ITIL V3 Benefit

A lot of speculation and considerable confusion surrounds the ITIL Refresh. I feel this is good because discussion promotes understanding. A friend of mine sent me a Computer World article discussing some of these changes, "ITIL Starts Making Sense in v3" which provides a very good perspective on the value of the changes to the ITIL framework. The ideas expressed are excellent and right on target. Another set of insights on each of the books comes from the ITSM International Portal. If you're interested, follow the thread of updates through all the books. I'll not restate what these authors have already expressed.

But there is a danger here that concerns many of my peers. Now, before I list these concerns, let me say, AGAIN, that the ITIL Refresh was long, long overdue. And it helps tremendously in clarifying some of the ambiguity and in emphasizing the interdependence of the services as critically related components in a cyclical, service-centric framework. I am not certain that my concerns, which are shared by others in the industry, could have been addressed fully and appropriately in the framework. Regardless of what I say or how I say it though, some will interpret my comments as criticism and resistance to the refresh. That is not the case.

The concern is not the structure of the revision but the apparent lack of understanding of some of the content that is presented. For example, the book I reviewed prior to publication gave, well there's no other way to say it, "lip service" to long-standing principles of quality. Herein lies the danger: there is "just enough" information provided in the texts to make someone potentially dangerous. Based on my review and documented critique, "some" of the materials addressed core concepts that lie outside the immediate domain of ITIL. That is fine. But these concepts were simply resurrected, referenced and reiterated, ad infinitum with no convincing indication that the authors actually had first-hand, practical experience using the concepts. It is my fear that because there is no depth, no richness based on first-hand experience, the concepts will:
1. Fall on deaf ears;
2. Be dismissed as too inconvenient or complex to apply to an ITSM implementation;
3. Be applied with minimal understanding of the intended consequences.

Any outcome can only hurt ITIL in the long run. Inexperienced certified ITIL "experts" may adopt the same shallow attitude and rush forward with "all the right words" and none of the practical application insight. I saw it happen when only V2 was available. I suspect there is even a greater likelihood today; particularly if the emphasis is on "upgrading" your certification and "complying" with the framework for the sake of compliance rather than understanding the concepts to a depth of competence that will promote a solid implementation.

A solid implementation requires considerable "soul searching" and extensive decision-making. Many organizations cannot or will not:

• Do what is necessary to understand why they're implementing ITSM;
• Face up to the truth from their customers;
• Follow-through with a solid program implementation framework based on the principles of quality;
• Make the hard decisions;
  
• Have the patience to "stick with it."

Lacking the depth of understanding of the quality principles underlying ITIL, an implementor has little foundation to maintain course once it's started. Of course, that only positions many of us to come in and fix the damage after a failed implementation. That is, if the client organization hasn't already tired of the struggle.