Scott, I agree, it would be way to harsh to bash or fear ITIL without any arguments. I'm not sure where this comes from, after all, ITIL is about best practices. It's not about forcing you into some kind of strict process model. Maybe the fear is because of the way ITIL is presented to some of you guys. If you associate a tool like ITSM with "the ITIL forcing tool that makes me work less efficient while costing a pile of money" then I think you are on the wrong track. You should be seeking process improvements by applying ITIL to your business and then look for tooling that fits you. Actually that's what we have been doing with ExpertDesk (which is build on AR System) in Europe for quite a while now! We see lots of companies that have ITIL-ish processes, most of them have the most common ones like Incident and Change Management pretty much worked out. But if your process, for example your Problem Management process is not that mature yet, ExpertDesk lets you configure the tool to support your process. When you're processes change, your ExpertDesk configuration can be changed through data and off you go. That's what "best practices" is about.
But all that I'm saying is: don't let the tool dictate your process, ITIL, eTOM or whatever, but let your process dictate the tool. I don't know if ITSM forces ITIL on you or if it is configurable (I assume it is) so I can't really comment on that. Looking at the post that started this thread "...I think it is about us – People resistant to ITIL, but forced into going there.", I'm wondering if it's really about being resistant to ITIL or being resistant to ITSM or other _supporting_ products for that matter. Just my 2 cents, Hugo On 9/20/07, Scott Parrish <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > 1. ITIL doesn't save money > 2. ITIL doesn't save time > 3. ITIL doesn't save energy > 4. ITL doesn't make sense > > > _______________________________________________________________________________ UNSUBSCRIBE or access ARSlist Archives at www.arslist.org ARSlist:"Where the Answers Are"
