When ITIL adoption fails to deliver the expected value
Many organizations conclude that ITIL does not generate value. However, the problem is rarely the framework itself, but rather how it is adopted in practice. This situation generally does not occur because ITIL has “failed” to deliver the expected benefits, but rather because ITIL has not been properly adopted due to a misinterpretation of its guiding principles.
ITIL 4 introduced the Guiding Principles (which are reinforced in ITIL Version 5). These are seven fundamental and universal guidelines designed to help organizations make decisions and manage services, fostering agility and value creation. Taking these principles into account can facilitate the deployment of ITIL and thus achieve greater organizational benefits. However, a misinterpretation of these principles hinders the application of the framework and prevents the expected positive impact from being perceived.
This misinterpretation of these principles can be referred to as anti-patterns in ITIL adoption. An ITIL anti-pattern is a recurring practice that appears to align with ITIL, but in reality contradicts these principles and results in loss of value.
The following are some anti-patterns that may arise when ITIL Guiding Principles are misinterpreted:
Anti-patterns in ITIL adoption
1. Focusing on processes
This is an anti-pattern of “Focus on Value.” When this situation occurs, a culture is fostered where members of the organization focus on following processes in an almost mechanical way. Employees are encouraged to primarily focus on meeting operational indicator targets, such as closing tickets before they expire or complying with response time SLAs. Prioritizing this approach causes the organization to lose sight of delivering what the user truly expects—whether restoring a malfunctioning application, granting access, or installing required software, among other cases.
From the user’s perspective, this results in a negative experience: tickets being closed without receiving the required solution, solely to avoid missing resolution deadlines.
To avoid this, focusing on value requires understanding the user—what they use the service for and how it helps them achieve their objectives. Therefore, it is advisable to foster a culture where all employees clearly understand this value-driven approach, and where goals and metrics are aligned primarily with delivering the benefits expected by users. This is complemented by the concept of User Experience (UX).
2. Reinventing everything
This is an anti-pattern of “Start Where You Are.” When initiating a transformation initiative or developing a new service, one approach may be to assume that nothing currently works and that everything must be built from scratch.
In contrast, the principle of “Start Where You Are” implies validating which elements (infrastructure, personnel, knowledge, experience, data, practices) can support the initiative. By identifying elements that can serve as a foundation, cost and time savings can be achieved compared to building everything from scratch.
3. Big Bang transformation
This is an anti-pattern of “Progress Iteratively with Feedback.” One approach to implementing technology deployments or process reengineering initiatives is to execute a full “big bang” rollout in a short period of time.
For example, deploying a new tool across all areas at once, or defining that all ITIL Management Practices will be adopted within six months.
Defining such large scopes within tight timelines can be counterproductive. In complex initiatives, the likelihood of failing in terms of scope, time, or cost is very high. These failures often lead to dissatisfaction among executives, penalties from clients, and demotivation among employees, among other issues.
Therefore, an agile and iterative approach allows the initiative to be divided into smaller work packages, enabling more focused planning and facilitating progressive value delivery. At the same time, each delivery incorporates feedback into the next cycle.
In the case of deploying a new technological tool, this translates into phased rollouts across different organizational units until full coverage is achieved. Regarding ITIL practices, it involves prioritizing those Management Practices that provide the greatest positive impact at the organizational level.
4. Siloed management
This is an anti-pattern of “Collaborate and Promote Visibility.” Traditional organizational structures often promote siloed work, where each area operates independently.
For example, IT may perform infrastructure maintenance without considering the impact on business areas, or implement technological updates without validating which tools would provide the greatest benefit to the business. This misalignment prevents IT from delivering real value, impacts business operations, and leads to low-value technology investments.
Additionally, it generates friction between teams and prevents the development of a shared organizational identity.
Fostering a culture of collaboration ensures that all employees understand how their work contributes to organizational objectives. Furthermore, collaboration between IT and business areas enables better investment decisions and reduces the likelihood of maintenance activities disrupting business operations.
5. Thinking and working locally
This is an anti-pattern of “Think and Work Holistically.” It refers, for example, to analyzing a process for improvement in isolation, without considering its interdependencies.
This approach may result in improvements in one process negatively impacting another dependent process.
A holistic approach means understanding that the organization is a complex system of interdependent elements. By recognizing these relationships, it becomes possible to assess how changes in one area may positively or negatively impact others.
6. Complexity in execution
This is an anti-pattern of “Keep It Simple and Practical.” In some organizations, there is a belief that the more complex a process is, the better it must be.
Modern approaches recognize that high complexity makes it harder for individuals to learn and follow processes correctly, increasing the likelihood of skipping steps or making mistakes. This leads to defects, compliance issues, and delays caused by rework.
Modern approaches promote keeping processes as simple as possible—eliminating redundant or non-value-adding activities while retaining only those that contribute directly or indirectly to the customer’s expected outcomes.
7. Automating inefficiency
This is an anti-pattern of “Optimize and Automate.” Some leaders believe that implementing a new technological tool is a “magic solution” that will instantly increase efficiency, reduce delivery times, and minimize errors.
In reality, this is rarely the case. Automating inefficient operations only results in automated inefficiency—such as duplicating unnecessary or redundant activities.
Therefore, ITIL emphasizes that the first step is to optimize operations. In practice, this means simplifying processes and eliminating non-value-adding activities. Once an appropriate level of optimization is achieved, automation can then be effectively introduced.
Conclusion: ITIL does not fail; what fails is how it is interpreted and implemented
In conclusion, ITIL does not fail; what fails is how it is interpreted and implemented. The anti-patterns presented demonstrate that adopting ITIL is not merely about implementing processes or technology in isolation, but about taking a holistic approach—prioritizing value, fostering collaboration, incorporating feedback, and maintaining simplicity, as suggested by the Guiding Principles.
Identifying and correcting these anti-patterns not only improves ITIL adoption but also turns service management into a true strategic enabler.
