&lt;p&gt;Much of what we read about CMDB is actually singing the praises of asset management, network discovery or other simpler technologies.  Other benefits attributed to CMDB actually come from process improvement and do not depend on the technology at all.  When all you want to sell is a hammer...&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;http://www.itskeptic.org/those-who-would-promote-cmdb-should-promote-cmdb&quot; target=&quot;_blank&quot;&gt;read more&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;</description>
 <comments>http://www.itskeptic.org/those-who-would-promote-cmdb-should-promote-cmdb#comments</comments>
 <category domain="http://www.itskeptic.org/analysts">analysts</category>
 <category domain="http://www.itskeptic.org/cmdb">CMDB</category>
 <wfw:commentRss>http://www.itskeptic.org/crss/node/1173</wfw:commentRss>
 <pubDate>Wed, 29 Oct 2008 21:14:50 +0000</pubDate>
 <dc:creator>skeptic</dc:creator>
 <guid isPermaLink="false">1173 at http://www.itskeptic.org</guid>
</item>
<item>
 <title>EMA CMDB research: where&#039;s the wave?</title>
 <link>http://www.itskeptic.org/node/732</link>
 <description>&lt;p&gt;Recent &quot;research&quot; (in the analyst sense of the word) from EMA shows that even amongst those who say they are working on a CMDB [which &lt;a href=&quot;http://www.itskeptic.org/node/663&quot;&gt;other numbers&lt;/a&gt; indicate is 10%-30% of the ITIL population], those with functional CMDBs remain a minority.  This confirms our recent assertion that CMS and SKMS and CMDB represent &lt;a href=&quot;http://www.itskeptic.org/node/607&quot;&gt;best practice blue sky&lt;/a&gt;.  There is nothing &quot;generally accepted&quot; about CMDB practice: about 2%-5% of IT shops I reckon.  In true market-hyping fashion Dennis Drogseth of EMA is fond of referring to the &quot;CMDB tidal wave&quot;.  Based on their own numbers I gotta ask: where&#039;s the wave Dennis?&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;http://www.itskeptic.org/node/732&quot; target=&quot;_blank&quot;&gt;read more&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;</description>
 <comments>http://www.itskeptic.org/node/732#comments</comments>
 <category domain="http://www.itskeptic.org/analysts">analysts</category>
 <category domain="http://www.itskeptic.org/cmdb">CMDB</category>
 <wfw:commentRss>http://www.itskeptic.org/crss/node/732</wfw:commentRss>
 <pubDate>Sun, 24 Aug 2008 23:57:40 +0000</pubDate>
 <dc:creator>skeptic</dc:creator>
 <guid isPermaLink="false">732 at http://www.itskeptic.org</guid>
</item>
<item>
 <title>BMC&#039;s own CMDB figures - The IT Skeptic </title>
 <link>http://www.itskeptic.org/node/1075</link>
 <description>&lt;object type=&quot;application/x-shockwave-flash&quot; data=&quot;/sites/itskeptic.org/modules/audio/players/1pixelout.swf&quot; width=&quot;290&quot; height=&quot;24&quot; &gt;
  &lt;param name=&quot;movie&quot; value=&quot;/sites/itskeptic.org/modules/audio/players/1pixelout.swf&quot; /&gt;
  &lt;param name=&quot;wmode&quot; value=&quot;transparent&quot; /&gt;
  &lt;param name=&quot;menu&quot; value=&quot;false&quot; /&gt;
  &lt;param name=&quot;quality&quot; value=&quot;high&quot; /&gt;
  &lt;param name=&quot;FlashVars&quot; value=&quot;soundFile=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.itskeptic.org%2Faudio%2Fplay%2F1075&quot; /&gt;
  &lt;embed src=&quot;/sites/itskeptic.org/modules/audio/players/1pixelout.swf&quot; flashvars=&quot;soundFile=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.itskeptic.org%2Faudio%2Fplay%2F1075&quot; width=&quot;290&quot; height=&quot;24&quot; /&gt;
&lt;/object&gt; 9:32 minutes (3.83 MB)&lt;p&gt;A podcast of the original post &lt;a href=&quot;http://www.itskeptic.org/node/713&quot;&gt;a back-of-an-envelope re-analysis of Forrester and BMC&#039;s own CMDB research&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;Several readers argue well that ROI is not the right measure for a CMDB, but nevertheless management want to know what they get for their money, and BMC&#039;s own research suggests &quot;not much&quot;.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;http://www.itskeptic.org/node/1075&quot; target=&quot;_blank&quot;&gt;read more&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;</description>
 <comments>http://www.itskeptic.org/node/1075#comments</comments>
 <category domain="http://www.itskeptic.org/analysts">analysts</category>
 <category domain="http://www.itskeptic.org/taxonomy/term/57">BMC</category>
 <category domain="http://www.itskeptic.org/cmdb">CMDB</category>
 <category domain="http://www.itskeptic.org/topic/itil">ITIL</category>
 <wfw:commentRss>http://www.itskeptic.org/crss/node/1075</wfw:commentRss>
 <enclosure url="http://www.itskeptic.org/audio/download/1075/bmc_cmdb_figures.mp3" length="4017462" type="audio/x-mpeg" />
 <itunes:duration>9:32</itunes:duration>
 <itunes:author>The IT Skeptic</itunes:author>
 <pubDate>Tue, 19 Aug 2008 10:17:15 +0000</pubDate>
 <dc:creator>skeptic</dc:creator>
 <guid isPermaLink="false">1075 at http://www.itskeptic.org</guid>
</item>
<item>
 <title>a back-of-an-envelope re-analysis of Forrester and BMC&#039;s own CMDB research</title>
 <link>http://www.itskeptic.org/node/713</link>
 <description>&lt;p&gt;This post has been &lt;a href=&quot;http://www.itskeptic.org/node/1075&quot;&gt;podcast&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;[Updated June 2009: the paper, entitled &quot;The Total Economic Impact of the BMC Atrium CMDB Solution&quot; &lt;a href=&quot;http://media.cms.bmc.com/documents/TEI-CMDB-FINAL-version-2-21-08-V3.pdf&quot; target=&quot;_blank&quot;&gt;is here&lt;/a&gt;.]&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;Several readers &lt;a href=&quot;http://www.itskeptic.org/node/712#comment-3241&quot;&gt;argue well&lt;/a&gt; that ROI is not the right measure for a CMDB, but nevertheless management want to know what they get for their money, and BMC&#039;s own research suggests &quot;not much&quot;.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;http://www.itskeptic.org/node/713&quot; target=&quot;_blank&quot;&gt;read more&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;</description>
 <comments>http://www.itskeptic.org/node/713#comments</comments>
 <category domain="http://www.itskeptic.org/analysts">analysts</category>
 <category domain="http://www.itskeptic.org/taxonomy/term/57">BMC</category>
 <category domain="http://www.itskeptic.org/cmdb">CMDB</category>
 <category domain="http://www.itskeptic.org/crap">Crap Factoid</category>
 <wfw:commentRss>http://www.itskeptic.org/crss/node/713</wfw:commentRss>
 <pubDate>Thu, 14 Aug 2008 07:23:24 +0000</pubDate>
 <dc:creator>skeptic</dc:creator>
 <guid isPermaLink="false">713 at http://www.itskeptic.org</guid>
</item>
<item>
 <title>Crap Factoid Alert: CMDB savings of more than $1 million per year </title>
 <link>http://www.itskeptic.org/node/709</link>
 <description>&lt;p&gt;&lt;span class=&quot;inline inline-left&quot;&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;/node/528&quot;&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;/files/itskeptic/imageskeptic/chokey_extreme.preview.jpg&quot; alt=&quot;&quot; title=&quot;&quot;  class=&quot;image image-preview&quot; width=&quot;200&quot; height=&quot;152&quot; /&gt;&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/span&gt;This post has been &lt;a href=&quot;/node/722&quot;&gt;podcast&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;span style=&quot;background-color:red;&quot;&gt;This is a CATEGORY 1 Crap Factoid alert from Chokey the Chimp at the IT Skeptic&#039;s Crap Factoid Warning Service.  &lt;strong&gt;THIS IS NOT A DRILL&lt;/strong&gt;.&lt;/span&gt;  Be on EXTREME danger alert for CF &quot;CMDB savings of more than $1 million per year&quot;.  BMC and Forrester are shovelling it. [Update: the IT Skeptic&#039;s own &lt;a href=&quot;/node/713&quot;&gt;assessment of the numbers  here&lt;/a&gt;.]&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;http://www.itskeptic.org/node/709&quot; target=&quot;_blank&quot;&gt;read more&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;</description>
 <comments>http://www.itskeptic.org/node/709#comments</comments>
 <category domain="http://www.itskeptic.org/analysts">analysts</category>
 <category domain="http://www.itskeptic.org/taxonomy/term/57">BMC</category>
 <category domain="http://www.itskeptic.org/cmdb">CMDB</category>
 <category domain="http://www.itskeptic.org/crap">Crap Factoid</category>
 <wfw:commentRss>http://www.itskeptic.org/crss/node/709</wfw:commentRss>
 <pubDate>Thu, 31 Jul 2008 22:31:38 +0000</pubDate>
 <dc:creator>skeptic</dc:creator>
 <guid isPermaLink="false">709 at http://www.itskeptic.org</guid>
</item>
<item>
 <title>IT analysts produce crap factoids - The IT Skeptic </title>
 <link>http://www.itskeptic.org/node/569</link>
 <description>&lt;object type=&quot;application/x-shockwave-flash&quot; data=&quot;/sites/itskeptic.org/modules/audio/players/1pixelout.swf&quot; width=&quot;290&quot; height=&quot;24&quot; &gt;
  &lt;param name=&quot;movie&quot; value=&quot;/sites/itskeptic.org/modules/audio/players/1pixelout.swf&quot; /&gt;
  &lt;param name=&quot;wmode&quot; value=&quot;transparent&quot; /&gt;
  &lt;param name=&quot;menu&quot; value=&quot;false&quot; /&gt;
  &lt;param name=&quot;quality&quot; value=&quot;high&quot; /&gt;
  &lt;param name=&quot;FlashVars&quot; value=&quot;soundFile=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.itskeptic.org%2Faudio%2Fplay%2F569&quot; /&gt;
  &lt;embed src=&quot;/sites/itskeptic.org/modules/audio/players/1pixelout.swf&quot; flashvars=&quot;soundFile=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.itskeptic.org%2Faudio%2Fplay%2F569&quot; width=&quot;290&quot; height=&quot;24&quot; /&gt;
&lt;/object&gt; 14:03 minutes (5.64 MB)&lt;p&gt;This is a podcast of the original article &lt;a href=&quot;http://www.itskeptic.org/node/544&quot;&gt;IT analysts produce crap - what to look for in analyst &quot;research&quot;&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;http://www.itskeptic.org/node/569&quot; target=&quot;_blank&quot;&gt;read more&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;</description>
 <comments>http://www.itskeptic.org/node/569#comments</comments>
 <category domain="http://www.itskeptic.org/analysts">analysts</category>
 <category domain="http://www.itskeptic.org/crap">Crap Factoid</category>
 <wfw:commentRss>http://www.itskeptic.org/crss/node/569</wfw:commentRss>
 <enclosure url="http://www.itskeptic.org/audio/download/569/IT_analysts_produce_crap.mp3" length="5916617" type="audio/x-mpeg" />
 <itunes:duration>14:03</itunes:duration>
 <itunes:author>The IT Skeptic</itunes:author>
 <pubDate>Sun, 13 Apr 2008 10:05:48 +0000</pubDate>
 <dc:creator>skeptic</dc:creator>
 <guid isPermaLink="false">569 at http://www.itskeptic.org</guid>
</item>
<item>
 <title>Analyst crap factoids as memes: nobody thinks any more</title>
 <link>http://www.itskeptic.org/node/567</link>
 <description>&lt;p&gt;There are a couple of fundamental causes underlying the success of analyst crap factoids as memes [a meme is an idea that propagates through the species like a gene].&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;http://www.itskeptic.org/node/567&quot; target=&quot;_blank&quot;&gt;read more&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;</description>
 <comments>http://www.itskeptic.org/node/567#comments</comments>
 <category domain="http://www.itskeptic.org/analysts">analysts</category>
 <category domain="http://www.itskeptic.org/crap">Crap Factoid</category>
 <wfw:commentRss>http://www.itskeptic.org/crss/node/567</wfw:commentRss>
 <pubDate>Sat, 12 Apr 2008 20:41:43 +0000</pubDate>
 <dc:creator>skeptic</dc:creator>
 <guid isPermaLink="false">567 at http://www.itskeptic.org</guid>
</item>
<item>
 <title>IT analysts produce crap  - what to look for in analyst &quot;research&quot;</title>
 <link>http://www.itskeptic.org/node/544</link>
 <description>&lt;p&gt;This post has been &lt;a href=&quot;http://www.itskeptic.org/node/569&quot;&gt;podcast&lt;/a&gt;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;span class=&quot;inline inline-right&quot;&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;http://www.itskeptic.org/taxonomy/term/130&quot;&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;/files/itskeptic/imageskeptic/chokey_extreme.thumbnail.jpg&quot; alt=&quot;&quot; title=&quot;&quot;  class=&quot;image image-thumbnail&quot; width=&quot;100&quot; height=&quot;76&quot; /&gt;&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/span&gt;Crap Factoids are pure B.S. that almost sound like a fact, and will be presented so often that everyone will think it true.  Let us look closer at a classic &lt;a href=&quot;http://www.itskeptic.org/taxonomy/term/130&quot;&gt;Crap Factoid&lt;/a&gt; where the results were deliberately skewed, then hyped up by marketing people, and the resulting Crap Factoid thrown to the winds like GM seed.  It is time people called analysts to task for this stuff because we all suffer the consequences when decision makers fall for it.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;http://www.itskeptic.org/node/544&quot; target=&quot;_blank&quot;&gt;read more&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;</description>
 <comments>http://www.itskeptic.org/node/544#comments</comments>
 <category domain="http://www.itskeptic.org/analysts">analysts</category>
 <category domain="http://www.itskeptic.org/crap">Crap Factoid</category>
 <wfw:commentRss>http://www.itskeptic.org/crss/node/544</wfw:commentRss>
 <pubDate>Wed, 09 Apr 2008 21:43:51 +0000</pubDate>
 <dc:creator>skeptic</dc:creator>
 <guid isPermaLink="false">544 at http://www.itskeptic.org</guid>
</item>
<item>
 <title>Crap Factoid Alert: &quot;Two-thirds of companies around the globe are using ITIL&quot;</title>
 <link>http://www.itskeptic.org/node/481</link>
 <description>&lt;p&gt;The IT Skeptic&#039;s Crap Factoid Early Warning Service has  detected another Crap Factoid (pure B.S. that will be presented so often that everyone will think it true) emerging.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;http://www.itskeptic.org/node/481&quot; target=&quot;_blank&quot;&gt;read more&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;</description>
 <comments>http://www.itskeptic.org/node/481#comments</comments>
 <category domain="http://www.itskeptic.org/analysts">analysts</category>
 <category domain="http://www.itskeptic.org/crap">Crap Factoid</category>
 <category domain="http://www.itskeptic.org/topic/itil">ITIL</category>
 <wfw:commentRss>http://www.itskeptic.org/crss/node/481</wfw:commentRss>
 <pubDate>Tue, 25 Mar 2008 10:55:28 +0000</pubDate>
 <dc:creator>skeptic</dc:creator>
 <guid isPermaLink="false">481 at http://www.itskeptic.org</guid>
</item>
<item>
 <title>IT Skeptic Awards 2007 - IT Skeptic </title>
 <link>http://www.itskeptic.org/node/437</link>
 <description>&lt;object type=&quot;application/x-shockwave-flash&quot; data=&quot;/sites/itskeptic.org/modules/audio/players/1pixelout.swf&quot; width=&quot;290&quot; height=&quot;24&quot; &gt;
  &lt;param name=&quot;movie&quot; value=&quot;/sites/itskeptic.org/modules/audio/players/1pixelout.swf&quot; /&gt;
  &lt;param name=&quot;wmode&quot; value=&quot;transparent&quot; /&gt;
  &lt;param name=&quot;menu&quot; value=&quot;false&quot; /&gt;
  &lt;param name=&quot;quality&quot; value=&quot;high&quot; /&gt;
  &lt;param name=&quot;FlashVars&quot; value=&quot;soundFile=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.itskeptic.org%2Faudio%2Fplay%2F437&quot; /&gt;
  &lt;embed src=&quot;/sites/itskeptic.org/modules/audio/players/1pixelout.swf&quot; flashvars=&quot;soundFile=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.itskeptic.org%2Faudio%2Fplay%2F437&quot; width=&quot;290&quot; height=&quot;24&quot; /&gt;
&lt;/object&gt; 14:21 minutes (5.76 MB)&lt;p&gt;A podcast of &lt;a href=&quot;http://www.itskeptic.org/node/430&quot;&gt;the original article&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;The IT Skeptic is pleased to announce our annual New Year&#039;s awards, inaugurated last year. These awards are presented to deserving figures and organisations in the IT industry in general and the ITSM industry in particular.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;http://www.itskeptic.org/node/437&quot; target=&quot;_blank&quot;&gt;read more&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;</description>
 <comments>http://www.itskeptic.org/node/437#comments</comments>
 <category domain="http://www.itskeptic.org/analysts">analysts</category>
 <category domain="http://www.itskeptic.org/topic/itil">ITIL</category>
 <category domain="http://www.itskeptic.org/taxonomy/term/28">itSMF</category>
 <category domain="http://www.itskeptic.org/taxonomy/term/32">OGC</category>
 <category domain="http://www.itskeptic.org/taxonomy/term/35">TSO</category>
 <wfw:commentRss>http://www.itskeptic.org/crss/node/437</wfw:commentRss>
 <enclosure url="http://www.itskeptic.org/audio/download/437/IT_skeptic_awards_2007.mp3" length="6040960" type="audio/mpeg" />
 <itunes:duration>14:21</itunes:duration>
 <itunes:author>IT Skeptic</itunes:author>
 <pubDate>Sun, 20 Jan 2008 09:16:37 +0000</pubDate>
 <dc:creator>skeptic</dc:creator>
 <guid isPermaLink="false">437 at http://www.itskeptic.org</guid>
</item>
<item>
 <title>McKinsey on IT Strategy; a combination of insight and gibberish</title>
 <link>http://www.itskeptic.org/node/261</link>
 <description>&lt;p&gt;Most analysts produce a combination of insight and gibberish, none more so than McKinsey.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;http://www.itskeptic.org/node/261&quot; target=&quot;_blank&quot;&gt;read more&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;</description>
 <comments>http://www.itskeptic.org/node/261#comments</comments>
 <category domain="http://www.itskeptic.org/analysts">analysts</category>
 <category domain="http://www.itskeptic.org/crap">Crap Factoid</category>
 <category domain="http://www.itskeptic.org/taxonomy/term/59">strategy</category>
 <wfw:commentRss>http://www.itskeptic.org/crss/node/261</wfw:commentRss>
 <pubDate>Sun, 24 Jun 2007 04:01:24 +0000</pubDate>
 <dc:creator>skeptic</dc:creator>
 <guid isPermaLink="false">261 at http://www.itskeptic.org</guid>
</item>
<item>
 <title>The CMDB Tidal Wave?  More of a ripple.</title>
 <link>http://www.itskeptic.org/node/198</link>
 <description>&lt;p&gt;Dodgy stats and talk-up-the-market hype mar two otherwise interesting articles on CMDB.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;http://www.itskeptic.org/node/198&quot; target=&quot;_blank&quot;&gt;read more&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;</description>
 <comments>http://www.itskeptic.org/node/198#comments</comments>
 <category domain="http://www.itskeptic.org/analysts">analysts</category>
 <category domain="http://www.itskeptic.org/cmdb">CMDB</category>
 <category domain="http://www.itskeptic.org/crap">Crap Factoid</category>
 <category domain="http://www.itskeptic.org/topic/itil">ITIL</category>
 <wfw:commentRss>http://www.itskeptic.org/crss/node/198</wfw:commentRss>
 <pubDate>Wed, 16 May 2007 22:21:45 +0000</pubDate>
 <dc:creator>skeptic</dc:creator>
 <guid isPermaLink="false">198 at http://www.itskeptic.org</guid>
</item>
<item>
 <title>The Emperor Still Has No Clothes: no evidence for ITIL</title>
 <link>http://www.itskeptic.org/node/111</link>
 <description>&lt;p&gt;We still call ITIL &quot;best&quot; and we still put up business cases for millions of dollars to implement it, yet there has never been any empirical scientific research to show that ITIL does better than, say, astrology as a framework for IT processes.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;http://www.itskeptic.org/node/21&quot;&gt;&quot;The Emperor has no clothes. Where is the evidence for ITIL?&quot;&lt;/a&gt; is the second-most-viewed entry on this blog.  Now an updated and revised version has been published as &lt;a href=&quot;http://www.itsmwatch.com/itil/article.phpr/3660826&quot; target=&quot;_blank&quot;&gt;an ITSM Watch article&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;http://www.itskeptic.org/node/111&quot; target=&quot;_blank&quot;&gt;read more&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;</description>
 <comments>http://www.itskeptic.org/node/111#comments</comments>
 <category domain="http://www.itskeptic.org/analysts">analysts</category>
 <category domain="http://www.itskeptic.org/topic/itil">ITIL</category>
 <wfw:commentRss>http://www.itskeptic.org/crss/node/111</wfw:commentRss>
 <pubDate>Wed, 21 Feb 2007 01:30:25 +0000</pubDate>
 <dc:creator>skeptic</dc:creator>
 <guid isPermaLink="false">111 at http://www.itskeptic.org</guid>
</item>
<item>
 <title>ITIL reduces costs by up to 48% - another crap factoid to beware of</title>
 <link>http://www.itskeptic.org/node/54</link>
 <description>&lt;p&gt;Time and again the analysts come up with these numbers using totally unscientific methods and before you know it they are gospel and popping up everywhere like bird flu.  I&#039;m not sure who&#039;s worse; the snake oil salesmen who invent them or the gullible twerps who repeat them.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;ooh I got all excited when I read this question in &lt;a href=&quot;http://www.infoworld.com/article/06/10/20/43FEitil_1.html&quot;&gt;an article on InfoWorld&lt;/a&gt;:&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;blockquote&gt;&lt;p&gt;
1. What can I do with ITIL that I couldn’t do before?&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/blockquote&gt;
&lt;p&gt;And the answer is......&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;blockquote&gt;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;http://www.itskeptic.org/node/54&quot; target=&quot;_blank&quot;&gt;read more&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;</description>
 <comments>http://www.itskeptic.org/node/54#comments</comments>
 <category domain="http://www.itskeptic.org/analysts">analysts</category>
 <category domain="http://www.itskeptic.org/crap">Crap Factoid</category>
 <category domain="http://www.itskeptic.org/topic/itil">ITIL</category>
 <wfw:commentRss>http://www.itskeptic.org/crss/node/54</wfw:commentRss>
 <pubDate>Wed, 01 Nov 2006 09:36:10 +0000</pubDate>
 <dc:creator>skeptic</dc:creator>
 <guid isPermaLink="false">54 at http://www.itskeptic.org</guid>
</item>
<item>
 <title>Debasement of concepts by IT vendors and analysts</title>
 <link>http://www.itskeptic.org/node/45</link>
 <description>&lt;p&gt;This article has been &lt;a href=&quot;http://www.itskeptic.org/node/63&quot;&gt;podcast&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;http://www.itskeptic.org/node/45&quot; target=&quot;_blank&quot;&gt;read more&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;</description>
 <comments>http://www.itskeptic.org/node/45#comments</comments>
 <category domain="http://www.itskeptic.org/analysts">analysts</category>
 <category domain="http://www.itskeptic.org/taxonomy/term/114">classic Skeptic</category>
 <category domain="http://www.itskeptic.org/cmdb">CMDB</category>
 <category domain="http://www.itskeptic.org/topic/itil">ITIL</category>
 <category domain="http://www.itskeptic.org/taxonomy/term/177">terminology</category>
 <category domain="http://www.itskeptic.org/taxonomy/term/25">vendors</category>
 <wfw:commentRss>http://www.itskeptic.org/crss/node/45</wfw:commentRss>
 <pubDate>Tue, 12 Sep 2006 00:27:27 +0000</pubDate>
 <dc:creator>skeptic</dc:creator>
 <guid isPermaLink="false">45 at http://www.itskeptic.org</guid>
</item>
</channel>
</rss>
