Is TSO operating without a license to enforce copyright for PRINCE2?

Is a British Government website inaccurate or is APMG TSO operating without a license?

OGC stay one step ahead of government policy in their commercialisation of ITIL. Better news for PRINCE2

Playing "bush lawyer", I have been tracking down the terms under which OGC control the copyright to ITIL (discussed here recently). And it makes an interesting little story: ITIL was almost free. And I think maybe PRINCE2 is.

Courageous Ken

Nobody could ever accuse Ken Turbitt of being backward about coming forward. Ken, you may recall, is owner of SMCG and the author of OGC's secret ITIL process software compliance "standard". Yesterday Ken said "Axios, and Service-Now have not been brave enough" to seek certification, which set off a small storm of response.

If there is the slightest shred of governance left in Castle ITIL one would hope they'll be telling Ken to pull his head in, so we reproduce the quote in full here - and some of the responses - before it disappears.

the end of ITIL V2 annnounced by OGC

It is official. ITIL V2 will end.

ITIL Still Needs to Embrace the Collective

In my recent article on ITSMWatch, I hammer once again on the great doors of Castle ITIL, right next to the faint marks from when I did so last time. ITIL needs to open up to the huge community it has created.

Refreshes all round and no time to apply

ITIL V3, PRINCE2:2009 (The-Framework-Previously-Known-As-Prince2), ITIL V3 New Edition... and now M-o-R:2010 and MSP:2010. Yes, OGC are calling for authors for Management of Risk 2010 edition and Managing Successful Programmes 2010 edition. Go on! How hard can it be? But you better hurry...

ITIL-COBIT mapping shows even less coverage by ITIL

Along the way, I've somehow never got around to discussing a very important paper: Aligning COBIT® 4.1, ITIL® V3 and ISO/IEC 27002 for Business Benefit. This is one of the official OGC Alignment White Paper Series that do the alignment between ITIL V3 and the other frameworks, that ITIL V3 should have done in the first place.

The OGC ITIL V3 Change Log's greatest hits

If you are thinking the ITIL V3 2nd Edition or Refreshrefresh - or whatever it is called - is just about adding a few missing semicolons and spelling Ivor Macfarlane's name right, think again. Even if they get talked out of this plan to rewrite (read: dumb down) the whole of Service Strategy ("oooh ITIL is HARD - why can't it be easy like TV?"), take a look at some of the errors to be fixed in the books. Remember, paid authors for each book from major corporations, hundreds of reviewers, professional commercial publisher with professional editors... and we get:

OGC revising ITIL again

Just when I asked whether there was any change to ITIL V3 books, out comes Project requirements for an update to the ITIL® core publications. OGC say "scope of change is gradual and not too extensive." We've heard that before.

ITIL Software Scheme comes under more fire

As I have said before, probably the biggest gun in the ITSM skepticking field right now is Aidan Lawes. Once again he has turned the flamethrower onto the ITIL Software Scheme, with a blistering post on his blog: "people with vested interests increasingly seem to find a ready platform for their propaganda... The software assessment service springs to mind as a prime example. Purported to be launched in the interest of the procurer, it seems to be much more in the interests of the small group (OGC, APMG and SMCG) involved in its secretive development." I'll let you read it there. Apart from agreeing with Aidan that a standard that is secret is lunacy (the kind of lunacy that only the British could invent), I'd like to pick up on some points that Aidan didn't address.

[Update: For the record, the IT Skeptic does not believe that there is anything illegal or dishonest about the ITIL Software Scheme. I do allege that it has been conducted in a manner that is inept, naive, unnecessarily secretive and without proper consideration for most of the stakeholders. It seems to me to be about as far from best practice in setting standards as one can imagine.]

Syndicate content