COBIT v5 will reduce number of processes covered to align with ITIL V3

Submitted by skeptic on Fri, 2011-04-01 20:03
Share this post with

I heard today that COBIT 5 will have only 27 processes, to align better with ITIL V3. Clearly ISACA have buckled under, surrendering to the momentum ITIL has in the industry. What's next? Allowing ITIL certifications as credit towards COBIT? For those interested the details are:

The COBIT processes not at all covered by ITIL V3 are:

  • PO2 Define Information architecture
  • PO3 Determine Technological direction
  • PO6 Communicate management aims and direction
  • PO7 Manage IT human resources
  • PO10 Manage projects
  • DS7 Educate and train users
  • ME2 Monitor and evaluate internal control
  • ME3 Ensure compliance with external requirements
  • ME4 Provide IT governance

These will be removed from the COBIT framework. If they are not covered by ITIL they don't need to be covered by COBIT, apparently. I suspect they did it to simplify the work of getting COBIT5 out the door.

There are 17 more COBIT processes that will be reduced in scope to match ITIL. I will bring you those details as I get them. I worked out a while ago that ITIL has full coverage for only 8 of the 34 COBIT processes so COBIT5 is clearly going to be a greatly reduced work from COBIT 4.1.

Part of me wants to praise ISACA for going against the trend of increasingly complex frameworks but I can't help feeling we are losing something here. What a shame. This is a sad day for COBIT fans.

Published in The Skeptical Informer, April 2011, Volume 5, No. 2


Comments

Submitted by Charles T. Betz on Sat, 2011-04-02 15:16.

Was waiting for the other shoe to drop

I was waiting for the other shoe to drop. This isn't April Fools?

The project management decision alone is nonsensical, since ITIL was set up to complement PRINCE2 I thought. And I cannot believe that ISACA would cut IT governance.

Charles T. Betz
http://www.erp4it.com

Submitted by Charles T. Betz on Sat, 2011-04-02 15:58.

Egg on face

OK, I didn't resolve the last link.

I was always the last kid to get the joke. Nothing changes...

Charles T. Betz
http://www.erp4it.com

Submitted by Tom Rankin (not verified) on Sun, 2011-04-03 23:44.

Phew!

You had me going for a moment there Skep. I thought WTF, why should COBIT exist at all then?

Anyway, are you going to the ITSMFA conference in August? Perth, which is a helluva way from NZ but enjoyed your talks last time. I'll be presenting this time around...

Submitted by Doug (not verified) on Mon, 2011-04-04 20:33.

Bravo!

Had me going - I just scanned it & filed it to read in more depth later, and would've been properly outraged, had I not read through the comments, too...

Submitted by deaf-llama on Sat, 2011-04-02 15:56.

Amusing news

Nice one, Cyril!

I had heard differently:

The COBIT Development team has lots of ex-mathematicians who are debating whether to go for:

- A prime number of processes that was more than the existing 34 in COBIT 4.1. So that would be 37 wouldn't it?

- A number of processes that had the most factors so they could be split into domains and subdomains easily. So that would be 36 (2x2x3x3) wouldn't it? This was also very popular since 36 processes look great on a radar (Kiviat) chart when presenting process maturity results.

- A number of processes that follows Fibonacci's sequence as the current 34 processes in COBIT 4.1 does:
i.e. 0, 1, 1, 2, 3, 5, 8, 13, 21, 34, 55, 89...

So that would be 55 processes, wouldn't it? Not too far short of the sum of the 3 processes in the 3 major framworks that are being merged into COBIT 5: COBIT (34), Val IT (22) and Risk IT (9) = 65 processes that could easily be merged into just 55 processes it was felt.

We will very soon find out since COBIT 5 draft is due this month (April 2011)

Submitted by Osama Salah (not verified) on Sat, 2011-04-02 05:46.

Just sad

I'm no COBIT or ITIL fan (do such creatures actually exist?), just trying to make some use out of them but it makes you wonder how much integrity and value these frameworks (or whatever they claim to be) have.
It seems to me the more you work with ITIL (I haven't done anything with COBIT) the more you questioning it.
So what is ISACA thinking? The processes they will drop, they were useless? COBIT was wasting our time? Besides don't they (COBIT and ITIL) serve different purposes (with a degree of similarity, nonetheless different purposes)?
Don't put blind trust into any of these frameworks, use the loosely and ignore anything you are not comfortable with.
These are just frameworks and not religions.

Syndicate content