In the second webinar of "The USM Revolution" series (https://lnkd.in/gfXbYCdU), we received more live questions than we could handle online. Let's now answer Live Question 4 from that webinar.

"๐€๐ง๐ฒ๐ญ๐ก๐ข๐ง๐  ๐ฐ๐ซ๐จ๐ง๐  ๐ฐ๐ข๐ญ๐ก ๐ญ๐ก๐ž ๐ˆ๐“๐ˆ๐‹๐Ÿ’ ๐๐ž๐Ÿ๐ข๐ง๐ข๐ญ๐ข๐จ๐ง ๐จ๐Ÿ '๐ฌ๐ž๐ซ๐ฏ๐ข๐œ๐ž'?"

The ๐ฌ๐ก๐จ๐ซ๐ญ answer is "Absolutely - like so many other definitions, it's way too vague and not operable, not measurable, and not underpinned with a detailed spec of a service construction."
The ๐ฅ๐จ๐ง๐ ๐ž๐ซ answer would be this:

ITIL4 defines a service as "๐ด ๐‘š๐‘’๐‘Ž๐‘›๐‘  ๐‘œ๐‘“ ๐‘๐‘œ-๐‘๐‘Ÿ๐‘’๐‘Ž๐‘ก๐‘–๐‘›๐‘” ๐‘ฃ๐‘Ž๐‘™๐‘ข๐‘’ ๐‘ก๐‘œ ๐‘๐‘ข๐‘ ๐‘ก๐‘œ๐‘š๐‘’๐‘Ÿ๐‘  ๐‘๐‘ฆ ๐‘“๐‘Ž๐‘๐‘–๐‘™๐‘–๐‘ก๐‘Ž๐‘ก๐‘–๐‘›๐‘” ๐‘œ๐‘ข๐‘ก๐‘๐‘œ๐‘š๐‘’๐‘  ๐‘๐‘ข๐‘ ๐‘ก๐‘œ๐‘š๐‘’๐‘Ÿ๐‘  ๐‘ค๐‘Ž๐‘›๐‘ก ๐‘ก๐‘œ ๐‘Ž๐‘โ„Ž๐‘–๐‘’๐‘ฃ๐‘’ ๐‘ค๐‘–๐‘กโ„Ž๐‘œ๐‘ข๐‘ก ๐‘กโ„Ž๐‘’ ๐‘œ๐‘ค๐‘›๐‘’๐‘Ÿ๐‘ โ„Ž๐‘–๐‘ ๐‘œ๐‘“ ๐‘ ๐‘๐‘’๐‘๐‘–๐‘“๐‘–๐‘ ๐‘๐‘œ๐‘ ๐‘ก๐‘  ๐‘Ž๐‘›๐‘‘ ๐‘Ÿ๐‘–๐‘ ๐‘˜๐‘ ."
It's almost impossible to get much more vague than this: you can't ๐‘๐‘œ๐‘›๐‘ ๐‘ก๐‘Ÿ๐‘ข๐‘๐‘ก a service based on this definition. You can't ๐‘ ๐‘๐‘’๐‘๐‘–๐‘“๐‘–๐‘ฆ and ๐‘š๐‘’๐‘Ž๐‘ ๐‘ข๐‘Ÿ๐‘’ the components of that service, as the definition doesn't specify any.

But ITIL is in good company. ๐“๐Ž๐†๐€๐…'s definition of service is very incomplete, as it only includes behavior:
1. A repeatable activity...
2. An element of behavior that ...
This means there are no ๐‘”๐‘œ๐‘œ๐‘‘๐‘  involved as components of the service.

๐€๐ซ๐œ๐ก๐ข๐ฆ๐š๐ญ๐ž and ๐™๐š๐œ๐ก๐ฆ๐š๐ง do not even โ„Ž๐‘Ž๐‘ฃ๐‘’ a definition of 'service'.

๐†๐š๐ซ๐ญ๐ง๐ž๐ซ'๐ฌ ๐„๐€ ๐…๐ซ๐š๐ฆ๐ž๐ฐ๐จ๐ซ๐ค and the ๐Ž๐ฉ๐ž๐ง ๐†๐ซ๐จ๐ฎ๐ฉ'๐ฌ ๐ˆ๐“๐Ÿ’๐ˆ๐“ do not define 'service' either, as they are ๐ˆ๐“ frameworks. They only define '๐ˆ๐“ ๐ฌ๐ž๐ซ๐ฏ๐ข๐œ๐ž': again as only an activity or as a vague statement about what it refers to.

ITIL and these EA frameworks do not specify ๐’๐ž๐ซ๐ฏ๐ข๐œ๐ž ๐Œ๐š๐ง๐š๐ ๐ž๐ฆ๐ž๐ง๐ญ either. They only talk about ๐ˆ๐“ Service Management (ITSM). They define ITSM as "A customer-focused approach to delivering value through the delivery of IT." Again: as vague as it gets.

Neither ITIL or any of these EA frameworks define ๐’๐ž๐ซ๐ฏ๐ข๐œ๐ž ๐Œ๐š๐ง๐š๐ ๐ž๐ฆ๐ž๐ง๐ญ ๐€๐ซ๐œ๐ก๐ข๐ญ๐ž๐œ๐ญ๐ฎ๐ซ๐ž.

This means we can't rely on any of these sources, as they are all ๐‘ก๐‘’๐‘โ„Ž๐‘›๐‘œ๐‘™๐‘œ๐‘”๐‘ฆ- and ๐‘๐‘Ÿ๐‘Ž๐‘๐‘ก๐‘–๐‘๐‘’-based frameworks that provide incomplete definitions or vague statements that you can't put to practice in an unambiguous way.

The USM method takes a very different approach: it provides a measurable specification of the concept of 'service'ย that has a ๐‘ข๐‘›๐‘–๐‘ฃ๐‘’๐‘Ÿ๐‘ ๐‘Ž๐‘™ nature, covering any service in any line of business for any organization of any size. All the definitions mentioned above can be covered by the USM definition: 'A service is a ๐ฌ๐ฎ๐ฉ๐ฉ๐จ๐ซ๐ญ๐ž๐ ๐Ÿ๐š๐œ๐ข๐ฅ๐ข๐ญ๐ฒ that is composed of ๐ ๐จ๐จ๐๐ฌ ๐š๐ง๐ ๐š๐œ๐ญ๐ข๐จ๐ง๐ฌ'. Each component is a part of a structured service system.

If you want to learn more about the architecture behind the new thinking of USM, please join the next webinar in the USM Revolution series: Service Management Architecture & System - 17 September - https://ow.ly/pgML50SIUAf