This was selected as Best Answer

beyond the points already made, I would also suggest that ITIL and PMBOK must co-exist in order to have true success in delivering business value. In most of the organizations that I have worked with, PMOs typically focus on the development and deployment of new applications, frequently using PMBOK, and SDLC, and CMM for the development. While ITIL programs sometimes start up solely in operations.

IMHO, ITIL requires a string of successful and well-managed projects in order to be successful. And, any PMO that kicks out new applications or services also must incorporate ITIL in order for the users to get what they need. Both sides have to stop treating the other side like a black box and have to stop just throwing things over the wall.

I've had a lot of success integrating ITIL-based operations and development, with PMBOK and an SDLC as the glue that ties them together. Change Management and Configuration Management and Release Management are sometimes good starting points because the disciplines exist on both sides of the wall. In that case, the PMO has responsibility to manage all the way from the application life cycle through the transition part of the ITIL life cycle. In my experiences, good PMs jump at the chance to ensure the success of their programs using the structure of ITIL. In one case, we easily expanded a very detailed project management process to include key elements needed for ITIL. A good PM will do a much better job of making sure the t's are cross and i's dotted than a typical operations employee or operations manager. Many operations organizations that I have seen make the mistake of giving their engineers or technicians or managers the job of actually managing the back end of the project. These folks try hard and are very committed, but so many times things still go wrong because these engineers are not always good project managers. I say take the PM responsibility through the entire life cycle and make sure that no one on the data center floor inadvertently hoses a deployment by not being meticulous enough about PM-type details such as acceptance criteria, phase gates, documentation, regression testing, etc. Some organizations hire project managers within the operations team and give them this responsibility but because it is an add-on responsibility, I have seen them vastly overloaded with hundreds of small projects and without enough influence within Operations. Again, I advise to develop a strong and powerful project management expertise and use it to ensure success of the ENTIRE project.

Another sticking point is that after the transition into production (i.e. Configuration, Change, and Release Management), a proper project no longer should have a black box simply called "Maintenance" that is used for bug fixes. Instead it should interface at a deeper level with the rest of the ITIL life cycle to inform the business of the efficiency and effectiveness of the deployed solution. If an organization has a strong governance program with portfolio management and Enterprise Architecture, then the Operations and Continual Service Improvement portions of ITIL can feed these programs with data that ties all the way back to the original design and deployment. I know this works from very successful implementations on major applications that actually changed the entire direction of the IT strategy and multi-million dollars of future investments just through proper linkage.

I didn't go into details about the front side of the ITIL life cycle (Strategy and Design), but these also should integrate into the project management life cycle.

good luck.

Links:

• http://www.holmes-inc.net

posted January 2, 2008

They can co-exist. Both are guidelines, not commandments. Use the available resources to develop best practices for your specific situation.

Too many people and organizations look at things like ITIL as omniscient, but it can't be all things to all people.

posted December 31, 2007