So what do you think? Is "certified compatible" different from "compliant"?

[The Skeptic]

Before reading this, see the recent article on this site and the definition of PinkVerify then give us your views

Apparently PinkVerify certfiication does not imply the product is compliant with ITIL, it only "verifies" "certification" that the product is "compatible with ... Service Support processes" "to ensure ITIL processes are effectively supported to at least a minimum level ... to help ...identify some of the products that at least meet ITIL’s guidance". And these are somehow different from "compliant" because compliance is a stricter term that implies measurement against a standard.

What do you think?

P.S. I like and respect Pink Elephant and their people (of whom I have met quite a few). They do good work and they are always very generous with sharing their IP publicly. I am not suggesting any dishonesty on their part. I do believe there is more marketing and less value in PinkVerify than in their other services and offerings, but I don't allow that to influence my broader view of the organisation and nor should you.
See the IT Skeptic site for more on what I was getting at.

[guerino1]

Hello Skeptic,

We seem to be playing in the same circles. It's my pleasure to see you again.

So, as an ITIL tool vendor, here's my perspective on this...

You stated that Pink certifies tools at the minimal level. Well, what's the "minimum level"? The OGC would have to definite "exactly" what the minimal level is and, as far as we know, they don't.

If you think about it, a spreadsheet is a tool that supports ITIL at the minimal level (arguably better than many tools for which their vendors claim to support ITIL). Should MS Excel be certified? Heck, if the enterprise properly records and manages its information on a napkin, that napkin would have to be certified, wouldn't it?

Many tools do many things. We, ourselves, do many things that other tools don't but which we consider to be critical for supporting ITIL. Would it be fair to say that because they don't do these things that they don't cover the minimum? Being that the needs of every prospect we deal with are different, I would venture to say that an enterprise's definition of it's minimum criteria for a given ITIL discipline is what that enterprise needs or can live with. And, if the OGC isn't willing to define the "minimum" in writing, I don't know that any vendor can.

Anyhow, I hope this information helps.

Best Regards,

Frank Guerino
CEO & Founder
TraverseIT

http://www.TraverseIT.com

[VaioBoyAus]

Originally Posted by guerino1

If you think about it, a spreadsheet is a tool that supports ITIL at the minimal level (arguably better than many tools for which their vendors claim to support ITIL). Should MS Excel be certified? Heck, if the enterprise properly records and manages its information on a napkin, that napkin would have to be certified, wouldn't it?

Many tools do many things. We, ourselves, do many things that other tools don't but which we consider to be critical for supporting ITIL. Would it be fair to say that because they don't do these things that they don't cover the minimum? Being that the needs of every prospect we deal with are different, I would venture to say that an enterprise's definition of it's minimum criteria for a given ITIL discipline is what that enterprise needs or can live with. And, if the OGC isn't willing to define the "minimum" in writing, I don't know that any vendor can.

Apologies if my post is so late, but I am in the midst of determining whether I should use my IT Service Transformation, Project Management and IT Sourcing Skills to become an independent consultant in Australia in Service Management.

Your statement "I would venture to say that an enterprise's definition of it's minimum criteria for a given ITIL discipline is what that enterprise needs or can live with". This cuts to the basic tenet of my Project Management mentors- It is the Customer who determines quality. So by extension, the Customer determines the level of ITIL compliance they can afford and stay in business.

Regards

Stephen Holland

[guerino1]

Hello VaioBoyAus,

Originally Posted by VaioBoyAus

t is the Customer who determines quality. So by extension, the Customer determines the level of ITIL compliance they can afford and stay in business.

Given that this is the case, now we shed light on one of the real ITIL dilemmas... "An enterprise (the customer that defines quality in yourstatement) can implement the absolute bare minimum of ITIL and now claim that they are ITIL compliant and have successfully implemented ITIL." This is very common and we see it all the time. Because the customer gets to define quality and scope, they get to define how much they do or don't implement of ITIL. If they choose to implement the bare minimum, of which there is no real definition for, they can simply claim they are ITIL compliant, as much as anyone that has implemented a great deal of ITIL.

Best Regards,

Frank Guerino
CEO & Founder
TraverseIT
On-Demand ITIL
http://www.TraverseIT.com

[VaioBoyAus]

Correct, so without an independent Audit of their "ITIL Compliance" whether you deploy a Minimum or a Maximum ITIL Compliance is a hollow statement. Even Certified Compatible is a loose and ill-defined concept.

One of the key criteria for me to determine if an entity is serious about ITIL/CoBIT or whatever is the desire, both expressed and culturally embedded, to not accept what we do today as the best, because what you do today can always be improved upon, next week, next year or whenever.

An interesting piece I found in some Gartner research was benchmarking as the tool to verify and validate service maturity. Not just benchmarking against a similar shop but also against other insourced and outsourced shop to determine if your services delivery is not just efficient (a commodity) but also effective.

Enjoy you submits

Stephen

[The Skeptic]

There is an irony to the fact that OGC have now unilaterally decreed that ITIL is indeed a compliance standard after all