Passed - ITIL Continual Service Improvement have question about Practitioner

genxfinalrevision

So about an hour ago, I passed the ITIL CSI certification exam. I earned 38/40, so while it isn't my best result, a pass is a pass.

I actually have a question about the Practitioner exam. It kinda popped up after I started my certification path but those 3 points sort of feel like money left on the table. I also see that it is open book (although I don't know how much help that would really be).

My question is how much study does one really need to sit this exam if they have already completed Foundation, SO, OSA, and (the one that I think counts most for Practitioner) CSI? Like I have the book but I'm tempted to register on the strength of "I got this" and take the exam tomorrow (unless it requires approved training...but I don't see that on the Axelos site (https://www.axelos.com/certifications/itil-certifications/itil-practitioner-level).

UncleB

Have a look at the syllabus and consider how rusty you are one year on from passing the CSI exam:
https://www.axelos.com/Corporate/media/Files/Syllabi/EN-ITIL-PRAC-2015-Candidate-Syllabus-V2-0.pdf

Since the exams you have are at a much higher level, I personally don't see any merit in going for a low level cert like practitioner. Focus on the others that take you towards Expert level if you plan to invest time and effort as there are very cheap routes to these now.

While you have 11 points towards the MALC exam, you would still need practitioner plus one other exam to get over the line, but to complete MALC you need to know stuff from all elements of the courses that make it up, so you would have to do PPO and RCV anyway.

It is a bit like doing a university degree then popping back to do a high school course just to get a bit of credit - it won't help professionally and is probably going to cost more in the long run as the MALC exam is notoriously hard and you will be less prepared than most from having only done 3 out of 4 component courses.

Just my take on it.

genxfinalrevision

Good insights, UncleB. I think you've sold me on the idea of not going backwards for the Practitioner...it just feels like free money/low hanging fruit but perhaps it's a poisoned pawn.

Right now I have OSA, SO, CSI and of course Foundation. That's 12 points so I have to take 2 more exams (Lifecycle or Capability). Sometimes, I just want to get the points the easiest way because I just feel like I'm going to have to review all the entire Lifecycle. That 'easiest route' for me based on current experiences would be Service Transition or RCV + Practitioner.

I don't know much about the Practitioner exam other than it now exists..that is in part to my sharing the opinion that it is sort of going backwards for a few points. Having said that, it wasn't a year but an hour before my post that I had passed the CSI. From the little about Practitioner that I do know through my skimming of the official Guidance booklet, it does leverage CSI in a way that I think would be an advantage to someone who just studied up on CSI.

At other times, I feel that I should take Service Strategy or Service Design as they are the areas where I need the most rounding out. Earning a certification in either of these (or the equivalent Capability offering) would, to your point, be a benefit professionally. I would also then only have one of the two to 'learn from scratch' before the MALC.

So many questions...how do I get to 17; would the Lifecycle or Capability offerings be better in terms of MALC prep; if I did take SS and SD, how much review time would I really save vs if Practitioner were added to the mix? Much to consider..

I will add that I have completed approved training for all Lifecycle modules, MALC, and two of the Capability offerings but I don't believe that I am solid enough to take on any remaining exams without reading the entire Guidance book for the offering. I only point it out because I will be basically self-study/self-reviewing for all exams from this point. So money has been somewhat flattened in the equation as I only have the exam fees left.

DAVIS NGUYEN

Congrats!

Liz Gallacher

I disagree with this description of the Intermediate level qualifications being at a much higher level than Practitioner. For those of us who remember the old Version 2 Practitioner, this was quite a low level qualification - but the new Practitioner is at least a level wit Intermediate (hence its points value), and possibly higher. It is a more challenging course and exam - no "death by powerpoint", it has its own guidance book which it is essential to read (unlike the Intermediate exams here few students ever read the core volumes), a case study is used in the exam and it focuses on implementation, business engagement and CSI. The pass rates have not been good - including the results of tutors sitting the exam in order to teach it, due to its challenging nature. Personally, as an experienced tutor, I sat in on a class, meaning to take the exam immediately afterwards, but realised I would need more time to study the book. To me it is more like MALC than another intermediate.

UncleB

Liz Gallacher wrote: »

I disagree with this description of the Intermediate level qualifications being at a much higher level than Practitioner.

Hello Liz, the reason I described it as low level compared to the intermediate exams is that the intermediate exams go into significant depth on each topic while the practitioner picks elements of each intermediate exam so by definition is shallower on each subject, (or selective if you prefer).

Yes, there is more to cover as you are in effect looking to skim material from the 5 intermediate lifecycle exams plus the MALC and wrap it up in one, so it is in effect a lightweight exam in terms of depth compared to the rest. The fact it has a wide breadth of this material seems to be where it is being a challenge for some.

The 3 day practitioner course then has to compare to 5 x 3 day courses for the lifecycle intermediate exams plus 1 x 3 day course for MALC, so it is about 17% of the Expert training time and has to cover the 5 study areas in this time, so by my estimation would cover 20% of the course material (the MALC is comprised of the 5 intermediate study areas of course). This is the core reason I describe it as lower level - it cannot cover anything like the same depth as each intermediate exam in the time given.

I have no doubt that the new exam is proving a challenge as is the case with many new exams, but I expect AXELOS will normalise the difficulty over time to get the pass level they want.

Full disclosure - I have not been on a training course for Practitioner so I am basing my opinion on the syllabus and time/subject matter to cover.

Liz Gallacher

I don't understand what you mean by "while the practitioner picks elements of each intermediate exam so by definition is shallower on each subject, (or selective if you prefer)."
The practitioner certainly does NOT pick elements of each intermediate exam. Axelos describes it as follows:

"

• ITIL Practitioner covers the Continual Service Improvement (CSI) approach as the way to structure any improvement initiatives.
• ITIL Practitioner also covers three key areas crucial for success of any improvement initiatives:
  • Organizational Change Management
  • Communication
  • Measurement and Metrics.
• The ITIL Practitioner guidance follows 9 Guiding Principles:
  • Focus on value
  • Design for experience
  • Start where you are
  • Work holistically
  • Progress iteratively
  • Observe directly
  • Be transparent
  • Collaborate
  • Keep it simple."

Although it is a 40 question multiple choice exam, it is very different from foundation, being open book, about application, not memory, is scenario-based and takes 2 hours 15 minutes. It requires in-depth knowledge of the new Practitioner Guidance book, NOT the core volumes. Although the course is marketed at holders of the Foundation certificate, and is sometimes held over 2 days at the end of a Foundation course, I would not recommend this approach, as there is not time to read the book, and sit the long exam. I would recommend it be sat AFTER a CSI course

UncleB

So the course sounds like it takes elements mostly from the 3 day CSI course, pulls in other bits and pieces from SO, SD and ST courses and wraps it with a lot of practical application theory - all in just 2 days? I think there must be a trade off made between the depth of material covered in CSI and that in Practitioner otherwise the Practitioner course would be more than 50% longer to accommodate this.

I've seen some very positive comments about the course material, but much fewer about the exam questions:
ITIL Practitioner: Thoughts on the experience so far - The ITSM Review

I take what you mean about it being different and having its place, but I still find it hard to equate it to the intermediate courses as it is a third shorter. Maybe ITIL need to re-define it as a longer course and sort out the questions to be more rational (based on the comments I see when Googling the experience).

Maybe we are comparing apples and oranges here - I'll see if I can get my employer to book me on the exam and I can draw my own conclusions.

Liz Gallacher

I agree the the course should be longer, and that there are issues with the exams. However it does NOT cover any topics from SO, SD or ST. It takes some of what was mentioned in CSI, but treats it very differently. It takes the CSI approach, communication, assessments and stakeholder management from CSI but does not "cover" them in the same way - it is all about how to use these, not what they are. The course is 80% practical. not slides and definitions etc.. I think you would fine it interesting and valuable

UncleB

Liz Gallacher wrote: »

...it does NOT cover any topics from SO, SD or ST.

I had looked at the description from Axelos and took the following connections:
ITIL Practitioner also covers three key areas crucial for success of any improvement initiatives:
- Organizational Change Management (ST)
- Measurement and Metrics. (SO)
The ITIL Practitioner guidance follows 9 Guiding Principles:
- Design for experience (SD)

It is probably me drawing a conclusion based on headlines not content - apologies if I went off reservation with this.

I'm going to ask if I can get the exam paid for by my employer as a hook to get the staff here some more relevant training than ITIL Foundation - if it is logical, sensible and relevant then I'll get a course setup for them to attend.

I prefer self study and the material is very well rated, so after the rather dry lifecycle books I'm looking forward to something relatable.

Thank you for a very level headed explanation.

genxfinalrevision

After reading through the Practitioner Guidance a little more over the last week, it does feel very much like a stand-alone exam. Having just completed the CSI exam, I initially figured that I would be able to leverage a lot of that studying and have a easier go with the Practitioner. I now do not have that opinion.

The last comment from Liz was absolutely spot on. It does not draw from the lifecycle modules very much. Even the CSI aspects are coming from different angle. While the Guidance is a mere 144 pages where some lifecycle publications have that many pages in chapter 4, none of it feels borrowed.

I decided to get to 16 points by taking down Release, Control, and Validation. I plan to sit that exam next weekend. As it stands, I am leaning once again to getting to 17 via the Practitioner. Maybe once I put RCV away and I have a good solid week to read the Guidance, I'll have a better idea of how helpful it will be in terms of the MALC and if I should pursue it over Service Strategy, Design, or SOA or PPO. Either way, I do feel that the Practitioner Guidance is worth picking up and giving a good examination as it really speaks about ITIL in terms closer to "how to do it" more so than "what it is."