If you really see a great deal of difference between those two usages, well then please accept my apologies and correction of the same on earlier article

On the other hand, if don’t see much difference (at least not practically), then I am with you; I don’t see a major difference either.

Thanks to Ronny for pointing me to the document where there is a clear disclaimer on what the ITIL software scheme is NOT. You can access (if you haven’t already) the document written by Mr. Peter Brooks, here.

It states:

The OGC, APMG & SMCG all recognise that this scheme is not an ITIL certification scheme, and it is not intended to be. You can’t be ‘ITIL compliant’.
ITIL is a framework, a set of ‘Best Practice’ guidelines. It is not a standard. Consequently no  company, tool, project or person could be ‘certified ITIL compliant’.

You can access (if you haven’t already) the document written by Mr. Peter Brooks, here.

Phew, I am truly relieved to some extent. It really clearly states that you can’t be ‘ITIL Compliant’!  (Btw, it is a document released in May 2009, so it is my mistake that I missed this while writing earlier articles.).

However, if you read the official page on ITIL software Scheme, it is offering the tool vendors a ‘Process Compliant Badge’.  Not compliant to ITIL, but compliant to a particular (or a few particular) processes in ITIL. (Of course, there aren’t  any tool that covers all the processes of ITIL anyway)

The page also states under Benefits to tool vendors that:  ‘The ability to demonstrate quality reviewed software for compliance to ITIL V3’  (And they have already started using that in a big way!)

Now, coming back to the report by Peter Brooks which is linked from the official page:

It goes on to state that ‘ an individual process can be evaluated to establish if it has those
characteristics listed in the ITIL core books as ‘must have’ requirements for the process.

Do ITIL core books say what are ‘Must have’ in each process?

I could not remember any, and on a quick run-through again I could not still find any. If any body can help me on this, will be grateful and will stand corrected!

Another statement that can be easily misinterpreted is:  However, any toolset could be customized in such a way that it suits customer needs better but no longer complies with the ‘must have’ requirements described in the ITIL core books.’

This, looks like more of a warning that if you customized these ‘certified’ tools (which support the process out of the box), they are likely to go out of ‘compliance’.

Not sure if it is me, but I feel the whole documentation and announcements about the software scheme can be a little more clearer, so that the concerns I raised in my previous blog and shared by many globally can be effectively addressed.

I feel the need is to have more clarity and consistency on communication and making the objective and scope of the scheme much more clearer.

Otherwise, I still have to live with the nightmare of monsters that I mentioned earlier and expect that to come true any time!


ITIL® is a Registered Trade Mark of the Office of Government Commerce in the United Kingdom and other countries