Stop Calling ITIL Best PracticeITIL is not best-practice and we deride ITIL by calling it that, writes ITSM Watch columnist The IT Skeptic.
By now, best-practice has been so abused it only means we wrote down a way of doing it." But ITIL is two decades old so let us assume that when ITIL was first created they really meant best-practice.
This strikes me as evasive: What has this to do with best? The itSMF defines best-practice as an industry accepted way of doing something, that works and the best identified approach to a situation based upon observation from effective organisations in similar business circumstances.
This is better. At least there is some element of relative merit to the second definition. Wikipedia (the Skeptics favourite source of the Zeitgeist) defines best-practice as a management idea which asserts that there is a technique, method, process, activity, incentive or reward that is more effective at delivering a particular outcome than any other technique, method, process, etc.
Yes, that is what "best means, isnt it? More than any other . Calling something best-practice is (or was) a brave statement. It led with the chin. This is superlative. There is no better way of doing it.
So why is OGCs (U.K.'s Office of Government Commerce) definition nowadays so wimpy? Because ITIL isnt best-practice. It is good practice. It is generally accepted practice. But it isnt "best."
We have good arguments why ITIL is not the ultimate approach to IT operations:
Although the last thing I want is to sound like is a post-modernist, in cases like this they have a point. Despite OGCs claims, ITIL does not fit well in smaller organizations and has almost nothing to say to small business. The great experiment is underway right now to see how it goes in the Asian cultures.