Change the term Standard change to something else

Discuss and debate ITIL Change Management issues
Post Reply
User avatar
29erCM
Newbie
Newbie
Posts: 1
Joined: Mon Nov 26, 2012 7:00 pm

Tue Nov 27, 2012 4:35 pm

An environment I'm the change manager for is folding in new Change Management processes, ITIL and best practices in other areas such as incident.

Now, there is a discomfort with the term "Standard" change. There is a push to call this "Routine" instead. There is no push to change the associated definition, just the word.

Now, I'm against this. The reason is that the current environment has some miles on it and most terms used are currently not in alignment with ITIL/Best Practices.

Seems to me that even if the term "Standard" means different things to different people now, you have to put a stake in the ground. As a matter of fact some seminars regarding ITIL have been provided to let folks get used to ITIL, it's suggestions and terms.

So, am I being petty and concerned with nothing or am I on the right path? If this terminology swap goes forward, similar name changes will likely permeate new ITSM tool(s) that are currently being deployed (since we all know these tools are all editable/customizable).

29er


User avatar
UKVIKING
ITIL Expert
ITIL Expert
Posts: 3639
Joined: Fri Sep 15, 2006 8:00 pm
Location: London, UK

Wed Nov 28, 2012 1:43 am

Oh the horror.. oh the inhumanity

Thank the gods that you prevented this from happening..

Imagine the scene when the ITIL Police comes in like the SPanish Inquistion and hangs the miscreants by their mouse cable,

.......

Wait.. there is no ITIL Police...

23erCM,

Take the following sentence to heart

ITIL IS NOT A STANDARD. IT IS A SET OF BETTER PRACTICES. THE TERMINOLOGY IS A RECOMMENDATION.

You can call Standard CHanges - Bananas. No one cares but your own organization
John Hardesty
ITSM Manager's Certificate (Red Badge)

Change Management is POWER & CONTROL. /....evil laughter
User avatar
Diarmid
ITIL Expert
ITIL Expert
Posts: 1894
Joined: Mon Mar 03, 2008 7:00 pm
Location: Helensburgh

Wed Nov 28, 2012 11:20 am

I have never liked the term standard change, because a) it encourages a lack of definition for all of its instances; b) it tends to narrow the scope of things that can (and should) get such special treatment (especially by applying it mostly to simple things; c) it is defined in almost as many ways as there are organizations using the term.

The first two reasons apply to your organization's proposed renaming - in spades for the second reason.

The only part of the concept that has much value is the idea that some kinds of predictable changes can be treated differently in ways that are more efficient and often quicker than going through the default change process. Such changes need to have a documented procedure of their own which covers how to achieve the correct governance for them, what conditions must apply for any change to qualify for this treatment and how scheduling will be managed.
"Method goes far to prevent trouble in business: for it makes the task easy, hinders confusion, saves abundance of time, and instructs those that have business depending, both what to do and what to hope."
William Penn 1644-1718
Post Reply