Search
Topics
  Create an account Home  ·  Topics  ·  Downloads  ·  Your Account  ·  Submit News  ·  Top 10  
Modules
· Home
· Content
· FAQ
· Feedback
· Forums
· Search
· Statistics
· Surveys
· Top
· Topics
· Web Links
· Your_Account

Current Membership

Latest: SmeleMype
New Today: 74
New Yesterday: 202
Overall: 130638

People Online:
Visitors: 49
Members: 4
Total: 53 .

Languages
Select Interface Language:


Major ITIL Portals
For general information and resources, ITIL and ITSM World is the most well known for both ITIL and ITIL Books. A shorter snapshot approach can be found at ITIL Zone

Related Resources
Service related resources
Service Level Agreement
Outsourcing

Note: ITIL is a registered trademark of OGC. This portal is totally independent and is in no way related to them. See our Feedback Page for more information.


The Itil Community Forum: Forums

ITIL :: View topic - ITIL v4 - You're the architect
 Forum FAQForum FAQ   SearchSearch   UsergroupsUsergroups   ProfileProfile   Log in to check your private messagesLog in to check your private messages   Log inLog in 

ITIL v4 - You're the architect

 
Post new topic   Reply to topic    ITIL Forum Index -> ITIL Discussion
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
BorisBear
Senior Itiler


Joined: Mar 10, 2008
Posts: 402
Location: Sunderland

PostPosted: Wed Apr 13, 2011 10:22 pm    Post subject: ITIL v4 - You're the architect Reply with quote

What would you change?


For me there's a whole lot of beefing-up required around Problem Management
Back to top
View user's profile
Flasheart
Newbie
Newbie


Joined: Jan 13, 2011
Posts: 14
Location: California

PostPosted: Fri Apr 15, 2011 7:52 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

In my limited experience I think ITIL v3 does a fair job of defining processes; but not enough on functions... perhaps a little more focus there
Back to top
View user's profile
drgroove
Newbie
Newbie


Joined: Jan 06, 2006
Posts: 12
Location: Scottsdale, AZ

PostPosted: Fri Apr 15, 2011 11:36 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

I'd prefer it if the next version of ITIL left other IT domains outside of Service Management along; for example, I don't believe ITIL should have any purview into Software Development Lifecycles or IT Asset Management. The folks in charge of defining ITIL should stop the IT land grab and leave things like SDLC and ITAM to experts in those domains.
_________________
DrGroove
ITIL Architect | Moderator, Devshed.com | Technology journalist
Back to top
View user's profile Visit poster's website
Fabien
Senior Itiler


Joined: Sep 27, 2005
Posts: 207

PostPosted: Sun Jun 05, 2011 2:51 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

I would actually go the other way. Those 2 specific areas are creating frictions in implementations and a better integration, especially in the application management space, would be appreciated.

But I do agree that ITIL shouldn't re-define those spaces. Instead, I think it should focus on making recommendations for successful integration.
For instance, how good is your release Mgt process if it doesn't integrate well with your software projects? Whether you use Agile or RUP, there needs to be a plan that helps operational teams absorbing large software changes.

Asset Management is an area that I know fairly well and it is true that there is no reason to maintain 2 different systems to keep track of assets.
_________________
BR,
Fabien Papleux

Accenture
Technology Consulting | Service Excellence
Red Badge Certified

Twitter @itilgeek
Back to top
View user's profile Send e-mail Visit poster's website MSN Messenger
RobRoy47
Itiler


Joined: Jul 26, 2005
Posts: 42
Location: Northern Virginia, USA

PostPosted: Wed Jun 08, 2011 8:50 pm    Post subject: Changes Reply with quote

1. Make Event Management a function.
2. Take Service Measurement and Service Reporting, and make one process
3. Separate Asset and Configuration Management
4. Take the development approval portion of Change Management, and move to Continual Improvement
5. Define Quality Assurance function
6. Shorten Process names, and do away with acronyms.[/list]
Back to top
View user's profile Send e-mail
StanleyLuces
Newbie
Newbie


Joined: Mar 20, 2011
Posts: 6
Location: Makati, Philippines

PostPosted: Thu Jun 09, 2011 8:02 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

One of the best improvement in ITILv3 compared to ITILv2 was giving emphasis to Service Request.. and creating seperate process for it - "Request fullfillemt" or "Service Request Management" (I still dont know which one is official) is a very good decision.

If ever ITILv4 rolls out I would like to see some changes on how Incident Management triggers Problem Management. In all ITIL versions, Problem Management is triggered manually - either someone raises it or reports it. I think recurring Incidents should trigger a Problem ticket "AUTOMATICALLY".. I have seen and experienced some cases wherein a recurring incident cotninous to be.. well just that- continous. Although the system gets restored to normal operations "as soon as possible" by restarting the server, It goes on and on because no one "manually" raises a Problem ticket. But if it is "automatic" - meaning if this same incident occurs lets say at least three times, the owner should automatically escalate it into a problem ticket - no ifs no buts.. then link those incident tickets to the new problem ticket.. then solve the issue permanently
Back to top
View user's profile
LizGallacher
Senior Itiler


Joined: Aug 31, 2005
Posts: 550
Location: UK

PostPosted: Thu Jun 09, 2011 9:49 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Sadly, and inexplicably, V3 downgraded Problem Management - The relevant paragraphs are headed "Incident and Problem management" and the time allocated in the Foundation class is very short - yet this was often the "light bulb moment" when people started to realise the benefits of the framework. I would re-instate it, and place even more emphasis on it than before.

The ridiculous division into Technical?Applications/Operations Management functions -which bears very little resemblance to modern organisations needs to be re-done.

High-lighting the touch points between Project management frameworks and Transition should have been included

CSI should not be a separate stage of the lifecycle - this is a logical nonsense -it should be included as part of each other phase - like Blackpool through rock.
Re-emphasise the CSI nature of Problem, SLM

Stop trying to take over every other management area - cultural or business change is NOT part of Transition, although success depends on it. - ITSCM cannot take the place of BCM

etc
etc
etc
_________________
Liz Gallacher,
ITIL EXPERT
Accredited ITIL and ISO/IEC20000 Trainer and Consultant - Freelance
Back to top
View user's profile Send e-mail Visit poster's website
Display posts from previous:   
Post new topic   Reply to topic    ITIL Forum Index -> ITIL Discussion All times are GMT + 10 Hours
Page 1 of 1

 
Jump to:  
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum

Powered by phpBB 2.0.8 © 2001 phpBB Group
phpBB port v2.1 based on Tom Nitzschner's phpbb2.0.6 upgraded to phpBB 2.0.4 standalone was developed and tested by:
ArtificialIntel, ChatServ, mikem,
sixonetonoffun and Paul Laudanski (aka Zhen-Xjell).

Version 2.1 by Nuke Cops 2003 http://www.nukecops.com

Forums ©

 

Logos/trademarks property of respective owner. Comments property of poster. Rest 2004 Itil Community for Service Management & Foundation Certification. SV
Site source copyright (c)2003, and is Free Software under the GNU / GPL licence. All Rights Are Reserved.