tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-80748269392081920322024-03-13T22:49:46.400+11:00Lightweight Management of IT Services<i>IT Services 'Lite'</i><br><br>
This blog is an answer to Neil Gunther:<br>
"If ITIL is the CMIP (a heavyweight IT Performance data protocol), then what is the equivalent of SNMP (a lightweight protocol)?"<br><br>
There isn't one that I know of... So time to jot notes about what it would or should look like.steve jenkinhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/16064724730975745470noreply@blogger.comBlogger2125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8074826939208192032.post-67629536219006617562007-02-27T22:19:00.000+11:002007-02-28T00:36:13.303+11:00Limits to IT Services - QuestionsFor any sort of 'new' description to be accepted where it counts - in the Marketplace, it's going to have to fulfill a number of criteria. And before competition takes away the market...<br /><br /><span id="fullpost"><br /><ul><li>Who is going to 'declare', ratify or back the standard?<br />It has to be an existing organisation, and with some clout.<br />Could the IETF or ICANN be persuaded? If not them, then who?<br /><br /><li>It has to be 'accessible' to the people that will use it.<br />Barriers to Entry have to be low - or it will take decades to get used, even a little.<br /><ul><li>Cost of basic materials have to be low. Near zero is possible if they are published on-line like RFC's and W3C standards.<br /><li>The basic manual has to be short and not intellectually difficult. This has to be implemented in 'The Real World' by real, ordinary I.T. professionals - especially those who have families, commitments and outside interests.<br /><li>Training costs have to be reasonable - no more than a few hundred dollars per person, and something freely available over the net.<br /><li>Consulting, training and "Operational Evaluations" have to be available at modest costs.<br /><br /><li>There have to be <em>convincing</em> business arguments for change available for owners and managers.</ul><br /><br /><li>Supporting Software, Templates and proformas<br /><ul><li>'Reference' implementations need to be available - for free.<br />These can be as simple as spreadsheets and formatted documents - or real software.<br /><li>There are enough good Free Open Source packages available to use as a base.</ul><br /><li>Professional Associations. Somewhere to 'network', find good consultants, swap war stories, give those interested a place to learn more.<br /><br /><li>A viable continuous update process. Like the IETF's RFC process.<br />Like the Internet, any sort of standard can never be 'finished', only 'complete as of now'. The world keeps on changing - those pesky engineers keep inventing stuff!</ul><br /><br /></span>steve jenkinhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/16064724730975745470noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8074826939208192032.post-4381750090525897962007-02-26T20:22:00.000+11:002007-02-28T14:47:35.556+11:00"The Question" and Goals and ObjectivesHere's <i>The Question</i> from from <a href="http://perfdynamics.blogspot.com/">Neil Gunther</a>, on 'ITILOPIA' that started this thread:<br /><br /><b>"If ITIL is the equivalent of CMIP (a heavyweight IT Performance data protocol), then what is the equivalent of SNMP (a lightweight protocol)?"</b><br /><br />Most of the world gets along "Just Fine" in providing/running their IT environments/operations <i>without</i> ITIL.<br />Why would they want to spend $10,000-$20,000 per fully trained individual for something that may or may not be worth it? That will take 1-5 years to implement and cost $100,000's in product licences, consultant fees and setup costs?<br /><br />And something that <i>will</i> have a serious downside - the unpleastantness of 'formalism'.<br />Something that will give "I.T." the ability to push-back on management, and take away one of their favourite whipping-boys...<br /><br />And it fails the <i>What's In It for Me</i> test of management self-interest.<br />What manager, opposed to <i>owner</i>, is going to sacrifice a whole bunch of money and resources on something where the payoff is unknown and the consequences unpleasant (giving to I.T. the power of saying "NO" and making it stick)?<br /><br />I assert that <i>no</i> politically savvy manager will back that horse... It can only be "A Career Limiting Move", not beneficial to them.<br /><br />If that sounds cynical, is it really?<br />What do you want out of a manager?<br /> Bright, aware and capable...<br />The sort of person who knows what's bad for them, the company, the customers/users and the employees - most likely this is the order they care about things...<br />Why would you <i>not</i> expect managers to look after their own interests first and foremost??<br /> You'd have to be crazy, "brave" or idealistic to put yourself last... And it's unlikely that's a person you want as a manager.<br /><br />So The Question stands:<br /> What's a <i>Politically</i> acceptable system for managing I.T. Services/Operations that serves the personal interests I.T. manager <i>and</i> the business managers/owners?<br /><br /><b>Goals and Objectives</b><br /><ul><br /><li>Describe the problem.<br /><li>Outline the parameters of a solution.<br /><li>Propose some elements of a solution.<br /><li>Ideas for how to arrive at a published <i>Standard</i>.<br /></ul>steve jenkinhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/16064724730975745470noreply@blogger.com0