Speaker 1: Have you ever found yourself feeling well stuck caught between
Speaker 1: two really powerful forces in the IT world, Like, on
Speaker 1: one side, you're pushing hard for that lightning fast delivery,
Speaker 1: you know, the agility of a startup, but then on
Speaker 1: the other you're grappling with these established processes and let's
Speaker 1: face it, the absolute need for stability and control.
Speaker 2: It's a real tension, isn't it a common one?
Speaker 1: Exactly? It feels fundamental. Well, you are definitely not alone
Speaker 1: if you feel that. We've got a fascinating deep dive
Speaker 1: for you today exploring exactly how to reconcile that tension.
Speaker 1: We're diving right into the intersection of ITYL and debops. Yeah,
Speaker 1: our focus today is based on Abynav Krishna Kaiser's insightful book,
Speaker 1: Reinventing IYLE in the Age of Debops.
Speaker 2: That's right, And our mission here really is to unpack
Speaker 2: how these two powerful approaches, which let's be honest, often
Speaker 2: seem like they're contrasting. Yeah, how they can not just
Speaker 2: coexist but actually thrive together. Think of it as a
Speaker 2: shortcut maybe to understanding this critical evolution in IT service management.
Speaker 2: We want to explore those perceived conflicts sure, but more
Speaker 2: importantly reveal some innovative techniques to make processes genuinely agile
Speaker 2: and relevant for today. So you get the clarity you
Speaker 2: need to navigate this landscape without feeling overwhelmed.
Speaker 1: Okay, so let's start there. Then let's unpack this apparent
Speaker 1: clash because yeah, on the surface, they can really seem
Speaker 1: like oil and water. So on one side we have DevOps. Now,
Speaker 1: most of you listening are probably familiar with the push
Speaker 1: for DevOps. It was borne out of this craving for
Speaker 1: fast turnarounds, solving those painful agility problems and really dramatically
Speaker 1: increase in productivity and quality and software delivery.
Speaker 2: And it's fundamentally cultural, wouldn't you say?
Speaker 1: Oh? Absolutely, it's a cultural transformation, a powerful union of
Speaker 1: development and operations teams. We saw it evolve clearly from
Speaker 1: that old sequential waterfall model, which oh man felt like
Speaker 1: trying to build a skyscraper without seeing the blueprint for months. Yeah,
Speaker 1: to the agile manifest show back in two thousand and one,
Speaker 1: which really emphasized fluidity and small, manageable iterations at its core.
Speaker 1: DevOps kind of lives by that Calmo's acronym culture automation, lean, measurement,
Speaker 1: and sharing.
Speaker 2: And culture's key, Like Peter Drucker said, culture eats strategy for.
Speaker 1: Breakfast exactly, and DevOps it's truly about overhauling behavior, changing
Speaker 1: how people work together. And just to give you a
Speaker 1: sense of the sheer speed and scale DevOps enables, think
Speaker 1: about Amazon back in twenty eleven, over one thousand deployments
Speaker 1: per hour per hour. That's not just faster. That's a
Speaker 1: different galaxy of speed.
Speaker 2: It really is. And what's fascinating is contrasting that with
Speaker 2: the other side of this perceived divide. It TEL now
Speaker 2: many listeners will know, IDEL is the backbone for traditional
Speaker 2: IT service management. It was really established in that earlier
Speaker 2: waterfall era where stability and control were.
Speaker 1: Absolutely paramount, right, the focus was different totally.
Speaker 2: Eyetel is fundamentally service centric. Its official definition emphasizes delivering
Speaker 2: value to customers by facililitating outcomes they want without them
Speaker 2: awning the specific costs and risks, and the framework itself
Speaker 2: is structured around a service life cycle with five sequential
Speaker 2: phases service strategy, service design, service transitions, service operation, and
Speaker 2: continual service improvement. You have to go through them in
Speaker 2: order sequentially. Yeah, and crucially for our discussion today, ITIL
Speaker 2: defines functions, which are essentially specialized teams like networking or
Speaker 2: Java teams. These often maybe inavertently create those silos we
Speaker 2: hear so much about. And it defines processes, these very structured,
Speaker 2: predictable sequences designed for control and stability. Inputs triggers, outputs,
Speaker 2: very defined.
Speaker 1: Okay, so we've got these two powerhouses, but they seem
Speaker 1: built on different foundations. So what happens when they collide
Speaker 1: in an organization? The book points out some big ticket
Speaker 1: conflicts things many of us have probably felt. First That
Speaker 1: core difference sequential versus concurrent.
Speaker 2: Yeah, that's a big one.
Speaker 1: Idle strictly sequential phases, you must finish strategy before design,
Speaker 1: design before build. That can feel like hitting a concrete
Speaker 1: wall when you're trying to move fast.
Speaker 2: Right, Absolutely, While DevOps is inherently anti sequential, it's iterative,
Speaker 2: expects output almost right away, often in parallel.
Speaker 1: Yeah, it's like building a house floor by floor versus
Speaker 1: I don't know, starting the plumbing while the foundation's still setting.
Speaker 1: It's a different mindset completely. Then there's batch sizes. Idle
Speaker 1: often leads to one big piece of delivery after a
Speaker 1: really long cycle, and we all know how risky that.
Speaker 2: Can be huge risk. If it fails, it fails big.
Speaker 1: Whereas DevOps champions small batches sprints. The whole idea is
Speaker 1: to reduce that risk and allow for quick, continuous changes.
Speaker 2: Delivering value incrementally. It's like small gifts daily versus one giant,
Speaker 2: risky present once a year.
Speaker 1: Good analogy, and Third, feedback, IDLE traditionally formalizes feedback way
Speaker 1: at the end in continual service.
Speaker 2: Improvement, often too late to make meaningful changes to what
Speaker 2: was just delivered right.
Speaker 1: DevOps, though, demands rapid feedback every step of the way,
Speaker 1: constant tests demos, often within those tight two week sprint cycles.
Speaker 2: You're getting feedback almost constantly.
Speaker 1: Then we have the silo culture versus the single team
Speaker 1: aisle's functional silos, just by their nature create boundaries and handoffs.
Speaker 2: Which leads to delays, misunderstandings.
Speaker 1: Exactly dev ups pushes for that one team, one software approach.
Speaker 1: Tear down the walls, remove the confusion, the miscommunication, the
Speaker 1: mistrust between dev and.
Speaker 2: OX, get everyone pulling in the same direction.
Speaker 1: And finally, there's this perception that well continuous deployment makes
Speaker 1: release management irrelevant because changes just go street to production
Speaker 1: without all the traditional heavy governance steps, right, Like.
Speaker 2: The need for a formal release team just vanishes.
Speaker 1: Yeah.
Speaker 2: We'll dig into whether that's actually true later.
Speaker 1: Yeah, that's a really interesting point.
Speaker 2: But you know, despite these apparent conflicts, and they are
Speaker 2: real conflicts in many places. Yeah, the core argument in
Speaker 2: the book and what we're seeing in practice is that
Speaker 2: it PO can adapt, It really can't. DevOps isn't necessarily
Speaker 2: about throwing out decades of ityl learning. It's more about
Speaker 2: creating a union of mindsets.
Speaker 1: A union of mindsets, I like that.
Speaker 2: Yeah, adapting the framework to the digital age, taking the
Speaker 2: best of iipel's governance and stability, but supercharging it with
Speaker 2: devops' speed and agility.
Speaker 1: Okay, so how do we actually do that? This is
Speaker 1: where it gets really interesting, right, because the key to
Speaker 1: bridging this divide seems to lie in three common elements
Speaker 1: that enable that DevOps cultural change, people, process, and technology
Speaker 1: a classic triad exactly. Let's start with people, specifically, those
Speaker 1: team structures. Traditionally, itol functions group specialists, technical management, application
Speaker 1: management into separate silos that often created those us versus
Speaker 1: them dynamics. We just talked about walls between teams, but
Speaker 1: in a DevOps world, the shift is towards building teams
Speaker 1: around an application. You bring all the necessary roles developers, testers,
Speaker 1: opspos into a single.
Speaker 2: Team, one team responsible and to.
Speaker 1: End right, this team becomes the Alpha and Omega, as
Speaker 1: the book puts it, for both developing and maintaining that application, and.
Speaker 2: That structure naturally fosters a flat hierarchy. Shared responsibility replaces
Speaker 2: those old many hierarchies within silos.
Speaker 1: Which fundamentally removes a lot of the conflicts of interest,
Speaker 1: doesn't it No more pointing fingers down the line precisely.
Speaker 2: And this model also brings in key agile roles. You've
Speaker 2: got the product owner.
Speaker 1: The customer's voice, and the team.
Speaker 2: Exactly embedded in the team providing constant feedback, steering the
Speaker 2: direction based on business value.
Speaker 1: And the scrum master.
Speaker 2: Yeah, the scrum master acting more like a servant leader
Speaker 2: whose main job is clearing away impediments, helping the team
Speaker 2: focus purely on delivery.
Speaker 1: So it's not just changing job titles. It's a really
Speaker 1: profound shift in accountability and how people collaborate.
Speaker 2: Absolutely, and once you have the right people in these
Speaker 2: new collaborative structures. The next question is, well, how do
Speaker 2: we orchestrate their work efficiently that brings us squarely to
Speaker 2: process or what the book calls Agile integration. DevOps introduces
Speaker 2: some specific processes on top of basic Agile methods to
Speaker 2: really accelerate delivery. First, you've got continuous integration or CI.
Speaker 2: This is where developers merge their code changes back into
Speaker 2: the main branch frequently, often multiple.
Speaker 1: Times a day, and the key is automation right totally.
Speaker 2: These integrations are immediately verified by automated builds and tests.
Speaker 2: It drastically minimizes conflicts and catches errors super early. Think
Speaker 2: of it like a constant automated sanity check for the codebase.
Speaker 1: Okay, CI, then what Then?
Speaker 2: You have continuous delivery CD. This means that every change
Speaker 2: that passes all the automated tests is automatically pushed to
Speaker 2: a staging or pre production environment. The binaries are qualified
Speaker 2: for production deployment.
Speaker 1: Qualified, but not necessarily deployed yet exactly.
Speaker 2: The actual deployment to production still needs a manual trigger,
Speaker 2: a human decision. But your software is always ready to
Speaker 2: go live. It's sitting in a launch pad button ready.
Speaker 1: Got it ready? But waiting for the go ahead.
Speaker 2: Right, and then finally there's continuous deployment. This takes continuous
Speaker 2: delivery one step further. Every change that passes all the
Speaker 2: tests is not just qualified, it's automatically deployed all the
Speaker 2: way to production.
Speaker 1: Whoa, so the button press is automated too.
Speaker 2: Essentially, Yes, every successful build automatically goes live. That really
Speaker 2: pushes the envelope on speed and requires a huge amount
Speaker 2: of trust in your automation and testing. Wow.
Speaker 1: Okay, that distinction between continuous delivery ready to deploy and
Speaker 1: continuous deployment actually is deployed automatically. That seems crucial. Yeah,
Speaker 1: defines the level of automation.
Speaker 2: And well trust, it really does.
Speaker 1: And these processes ci CD they obviously rely heavily on
Speaker 1: technology automation tools.
Speaker 2: Yeah, the third piece of the triad.
Speaker 1: The book rightly emphasizes that technology is often seen as
Speaker 1: the most important bit for getting those rapid results.
Speaker 2: Because it's tangible.
Speaker 1: You can buy a tool, right, But as you said earlier,
Speaker 1: it's pretty useless without the right people and processes where
Speaker 1: and sync.
Speaker 2: Absolutely, but the tech has been a massive enabler. Automation
Speaker 2: has completely changed the game for infrastructure.
Speaker 1: Like infrastructure as code.
Speaker 2: Exactly, instead of manually building servers over weeks, you can
Speaker 2: spin up complex environments from code in minutes than cloud
Speaker 2: platforms aws, Azure, Google Compute Engine. They make this dynamic
Speaker 2: provisioning possible.
Speaker 1: So no more waiting weeks for a server hopefully not.
Speaker 2: And then there are specific tools for different parts of
Speaker 2: the pipeline. Distributed version control like GIT is huge. It
Speaker 2: provides that safety net for rapid changes, letting teams experiment
Speaker 2: collaboratively in ways older systems like SVN just couldn't handle easily.
Speaker 1: Branching is so much easier.
Speaker 2: Much easier. Then you have orchestrators like Jenkins or Bamboo.
Speaker 2: They're not just scheduling tasks, they're codifying your entire release pipeline,
Speaker 2: turning complex manual handoffs into predictable, repeatable, transparent.
Speaker 1: Workflows, making the process visible.
Speaker 2: Visible and automated configuration management tools like Puppet and Chef
Speaker 2: automates server setups, application can figs ensuring consistency everywhere. No
Speaker 2: more works on my.
Speaker 1: Machine, huh, We've all heard that one in.
Speaker 2: Automated testing tools like Selenium or Cucumber provide those crucial
Speaker 2: quality checks, ensuring speed doesn't rex stability quality gates exactly.
Speaker 2: And one more important distinction the book makes artifact repositories.
Speaker 2: These store the machine readable binaries, the deployable units. They're
Speaker 2: distinct from source code repositories, which hold the human readable
Speaker 2: code and scripts. Both are critical, but for different stages. Right,
Speaker 2: one holds the recipe, the other holds the baked cake,
Speaker 2: ready to deliver perfect analogy precisely. So to really see
Speaker 2: this union of mindsets in action, we need to get
Speaker 2: a bit more granular. Now, let's zoom in on how
Speaker 2: some of idyl's most critical processes are being fundamentally reinvented
Speaker 2: when you infuse them with these DevOps principles.
Speaker 1: Okay, yeah, let's do that. Where should we start. How
Speaker 1: about service transition, managing changes in assets?
Speaker 2: Good place. So change management in idle definistion is the addition, removal,
Speaker 2: or modification of anything that could have an effect on
Speaker 2: it services. Historically, it acted as.
Speaker 1: A gatekeeper and often felt, let's be honest, pretty rigid bureaucratic.
Speaker 1: Lots of approvals, cab meetings.
Speaker 2: It could definitely slow things down. But here's where the
Speaker 2: book offers a really a potentially game changing insight. It
Speaker 2: talks about maximum agility with standard changes.
Speaker 1: Standard changes, Okay, what does that mean in this context?
Speaker 2: It's about intelligently segmenting your change workload. The analysis suggests
Speaker 2: that a huge chunk, maybe sixty seventy percent of all
Speaker 2: changes are actually low risk, low impact and highly repeatable.
Speaker 2: Think patching minor can figure up dates.
Speaker 1: May think you do all the time, exactly.
Speaker 2: So the idea is identify these, define them clearly, test
Speaker 2: the process thoroughly, and then preapprove.
Speaker 1: Them preapproved so they bypass the usual CAD.
Speaker 2: For the most part. Yes, they bypass multiple time consuming
Speaker 2: approval steps. This significantly boost productivity and lets the change
Speaker 2: management process focus its energy on the truly complex, high
Speaker 2: risk changes.
Speaker 1: That makes a lot of sense, freeing up cognitive load exactly.
Speaker 2: The book even mentions an anecdote and organization saved over
Speaker 2: half a million dollars annually just by properly implementing standard changes.
Speaker 1: Wow, but how do you build the trust needed for
Speaker 1: that pre approval? Doesn't it still feel risky to some
Speaker 1: parts of the business.
Speaker 2: Oh? Absolutely, it requires a cultural shift towards trust, yes,
Speaker 2: but also really robust automation and monitoring to prove that
Speaker 2: these standard changes truly are low risk and well tested,
Speaker 2: And it's not about abandoning governance entirely. It's about shifting
Speaker 2: where you apply it.
Speaker 1: Okay, So how does that work with continuous delivery or deployment.
Speaker 2: Well, with continuous delivery, where there's still a manual trigger
Speaker 2: for production, you might still have a COIB approval for
Speaker 2: that specific deployment. But with continuous deployment, where everything is automated, yea,
Speaker 2: the change Advisory Board often shifts its focus. Instead of
Speaker 2: approving individual deployments, they approve the pipeline itself. If the
Speaker 2: whole automated process, the testing and the quality gates. Once
Speaker 2: the pipeline is trusted, it can run, allowing multiple daily
Speaker 2: deployments without individual cab blessings for each one.
Speaker 1: So the governance moves upstream to the process itself exactly Now.
Speaker 2: Still within service transition, there's Service Asset and Configuration Management sacm.
Speaker 1: AH, the CMDB, the heart of service management. Some call it.
Speaker 2: It is the configuration management database, tracking all those configuration
Speaker 2: items cis and their relationships. In the old world, it
Speaker 2: could sometimes feel like a static inventory, maybe only updated quarterly,
Speaker 2: a bit dusty sometimes, but in a DevOps world. The
Speaker 2: CMDB isn't just for auditing production anymore. It becomes critical
Speaker 2: for dynamic environment provisioning, spinning up test environments that mirror
Speaker 2: production accurately. It's vital for rapid impact assessment. If this
Speaker 2: component changes, what else is effected across all environments and
Speaker 2: managing dependencies. Knowing application B relies on service C.
Speaker 1: So it becomes a living map integrated into the workflow.
Speaker 2: Precisely and alongside the CMDB, the Source Code Repository SCR
Speaker 2: like it becomes that single source of truth for all
Speaker 2: the code, the infrastructure scripts, the configuration files. It enables collaboration,
Speaker 2: tracks every change, and provides that safety net for experimentation.
Speaker 1: Okay, so the CMDB and SCR become active, vital parts
Speaker 1: of the pipeline, not just after the fact records. That's
Speaker 1: a big shift, huge shift, all right, Moving on from transition,
Speaker 1: what about service operation keeping the lights on, keeping things
Speaker 1: running smoothly. Let's talk incident management.
Speaker 2: Okay. Itill's goal here as simple, restore service to its
Speaker 2: normal state as quickly as.
Speaker 1: Possible, minimize the disruption. Right.
Speaker 2: The typical flow is identify the incident users, calling monitoring tools,
Speaker 2: firing it staff noticing, then analysis, maybe escalation L one
Speaker 2: to L two L three.
Speaker 1: The usual path. How does DevOps change that?
Speaker 2: What's really transformative here is that the DevOps team itself
Speaker 2: often acts as L three support for incidents related to
Speaker 2: their applications, code or recent changes.
Speaker 1: So the people who wrote the code are fixing it directly.
Speaker 2: Often yes, the resolving incidents in parallel with their development work.
Speaker 2: They might pull the production codebase onto a separate branch,
Speaker 2: diagnose the issue, fix it, test it, and deploy the
Speaker 2: fix rapidly through the same automated pipeline.
Speaker 1: Wow. Their intimate knowledge must lead to much faster resolution.
Speaker 2: Times, incredibly faster. Usually it's like having the architect in
Speaker 2: the builder on site immediately when a pipe bursts, instead
Speaker 2: of calling a separate maintenance hotline and waiting. Yeah.
Speaker 1: Makes sense, But even with that speed, some idel disciplines still.
Speaker 2: Matter, right absolutely. Even though the pace is fast, itil's
Speaker 2: robust knowledge management process is still vital, capturing learnings from
Speaker 2: incidents quickly making them searchable. That, coupled with good configuration
Speaker 2: management data from the CMDB, is crucial for quick analysis
Speaker 2: and effective resolution. You don't want to solve the same
Speaker 2: problem twice.
Speaker 1: So capture the knowledge, use the CMDB for context.
Speaker 2: Got it and related to incidents. But distinct is problem.
Speaker 1: Management ah, the detective work exactly.
Speaker 2: This is the investigation unit, the CSI of IT service management.
Speaker 2: Its role isn't just to fix the immediate disruption that's
Speaker 2: incident management, but to find the underlying cause of one
Speaker 2: or more incidents to prevent them from happening again.
Speaker 1: So differentiating is key incident disruption, problem root cause precisely.
Speaker 2: Example, the application crashes frequently, that's a series of incidents.
Speaker 2: The unknown bug causing the crashes, that's the problem. It's
Speaker 2: the difference between constantly mopping up a leak versus finding
Speaker 2: and fixing the leaky pipe.
Speaker 1: Okay, and ITIL has techniques for this.
Speaker 2: Yes, things like the five Y technique just keep asking
Speaker 2: why until you get to the route, or the Ishikawa
Speaker 2: diagram the fishbone diagram to map out potential causes. These
Speaker 2: are still incredibly useful.
Speaker 1: So how does problem management fit into the fast pace
Speaker 1: of dubops.
Speaker 2: Well, things like unresolvable defects those bugs found during development
Speaker 2: that maybe have minimal impact but still need a proper fix.
Speaker 2: Eventually they become direct inputs to the problem management process.
Speaker 2: The problem manager, who might be part of a shared
Speaker 2: services team or even embedded within larger DevOps teams, works
Speaker 2: to prioritize these problems. The resolution then gets fed back
Speaker 2: into the development backlog, planned into sprints.
Speaker 1: Ah, so the fix becomes a work item for the
Speaker 1: DevOps team.
Speaker 2: Exactly. The solution is developed, tested through the CICD pipeline,
Speaker 2: and deployed like any other feature or fix, ensuring permanent
Speaker 2: solutions are rolled out efficiently.
Speaker 1: Okay, that integration makes sense, and that leads us nicely
Speaker 1: to release management, actually delivering these changes and fixes with
Speaker 1: speed and control.
Speaker 2: Right ITIL traditionally defined releases as a collection of changes,
Speaker 2: often bundled into release units or release.
Speaker 1: Packages, and deployment approach is varied.
Speaker 2: Yeah, you had the big bang, everything goes out at once,
Speaker 2: high risk, high reward. Maybe be risk definitely or the
Speaker 2: phased approach, which is much more common now deploying to
Speaker 2: specific regions or user groups in stages. Think about how
Speaker 2: iOS updates roll out.
Speaker 1: Yeah, not everyone gets it on day one exactly.
Speaker 2: That phased approach is great for managing risk, learning quickly
Speaker 2: from a smaller group, and minimizing the blast radius if
Speaker 2: something does go wrong.
Speaker 1: So how does this look in DevOps? Releases still exist, right, Oh.
Speaker 2: Yes, but release management becomes much more iterative. For longer
Speaker 2: projects or coordinated releases across multiple teams. You often see
Speaker 2: planning done through agile release trains arts, a concept from
Speaker 2: the scaled agile framework.
Speaker 1: Okay, but here's another one of those provocative points from
Speaker 1: the source material. Automation has simply killed the release management
Speaker 1: team for the repetitive stuff.
Speaker 2: Uh. Yeah, that's a bold statement, but there's truth to it.
Speaker 1: So if the machines handle the gruntwork, the building, the testing,
Speaker 1: the deploying, what's left for humans and release management.
Speaker 2: It's the cognitive work, the planning, the strategic thinking, the
Speaker 2: risk assessment, coordinating dependencies between teams, the final GONA GO reviews,
Speaker 2: the communication, the post release and analysis. These things still
Speaker 2: absolutely require human intelligence and judgment. Automation handles the how
Speaker 2: humans focus on the what, why, and when.
Speaker 1: So the role evolves, it doesn't necessarily disappear. It becomes
Speaker 1: more strategic, exactly.
Speaker 2: It's a powerful shift in focus. And this transformation also
Speaker 2: brings deployment strategies like blue Green deployment to the forefront.
Speaker 1: AH blue Green explain that quickly.
Speaker 2: Sure, it's a fantastic way to achieve deployments with effectively
Speaker 2: zero downtime. You run two identical production environments in parallel.
Speaker 2: Let's call them blue and green.
Speaker 1: Okay, two identical setups.
Speaker 2: Right, one say, Blue is live serving all your user traffic,
Speaker 2: the other, Green is idle or passive. You deploy your
Speaker 2: new release to the green.
Speaker 1: Environment while Blue is still running the old version exactly.
Speaker 2: You can then thoroughly test Green smoke tests, integration tests,
Speaker 2: maybe even route some internal traffic to it. Once you're
Speaker 2: completely confident, you flip the switch. You redirect all the
Speaker 2: live traffic from Blue to Green. Green is now live
Speaker 2: serving the new version. Blue is now idle and becomes
Speaker 2: your rollback environment if needed, or the staging area for
Speaker 2: the next release.
Speaker 1: Slick like having a standby runway, always ready for takeoff.
Speaker 1: Continuous availability.
Speaker 2: That's the goal.
Speaker 1: And this brings us to another really significant role transformation
Speaker 1: mentioned in the book, the product owners. They're emerging as
Speaker 1: the new release managers.
Speaker 2: That's a fascinating point.
Speaker 1: Why them, Well, think about their position. They're already close
Speaker 1: to the business understanding the value proposition. They're deeply embedded
Speaker 1: with the development team understanding the features, and they need
Speaker 1: to coordinate with operations for smooth delivery, so they have
Speaker 1: that end to end view exactly. They're ideally suited for
Speaker 1: that end to end release ownership, managing not just the
Speaker 1: scope but also the cost, the schedule, and the quality
Speaker 1: what the source calls the quadruple constraints of project management.
Speaker 2: So it's not just about what features are in the release,
Speaker 2: but the entire delivery package. Right.
Speaker 1: It signals a fundamental ship embedding that business context directly
Speaker 1: into the release process, moving away from it acting as
Speaker 1: a separate gatekeeper towards being an integrated value delivery partner.
Speaker 2: Okay, so if we pull all these threads together, Yeah,
Speaker 2: the big picture here isn't about choosing ITIL or DevOps.
Speaker 1: Now it seems much more nuanced.
Speaker 2: It really is. It's about leveraging idol's foundational strengths, the governance,
Speaker 2: the service centric view, the process discipline, but infusing it
Speaker 2: with DevOps emphasis on speed, agility, collaboration, and crucially automation.
Speaker 2: This combination allows organizations to actually meet the relentless demands
Speaker 2: of the digital age.
Speaker 1: Without throwing the baby out with the bathwater, Without sacrificing
Speaker 1: stability or control precisely, Yeah, because this adaptation, this synergy,
Speaker 1: it seems to provide the ability to deliver fast and
Speaker 1: to minimize the number of bugs. As the book says,
Speaker 1: you get speed, but you also maintain those robust controls,
Speaker 1: the transparency, and that relentless focus on customer value.
Speaker 2: It's about being pragmatic, you know, cutting the unnecessary bureaucracy,
Speaker 2: the performative processes and truly empowering teams to deliver their
Speaker 2: best work.
Speaker 1: Which ultimately makes it a much more strategic asset, doesn't it.
Speaker 2: Absolutely, this evolution ensures that even with all these rapid
Speaker 2: continuous changes, the core objectives service, stability, quality, business alignment
Speaker 2: are still met. It helps it become a true integrated
Speaker 2: partner in the business, driving value, not just a support
Speaker 2: function reacting to tickets.
Speaker 1: Proactive, not just reactive.
Speaker 2: Exactly, it's an evolution that makes it far more strategic.
Speaker 1: So, reflecting on all this, what stands out to you
Speaker 1: as the most maybe profound transformation seeing itel reinvented through
Speaker 1: this DevOps lens and for you listening what existing maybe
Speaker 1: seemingly unchangeable process in your own work could actually benefit
Speaker 1: from this kind of integrated agility first approach. That was
Speaker 1: a really really enlightening deep dive seeing how two philosophies
Speaker 1: that seem so different on the surface can actually come
Speaker 1: together to create something incredibly powerful and frankly pragmatic. From
Speaker 1: reinventing team structures, empowering those product owners to streamlining change
Speaker 1: and release, the synergy between ITIL and DevOps is clearly
Speaker 1: changing the game for IT organizations everywhere.
Speaker 2: Indeed, and the insights from up and of Krishna Kaiser's
Speaker 2: book really drive home that continuous improvement isn't just one
Speaker 2: phase in the ITIL life cycle. It's a fundamental mindset
Speaker 2: that has to apply it to the frameworks.
Speaker 1: Themselves, adapting the adapter.
Speaker 2: Pretty much, the world of IT is constantly evolving faster
Speaker 2: than ever, and our approaches to managing it simply must
Speaker 2: evolve with it becoming more adaptable, more efficient, more value focused.
Speaker 1: So as you go about your day, maybe think about this.
Speaker 1: If even these established foundational frameworks like IDOL can be
Speaker 1: so fundamentally reinvented for agility and speed, what long standing,
Speaker 1: maybe seemingly rigid process in your organization might be ripe
Speaker 1: for a similar DevOps inspired transformation. What's the biggest bureaucratic
Speaker 1: hurdle you could potentially automate or streamline away. Thank you
Speaker 1: so much for joining us on this deep dive. Until
Speaker 1: next time, keep learning, keep questioning, and keep innovating.