I thought good  practice schemes have a natural death – when newer, better practices comes to the foray, the older ones gracefully fade out.

I started my journey with ITIL in V2 and never cared to look at V1 as it was almost naturally taken over by V2. I am not sure (disclaimer) if there was a planned and executed end of V1 from the source – OGC or TSO

Yesterday the official press release from OGC announced the phased withdrawal plan for ITIL V2. Points worth a note are:

  • The decision is based on a survey of around 1300 people in the industry.
  • The Withdrawal will be complete on 30th June 2011  (Just wondering is it a mere coincidence that the ITIL V3 revision is also planned to complete just before that? May be I am reading too much into it)
  • But wait, that withdrawal is with respect to the Publications (books) – though it “may be” made available later on a ‘print-on-demand’ basis.
  • The certifications will be withdrawn earlier in phases:
  • V2 Foundation to cease 30 June 2010
  • V2 Manager to cease 31 August 2010
  • V2 Practitioner to cease 31 Dec 2010 
  • Foundation Bridge to cease 31 Dec 2010
  • After that only ‘re-sits’ will be allowed till 30th June 2011.

    There are still some unanswered questions:



    An interesting experience during my initial ITIL V3 trainings – which I missed to write about:

    As a trainer, there are many situations where we have to stand-up and justify ITIL definitions and interpretations – all the more while justifying the correct answer of some of the tricky questions. This one was related to one of those situations.

    There used to be (not sure if it is still there) a question in the sample question papers in the lines of (dont remember the exact question): “Which of the following most closely defines a good practice?”

    One of the options said some thing like : “Some thing that help in driving organization forward“, while the correct answer was the option: “An industry-wide practice“. Many students used to select the earlier option as the correct one and I had to do a lot of justification and point to the courseware to say the correct answer was : “”An industry-wide practice

    Now, in that particular batch there were a couple of richly experienced senior managers, who went on unconvinced, whatever justifications I gave. Finally one of them gave me a statement, which almost threw me out of balance (almost literally :-)). (more…)

    It is high-time the Information controls (especially Information security controls) move into a mode of ‘Protecting’ (‘Provide and Protect’ – the phrase I borrowed from a colleague, as I liked it very much! or even better: “Protect and enable“) than ‘Controlling’.

    Many organizations get into a false sense of achievement in ‘control’ and ‘compliance’  by putting stringent information security controls (technical or procedural) – to the extend of restricting or handicapping the business itself!

    Here are a couple real-life cases I had experienced recently:

    • In a global organization where they hired me as a consultant – I had to go in to discussions with just a notepad; as getting an external laptop inside involved a huge procedure and a series of justifications and approvals! The team didnt find it ‘worth the pain’. Talk about productive output from an external consultant you are hiring!
    • A corporate where i was conducting ITIL workshops opted NOT to go for a prometric exam conducted in their premise (though we all agreed that could be the most optimal and cost effective option for them) – Since getting an external server connected to their network involved (in their words), ‘too much of procedures’ and ‘too much of pain to get all approvals etc’.

    Here we can argue on all the sides – justifying the actions of all parties involved, with fairly genuine arguments on all sides.

    Add on to this – a negative perception created in the mind of business users.  (more…)

    There is some heated debate going in many forums about some of the so-called “Progressive” or “ahead of the market” concepts in ITIL like CMDB which was in Version 2 as well as the much advanced version of it called “SKMS” in V3.

    While it is really a good thing for the industry to know better practices/methods/techniques which can enhance the ITSM, the main contention is that is it making ITIL digress or deviate from its intended purpose?

    ITIL, from the start is intended to be “Collection of Best practices for IT Service management”. Even ignoring the fact that the term is silently chaged into “Good practices” in many areas, ITIL is known to be that – across the globe.

    One of such debate where I contributed with my view is here: Link to itskeptic.org