CHAPTER 1: WHY THIS BOOK

As independent consultants, we are constantly asked the same set of questions:

• “Aren’t these frameworks for big companies only?”
• “Where do we start? What do we have to do?”
• “What do we measure?”
• “Is there a difference between ‘prescriptive’ and ‘suggestive’ when it comes to frameworks?”
• “Isn’t ITIL (insert any other service management framework/standard/methodology¹) better than COBIT (insert any other service management framework)?”
• “ITIL (insert any other service management framework) doesn’t work. What else ya got?”
• “If we use multiple frameworks, how do we fit them together?”

What consistently surprises us is the prevalent “one service management body of knowledge is better than the others” debate. The service management community seems to have polarized to a specific framework and developed a bit of “tunnel vision.” Currently, ITIL is the “most widely accepted approach to IT service management in the world.”² As robust as ITIL is, there are areas where the information provided is either lacking or incomplete (e.g. governance, risk, implementing a working service management system, etc.). Of course, this shouldn’t create a negative impression but it is an opportunity for the Service Manager to explore the other frameworks.

So, let’s level set. First, all service management frameworks support the goal of delivering quality services that benefit the business efficiently, effectively and economically. This is not an unknown to anyone in the service management field. It’s why they (and their organization) have adopted and adapted the framework of their choice. However, the quandary is this: no matter what framework has been chosen, there are gaps. These gaps become more and more noticeable as one explores all available frameworks.

Second, if we agree there are gaps, we also must agree the various frameworks all have specific strengths – there is a reason why there are so many frameworks – they were developed because what was available had gaps! This is just simple logic. Service managers then need to recognize the gaps and then exploit the strengths found in the service management frameworks. As in life, there is no time or place for bigotry!

Third, most service managers have taken one or more certification classes. Well done. As good as most training is, it is not a substitute for experience. The academic deployment of framework guidance is typically doomed from the start; often creating greater disruption than the original situation which was supposed to improve with the deployment of best practice. Knowledge does not equate success.

We also recognize there will be controversy around what we have written. That is the beauty of applying frameworks – there never is an absolute. As long as one can justify, document and demonstrate the benefit sought has been achieved, there is no “wrong.” Can the system improve? Absolutely and always – we are firm believers in continual improvement knowing the only constant in life is change. Thus we encourage you to look for and communicate those improvements.

The Focus

This book focuses on three of the many available frameworks – we’d love to include “all” of them but we do have to define a scope or we would never be done. Therefore, we chose (in no particular order other than alphabetical) COBIT5, ISO/IEC 20000-1:2011³ and ITIL. We felt these three would adequately support the intent of this book and offer a solid foundation on which to build. We will offer other frameworks for consideration where appropriate and encourage you to explore them to continually improve your service management initiative.

We chose these three for the following reasons:

• Availability of information
• Pervasiveness of deployment
• International acceptance
• A business need to create value
• Process orientation.

Please don’t interpret the inclusion or omission of any of the many service management frameworks as a value-based decision. Each framework has a purpose and benefit. The three we’ve chosen creates a manageable level of information for the purpose of this book which is to show how to deploy an amalgamated solution using the strengths of each. We will use caselets (mini case studies) to provide context – each caselet is fictitious but based on real events from our consulting careers. We’ve chosen some rather generic and common events to demonstrate how to combine the best practices.

Strengths

While each of the frameworks is described in the next chapter, we thought it appropriate to list the strengths as we see them for these three frameworks.

• COBIT5
• Ability to conduct process capability assessment
• Metrics
• RACI diagrams to show interrelationships
• ISO/IEC 20000-1
• Concise listing of what MUST be achieved
• Service Management System (SMS)
• ITIL
• Well-described processes
• Generic information around lifecycle activities.

Combining these strengths, you can readily see the following benefits:

• An overall management system for the service management activities (SMS)
• Business-based philosophy based on Deming’s PCDA
• Processes to support the lifecycle service delivery
• Interrelationships of processes for efficiency
• Descriptions of the various maturity levels within the processes (drives improvements)
• Measuring process performance.

The Five Anchors and Caselets

Chapter 3 will hold the main content – an analysis structure, which we call the Five Anchors, developed to ensure an enterprise-wide assessment. The Five Anchors are applied to five caselets to show how to not only analyse the situations but also apply multiple frameworks towards a common goal.

When used, this analysis structure, based on practical experience as well as guidance from the service management frameworks, is a consistent view into any scenario. We’ve then applied various frameworks to provide information and best practices that an organization can adopt/adapt creating a solution to benefit the business.

To assist in your learning, a comprehensive mapping between COBIT5, ISO/IEC 20000-1 and ITIL, can be found in Appendix A. We recognize the 37 processes described in COBIT5 do not necessarily create a one-to-one relationship with the processes in ISO/IEC 20000-1 and ITIL. We used each framework’s numbering scheme to point to specific references rather than regurgitate the information held within these frameworks. For full comprehension and to compare the information, you will need to view the full references.

¹ We recognize the many service management frameworks, standards, methodologies as well as the particular nature of those terms. For ease of reading, we will use the term “framework” to represent all unless we are specifically speaking to an international standard.

²www.itil-officialsite.com

³For ease of reading, going forward, we will refer to ISO/IEC 20000-1:2011 as ISO/IEC 20000-1.