ITIL Software Scheme released
[Updated 6 May to use correct link] It has arrived. As previously disclosed, the OGC has appointed APMG to administer a scheme to assure ITIL compliance of software.
Well actually it still hasn't fully arrived. In true Castle ITIL fashion we have a May 1 announcement of an "Operational pilot due end of April". Now we await the next two stages which will appear in "Summer" and "Autumn" 2009.
The IT Skeptic has always advocated such a scheme but it is a remarkable reversal for the Castle ITIL establishment that until now argued that such assessment was not possible because ITIL was only guidance and no standard exists. Suddenly we have a standard, although everyone has now stopped calling it that. It is now "defined and agreed minimum assessment criteria". But the word "compliance" is used without blushing.
There is no word at all on who is doing the defining and agreeing. Nobody is being invited to do so. There is zero public consultation on what those criteria might be. The IT Skeptic's understanding is that the criteria were written by SMCG, the organisation already appointed as the first Licenced Software Assessor by APMG, but there is no public information to confirm that. For SMCG read Ken Turbitt, who many of you will recall from his days at BMC prior to going out on his own recently (as the IT Skeptic did from CA nearly five years ago). It is unclear whether Sharon Taylor, Chief Architect of ITIL, had any role in developing the standard, although Ken refers to "a new service Sharon Taylor and I will be offering to the market shortly".
The standard or criteria are just being promulgated by decree, a most novel and unusual way to set a standard in recent centuries. Disappointingly we are left almost entirely in the dark over this mysterious new scheme. At this stage it would seem even the vendors have had no say in the standard they have to meet. And of course no comment on the actual content of that standard is possible because the public have had no sight of it yet. It is all very disappointing.
Made in New Zealand 
Comments
BMC announces 1st certification - what a surprise
So four days after the program is announced with timing of the pilot set for late summer, BMC announces they have gotten the first certification. I wonder how they were able to achieve that so quickly. Couldn't have anything to do with their relationship to SMCG?
This is worse than disappointing. It's a joke.
BMC ahead
Thanks. Blogged here
Location of APMG story
Skep,
The APMG words can be found at http://www.itil-officialsite.com/News/ITILSoftwareSchemeOperationalPilotLaunch.asp
Is this a joke?
OGC's ITIL Software Scheme enables tool vendors to apply to Licensed Software Assessors for a recommendation on the software tool. Software tools are assessed on three levels. These are:
BRONZE: where the tool has not been purchased by a customer;
SILVER: where the tool has at least three customers;
GOLD: where the tool has a least three customers that have implemented and are using the tool. Proof of customer implementation is required.
gold standard ITIL compliant
Anything less than gold would be highly unusual. I guess it means that one cannot get gold for next release (at least until it is in beta).
Or for Post-It Notes™ (if it didn't cost tens of thousands of dollars to certify, I'd consider certifying Post-It Notes - perfectly valid technology for running ITIL processes, although may not meet the criteria for "software". Excel would.).
But it somewhat debases the term "gold", no? I'm betting many buyers will think it means a higher level of compliance
Better than Gold
Did anyone mention Platinum and Diamond yet? Come on, this is just commercial "vapour-ware". I'd tought OGC wise enough to stay away from this but NO, dollar signs are in their eyes (eeeeh excuse me....English Pound signs, they're still Brittish).
Remember: a fool with a tool is still a fool, even if the tool had the gold seal from OGC