Thanks, Scott for the Clarification. -- I am glad you did not take offense to the Sharp (and yes I know it was) context. I appreciate that... I know and agree with what you are saying here.. the problem is that there seems to be a Perpetual Moving in Standards, Take TQM, and Change management, then Atrium, then ITSM now ITIL within that ... Everyone is trying to Create something New and Well... Everyone knows that something new is obviously better... And since it is better and new.. We need it. --- not so... I believe there is nothing new under the sun.. and Yes I can learn something new to m and you.. and I can indeed modify my processes accordingly.. and yes sometimes there are better vehicles to do this with.. I just do not see that ITIL for the DOD is it.. I just see a bunch of folks Chasing the next new thing that some person (contractor?) has convinced a person of Influence (Senator?, General ? DOD).. that this is there answer to their problem.. ... So now they are putting all there chickens, eggs, and baskets together.. with the foxes, raccoons, etc...
This ITIL might be the answer to Some Stuff.. But I don't think from a DOD, or maybe even a Major Corp it is a good thing either.. Let say I have made some 1200 applications, in the old remedy system.. right ? and I have applications to track nuclear warheads, Parts for the F-16, another for tracking Sub Atomic Particles in a research lab... or Whatever... Now.. you bring in ITIL.. What is Remaining after ITIL is done? well I still have some 800 or 400 even applications, that do not fit.. Do I force them to fit? no.. >From the Corporate level, or even DOD.. I incorporate ITIL.. Prior I was doing business just fine.. People Resolved problems, Things worked.. But I have 200 separate servers, lets say.. and they have all there own different processes,,, But it is working.. AFTER ITIL -- I now have 1 site (web Based) for 3 million people.. (standards are the same - which is good) however.. I now am going to Track every object for 3 million people, and every time someone touches one.. generate a ticket and notify a new 200 committees to track the 3 billion objects, and get approval to have it touched.. and when it is touched to Slap someone.. Who is going to do all the additional work ? The workforce is Shrinking, and object list is growing.... and you still need the old remedy server, because there is functionality that does not fit into the paradigm.. My analysis.. Take every atom in the universe, and put it into ITSM and create a change message for each time an atom is touched.. no enough manpower to say yes or no.. totally uselss.. We do not get a profit, We do not make anything, We only spend money, and buy things.. --- Hope this helps some.... On 9/19/07, Scott Parrish <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Sorry Norm, but when you stated that Patrick was "100% correct", you went > from being a skeptic to stating a fact. So, now the burden is upon you to > prove the he is, in fact, 100% correct in his assessment. It's one thing > to > simply say "I want to see evidence," but it's entirely another to say that > Patrick is 100% correct. > > Of course change costs money. But just because it costs money doesn't make > it a BAD thing. "Well, gotta change my tires, they're worn out. BUT, I > think > I'll just drive on the rims because CHANGING THEM WILL COST ME MONEY?" And > the thinking that "This is the way that we've been doing it so we may as > well continue doing it this way" is pretty backward. > > > Scott Parrish > IT Prophets, LLC > (770) 653-5203 > http://www.itprophets.com > > > -----Original Message----- > From: Action Request System discussion list(ARSList) > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Kaiser Norm E CIV USAF 96 > CS/SCCE > Sent: Wednesday, September 19, 2007 5:46 PM > To: [email protected] > Subject: Re: OT -- Sort Of: Computerworld reports on ITIL > > With all due respect, that's a fallacious argument. The burden of proof > is > on the person making the claim, NOT THE SKEPTIC. > > If I claim, "I made a jet that outperforms the F-22," it is ON ME to prove > it, not on Lockheed Martin to DISPROVE it. > > And Pat is right--all change costs money at some point in the change > process. > > Norm > > -----Original Message----- > From: Action Request System discussion list(ARSList) > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: Wednesday, September 19, 2007 4:33 PM > To: [email protected] > Subject: Re: OT -- Sort Of: Computerworld reports on ITIL > > Prove to me how it doesn't. Don't throw out the common "Change costs > money." Show me the money that it costs. Prove to me where that there is > no > value. Tell me where Constant Process Improvement is a bad thing. > > SHOW ME THE COSTS! Show me the LACK OF ROI! > Don't tell me about what you have "seen" or "experienced" yourself. SHOW > ME > A CASE STUDY! > > > Scott Parrish > IT Prophets > > Original Message: > ----------------- > From: Kaiser Norm E CIV USAF 96 CS/SCCE [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Date: Wed, 19 Sep 2007 15:35:46 -0500 > To: [email protected] > Subject: Re: OT -- Sort Of: Computerworld reports on ITIL > > > Correct 100%. I would like to see rock-solid, irrefutable case studies > that show how implementing ITIL in a mature environment saves money or > delivers some other quantifiable benefit. > > I do NOT want to hear the old clichés: > > - Constant process improvement. > - Better management of services and service delivery. > - Improved integration of maturity models. > - Enhanced process standardization. > - Blah, blah, blah... > > No! A) Speak English and B) Show me RESULTS, not buzzwords. > > Show me NUMBERS! Show me the MONEY! How has ITIL made a large company more > profitable?! I want to see it. > > I'd especially like to see how a full implementation of BMC's ITSM suite > has made a sizable company more profitable. > > > -----Original Message----- > From: Action Request System discussion list(ARSList) > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of patrick zandi > Sent: Wednesday, September 19, 2007 3:26 PM > To: [email protected] > Subject: Re: OT -- Sort Of: Computerworld reports on ITIL > > ** > Gary, > Read the remarks and find some comfort.. > Change always costs money.. and More legislation does not make a better > worker... > Does anyone on the list remember Cecil Lawson ? I'll bet he is not an > ITIL > fan... > The Problem is that ITIL has now be Legislated from Congress to do it that > way... Why? > COMMERCE !!! The problem is the overhead on a companies manpower Really > Stresses it to the Breaking Point.. With little or no Return.. > I don't do processes, just because I can and because they are there... I > do them because they make sense, Save money, Save time, and Energy. > ITIL does none of those.. so I am against it... I am a RedNeck I guess.. > Why buy a new Maserati with all the latest smog, and computers, and bells > and whistles.. when a 67 Chevy will do the trick for 89K less.. Cause I > can? So who is artificially stimulating the economy now? Cohen in > congress > with a mandate that we use ITIL.. > Yeah that will save us money? Spending more always saves us money... 8-( > WRONG > CHANGE ALWAYS COSTS MONEY !!! > > The only reason we are spending more money, is because we are not content > and no one is standing in the Gap to say... No. > > > On 9/19/07, Opela, Gary L Contr OC-ALC/ITMA <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > wrote: > > ** > > Check out this article. I think it is about us - People resistant > to > ITIL, > but forced into going there. > > > > I'm not resistant to ITIL, I guess, I just want an easier way to do > it! > > > > > > http://www.computerworld.com/action/article.do?command=viewArticleBasic&art > icleId=9037418&pageNumber=1 > < > http://www.computerworld.com/action/article.do?command=viewArticleBasic&art > icleId=9037418&pageNumber=1> > > > > Thanks, > > > Gary Opela, Jr > > Sr. Remedy Developer > > Leader Communications, Inc. > > 405 736 3211 > > > > __20060125_______________________This posting was submitted with > HTML in > it___ > > > > > -- > Patrick Zandi __20060125_______________________This posting was submitted > with HTML in it___ > > > ____________________________________________________________________________ > ___ > UNSUBSCRIBE or access ARSlist Archives at www.arslist.org ARSlist:"Where > the Answers Are" > > -------------------------------------------------------------------- > mail2web.com - Enhanced email for the mobile individual based on > Microsoft(r) > Exchange - http://link.mail2web.com/Personal/EnhancedEmail > > > ____________________________________________________________________________ > ___ > UNSUBSCRIBE or access ARSlist Archives at www.arslist.org ARSlist:"Where > the > Answers Are" > > > ____________________________________________________________________________ > ___ > UNSUBSCRIBE or access ARSlist Archives at www.arslist.org ARSlist:"Where > the > Answers Are" > > > _______________________________________________________________________________ > UNSUBSCRIBE or access ARSlist Archives at www.arslist.org ARSlist:"Where > the Answers Are" > -- Patrick Zandi _______________________________________________________________________________ UNSUBSCRIBE or access ARSlist Archives at www.arslist.org ARSlist:"Where the Answers Are"
