According to a recent article on ITSMWatch, OGC is withdrawing support from ITIL V2 expected to be complete by 30th June 2011. Specifics of withdrawal are :
v2 Foundation to cease 30 June 2010
v2 Manager to cease 31 August 2010
v2 Practitioner to cease 31 Dec 2010 Foundation Bridge to cease 31 Dec 2010
(All of the above will be available for re-sits until 30 June 2011.)
Manager Bridge to cease 30 June 2011
Service Support and Service Delivery publications will be removed on 30 June 2011
I could not find anything on the OGC website about this though!
I think its the right thing to do, ITIL V3 has been around for a while now (its popularity can still be questioned), and two sets of certifications would create more confusion and a gradual phase out of the V2 was required.
OGC had recently released a document around planned updates for ITIL V3 books, and has now requested for authors to bid for the refresh. Read the detailed pdf here.
I would have written a summary myself, however I think this summarizes the document well!
San Jose based IT company ZL Technologies, recently filed a case against Gartner challenging the very popular Gartner “Magic Quadrant”.
As per ZL Technologies website,
ZL Technologies, a San Jose-based IT company specializing in cutting-edge enterprise software solutions for e-mail and file archiving, is challenging Gartner Group and the legitimacy of Gartner’s “Magic Quadrant.” In a complaint filed on May 29, 2009, ZL claims that Gartner’s use of their proprietary “Magic Quadrant” is misleading and favors large vendors with large sales and marketing budgets over smaller innovators such as ZL that have developed higher performing products. The complaint alleges: defamation; trade libel; false advertising; unfair competition; and negligent interference with prospective economic advantage.
Read more here.
Read some detailed points of view and analysis of this situation here on the ZDnet blog.
OGC recently released the project requirements for an update to the ITIL Core publications.
The aim for this update project would be :
- To update the publications in line with a number of issues raised in the Change Control Log. Not everything will be addressed – some technical changes are seen as too much for this evolutionary change
- To remedy the inconsistencies that exist between the content and layout of the publications
- To answer some of the criticisms that have been leveled at the core publications by the training community
- To simplify the Service Strategy publication to ensure that the concepts are readily understood and that the content is accessible to a greater number of users.
Some of the key updates which are in scope for this edition (not version) would be :
- Look at remedying inconsistencies within the content of the five books:
- Roles need to be made consistent across the books, ensuring that the activities apply only to one role
- Clarify that the organizational structures given as examples are indicative rather than prescriptive
- Restructure the guidance to ensure that all five publications are organized in the same way:
- Ensure that each process has goals, purpose and objectives
- Look at how the processes are dealt with, and ensure a common treatment for all
- Ensure that the books are aligned, w • here relevant, with guidance in MSP™, M_o_R®, PRINCE2® and P3O®.
- Give clear explanations and descriptions of roles and responsibilities
- Standardize the use of glossary definitions within the five titles. Ensure that the explanations in the text align with those in the glossary
- Update to the glossary to take account of the comments made in the Change Control Log
- Examine the definition and usage of the roles of Product Manager and Service Owner
- Ensure that service catalogue manager appears within Service Operation
- Redesign the content according to OGC’s updated style guidelines.
Please see the official document here.
Information Source : OGC Best Management Practice Website.
I personally think this is a good idea to make these updates. Having gone through the Service Strategy and Design books myself, I found them very difficult to understand and vague. This should help those two books and the entire audience who refers back to the core publications.
Also click here for some interesting thoughts and discussion on this topic.
Text source for this post : Project Requirements Document for update to Core Publications