You are the IT service manager for a multinational corporation that provides financial services. The company recently acquired a smaller fintech startup. The startup has its own IT infrastructure and processes, which are very different from the parent company's. The parent company uses a centralized IT service management system based on ITIL, while the startup uses a lightweight, DevOps-oriented approach. The CEO wants to integrate the startup's IT operations into the parent company's ITSM tool as quickly as possible to gain visibility and control. The startup's team is resistant, arguing that the parent company's processes are too bureaucratic and will slow them down. The parent company's IT team is frustrated because the startup is not following the established incident and change management processes. You have been asked to propose a course of action that aligns with ITIL guiding principles. Which option should you choose?
This applies 'Start where you are', 'Collaborate and promote visibility', and 'Progress iteratively with feedback'.
Why this answer
Option D is correct because it directly applies the ITIL guiding principles of 'Start where you are' (by mapping the startup's existing DevOps processes), 'Collaborate and promote visibility' (via a joint team), and 'Progress iteratively with feedback' (incremental rollout with feedback loops). This approach avoids the resistance and disruption of forced adoption while creating a lightweight integrated process that satisfies both the need for visibility and the startup's agility requirements.
Exam trap
The trap here is that candidates may choose Option C because it appears decisive and aligns with the CEO's urgency, but ITIL4F emphasizes collaboration and iterative progress over forced top-down mandates, which often fail in practice due to cultural resistance and process mismatch.
How to eliminate wrong answers
Option A is wrong because requiring email reporting bypasses the centralized ITSM tool's automation and audit trails, creating manual overhead and data inconsistency, violating the 'Optimize and automate' principle. Option B is wrong because maintaining a separate ITSM instance with full autonomy delays integration indefinitely and contradicts the CEO's directive for immediate visibility and control, ignoring 'Focus on value'. Option C is wrong because forcing immediate adoption of the parent company's bureaucratic processes violates 'Start where you are' and 'Progress iteratively', likely causing resistance, shadow IT, and operational disruption.