Page 1 of 1

Do we need to separate the Asset Mgt and Configuration mgt if we will align to ITIL 4?

Posted: Wed Oct 02, 2019 3:16 am
by dynamite42
Do we need to have a separate asset mgt and config mgt process if we will align to ITIL 4? per the list of practices, it seems that they already have a seaparate process/practice compared to the integrated itil 3 A&C mgt process

Re: Do we need to separate the Asset Mgt and Configuration mgt if we will align to ITIL 4?

Posted: Wed Oct 02, 2019 10:24 am
by tedderpd
While there are many considerations, basically the answer has always been "yes" - you should have separate Asset Management and Configuration Management processes. Whether it is ITIL 4, ITIL v3, or whatever framework, Asset Management and Configuration Management have two distinct purposes. Asset Management is all about managing and tracking the financial value of an asset; Configuration Management is about managing the relationships between Configuration Items (CI), and how those CIs support/deliver a service. While the two may have some data that is shared, the correct approach is to develop the interface between the two processes, not assume that one completely fulfills the needs and purpose of the other.

Re: Do we need to separate the Asset Mgt and Configuration mgt if we will align to ITIL 4?

Posted: Wed Dec 04, 2019 5:13 pm
by Corde Wagner
I agree with Ted! While both asset and configuration management are tightly coupled, the differing purposes makes management of the two more effective if they are treated as separate processes.

Cheers,

Corde