Skip to main content

The Two Faces of IT Service Management

Dennis Drogseth

EMA recently completed some research looking at the future of IT Service Management (ITSM). We solicited responses to about 270 people overall, with roughly 150 in North America and 100 in Europe (England, Germany, France). The results just came in two weeks ago, and I’d like to share a few highlights with you here.

But first, I should probably start out with one question we didn’t ask — "What is IT Service Management?"

Probably the most frequent industry answer is that ITSM is a "process-based practice designed to align the delivery of IT services with the needs of IT customers and the business IT serves." As a result, many ITSM descriptions spend a great deal of time looking at IT Infrastructure Library (ITIL) roots for ITSM, as well as other best practices focused on process. However, this research approached ITSM from a triangle of perspectives. We recognized the importance of technology and organization, as well as process (including dialog and communication).

Beyond that, even before we launched our questionnaire, it became apparent from talking around the industry that IT Service Management is a term that carries a diverse identity — depending on whom you talk to (in role and organization), history and IT-related politics.

On the one hand, ITSM is often linked to old-guard values associated with elaborate, time-consuming processes for managing change and traditional forms of governance that slow down IT resilience in the face of shifting business pressures and demands.

On the other hand, ITSM is often viewed as a dynamic center for expanding IT value, impact and effectiveness in support of broader business requirements — in combination with operations, development and business stakeholders.

Can both views be right? It depends upon whom you ask. But overall, our data tended to favor the second, more positive perspective on ITSM. Here are just a few highlights:

■ Nearly 50% of ITSM organizations were slated for growth, and 35% remain the same size.

■ Improved user experience management and integrated operations for incident, problem and change management led in ITSM strategic priorities.

■ Self-service, project management and CMDB/CMS/ADDM led in functional priorities.

■ 55% viewed big data/analytics for IT as a shared ITSM and operations priority, while 14% viewed ITSM as the lead in analytics.

■ 63% were using mobile in support of ITSM professionals.

■ 50% offered mobile support for ITSM/consumer interactions.

■ Only 20% had no plans to integrate ITSM and DevOps (agile).

■ 43% were actively using ITIL best practices, and of these, 71% viewed it as "essential" or "very important" for their organization.

■ Only 11% had no plans to consolidate ITSM outreach to support enterprise (non-IT) services.

When looking at success rates, we also analyzed the data to contrast how the 16% "extremely successful" performed, versus the 12% combined "somewhat successful" and "largely unsuccessful" respondents. (Most viewed themselves, perhaps a tad optimistically, as "very successful" or simply "successful".)

Compared to that 12% with marginal success rates, extremely successful ITSM initiatives were:

■ 2X more likely to have a CMDB/CMS-related technology deployed

■ Nearly 8X more likely to have ADDM deployed or in plan

■ 2X more likely to be leveraging mobile for ITSM professionals

■ Far more likely to see cloud as a resource for expanding service desk capabilities

■ 20X more likely to view integrated ITSM and agile as "transformative"

■ Far more likely to have an integrated approach to support enterprise services

■ Significantly more likely to value ITIL

■ Much more likely to get an increase in budget

■ Nearly 2.5 times more likely to be slated for growth

These are just a few highlights from our overall success profile.

What this data suggests to me albeit I realize data is always open to interpretation, is several things. For starters, it shows me that our "progressives" are not abandoning ITSM processes and more established ITSM-related technologies such as CMDB systems and application discovery and dependency mapping, but instead are seeking more innovative approaches in their adoptions. The data also reflects a dramatic outreach to support mobile, cloud, agile and enterprise needs — some of which show astonishing uptake from levels just assessed two years ago when we looked at the changing role of the service desk.

What the future will bring is always open to interpretation, as well. But this research seems to indicate a clear trajectory that in many respects is ahead of existing "market thinking." A trajectory that underscores the need to bring process, workflow, automation and dialog between the service desk and the rest of IT into a far more unified whole than in the past. It also suggests that technologies like "big data for IT" — so often referred to as IT operations analytics — belongs as much to this shared mix of capabilities as trouble ticketing and workflow.

Needless to say, the role of culture, leadership and more effective process and dialog is probably an even more important part of ITSM transformation than pure technology adoption, and we looked at many of those issues, as well. So stay tuned. We’ll be doing a webinar with more information on April 7, and hopefully this will whet your appetite for more data and more insights. In the meantime, I welcome the chance to get some of your perspectives and ideas.

Hot Topics

The Latest

Like most digital transformation shifts, organizations often prioritize productivity and leave security and observability to keep pace. This usually translates to both the mass implementation of new technology and fragmented monitoring and observability (M&O) tooling. In the era of AI and varied cloud architecture, a disparate observability function can be dangerous. IT teams will lack a complete picture of their IT environment, making it harder to diagnose issues while slowing down mean time to resolve (MTTR). In fact, according to recent data from the SolarWinds State of Monitoring & Observability Report, 77% of IT personnel said the lack of visibility across their on-prem and cloud architecture was an issue ...

In MEAN TIME TO INSIGHT Episode 23, Shamus McGillicuddy, VP of Research, Network Infrastructure and Operations, at EMA discusses the NetOps labor shortage ... 

Technology management is evolving, and in turn, so is the scope of FinOps. The FinOps Foundation recently updated their mission statement from "advancing the people who manage the value of cloud" to "advancing the people who manage the value of technology." This seemingly small change solidifies a larger evolution: FinOps practitioners have organically expanded to be focused on more than just cloud cost optimization. Today, FinOps teams are largely — and quickly — expanding their job descriptions, evolving into a critical function for managing the full value of technology ...

Enterprises are under pressure to scale AI quickly. Yet despite considerable investment, adoption continues to stall. One of the most overlooked reasons is vendor sprawl ... In reality, no organization deliberately sets out to create sprawling vendor ecosystems. More often, complexity accumulates over time through well-intentioned initiatives, such as enterprise-wide digital transformation efforts, point solutions, or decentralized sourcing strategies ...

Nearly every conversation about AI eventually circles back to compute. GPUs dominate the headlines while cloud platforms compete for workloads and model benchmarks drive investment decisions. But underneath that noise, a quieter infrastructure challenge is taking shape. The real bottleneck in enterprise AI is not processing power, it is the ability to store, manage and retrieve the relentless volumes of data that AI systems generate, consume and multiply ...

The 2026 Observability Survey from Grafana Labs paints a vivid picture of an industry maturing fast, where AI is welcomed with careful conditions, SaaS economics are reshaping spending decisions, complexity remains a defining challenge, and open standards continue to underpin it all ...

The observability industry has an evolving relationship with AI. We're not skeptics, but it's clear that trust in AI must be earned ... In Grafana Labs' annual Observability Survey, 92% said they see real value in AI surfacing anomalies before they cause downtime. Another 91% endorsed AI for forecasting and root cause analysis. So while the demand is there, customers need it to be trustworthy, as the survey also found that the practitioners most enthusiastic about AI are also the most insistent on explainability ...

In the modern enterprise, the conversation around AI has moved past skepticism toward a stage of active adoption. According to our 2026 State of IT Trends Report: The Human Side of Autonomous AI, nearly 90% of IT professionals view AI as a net positive, and this optimism is well-founded. We are seeing agentic AI move beyond simple automation to actively streamlining complex data insights and eliminating the manual toil that has long hindered innovation. However, as we integrate these autonomous agents into our ecosystems, the fundamental DNA of the IT role is evolving ...

AI workloads require an enormous amount of computing power ... What's also becoming abundantly clear is just how quickly AI's computing needs are leading to enterprise systems failure. According to Cockroach Labs' State of AI Infrastructure 2026 report, enterprise systems are much closer to failure than their organizations realize. The report ... suggests AI scale could cause widespread failures in as little as one year — making it a clear risk for business performance and reliability.

The quietest week your engineering team has ever had might also be its best. No alarms going off. No escalations. No frantic Teams or Slack threads at 2 a.m. Everything humming along exactly as it should. And somewhere in a leadership meeting, someone looks at the metrics dashboard, sees a flat line of incidents and says: "Seems like things are pretty calm over there. Do we really need all those people?" ... I've spent many years in engineering, and this pattern keeps repeating ...

The Two Faces of IT Service Management

Dennis Drogseth

EMA recently completed some research looking at the future of IT Service Management (ITSM). We solicited responses to about 270 people overall, with roughly 150 in North America and 100 in Europe (England, Germany, France). The results just came in two weeks ago, and I’d like to share a few highlights with you here.

But first, I should probably start out with one question we didn’t ask — "What is IT Service Management?"

Probably the most frequent industry answer is that ITSM is a "process-based practice designed to align the delivery of IT services with the needs of IT customers and the business IT serves." As a result, many ITSM descriptions spend a great deal of time looking at IT Infrastructure Library (ITIL) roots for ITSM, as well as other best practices focused on process. However, this research approached ITSM from a triangle of perspectives. We recognized the importance of technology and organization, as well as process (including dialog and communication).

Beyond that, even before we launched our questionnaire, it became apparent from talking around the industry that IT Service Management is a term that carries a diverse identity — depending on whom you talk to (in role and organization), history and IT-related politics.

On the one hand, ITSM is often linked to old-guard values associated with elaborate, time-consuming processes for managing change and traditional forms of governance that slow down IT resilience in the face of shifting business pressures and demands.

On the other hand, ITSM is often viewed as a dynamic center for expanding IT value, impact and effectiveness in support of broader business requirements — in combination with operations, development and business stakeholders.

Can both views be right? It depends upon whom you ask. But overall, our data tended to favor the second, more positive perspective on ITSM. Here are just a few highlights:

■ Nearly 50% of ITSM organizations were slated for growth, and 35% remain the same size.

■ Improved user experience management and integrated operations for incident, problem and change management led in ITSM strategic priorities.

■ Self-service, project management and CMDB/CMS/ADDM led in functional priorities.

■ 55% viewed big data/analytics for IT as a shared ITSM and operations priority, while 14% viewed ITSM as the lead in analytics.

■ 63% were using mobile in support of ITSM professionals.

■ 50% offered mobile support for ITSM/consumer interactions.

■ Only 20% had no plans to integrate ITSM and DevOps (agile).

■ 43% were actively using ITIL best practices, and of these, 71% viewed it as "essential" or "very important" for their organization.

■ Only 11% had no plans to consolidate ITSM outreach to support enterprise (non-IT) services.

When looking at success rates, we also analyzed the data to contrast how the 16% "extremely successful" performed, versus the 12% combined "somewhat successful" and "largely unsuccessful" respondents. (Most viewed themselves, perhaps a tad optimistically, as "very successful" or simply "successful".)

Compared to that 12% with marginal success rates, extremely successful ITSM initiatives were:

■ 2X more likely to have a CMDB/CMS-related technology deployed

■ Nearly 8X more likely to have ADDM deployed or in plan

■ 2X more likely to be leveraging mobile for ITSM professionals

■ Far more likely to see cloud as a resource for expanding service desk capabilities

■ 20X more likely to view integrated ITSM and agile as "transformative"

■ Far more likely to have an integrated approach to support enterprise services

■ Significantly more likely to value ITIL

■ Much more likely to get an increase in budget

■ Nearly 2.5 times more likely to be slated for growth

These are just a few highlights from our overall success profile.

What this data suggests to me albeit I realize data is always open to interpretation, is several things. For starters, it shows me that our "progressives" are not abandoning ITSM processes and more established ITSM-related technologies such as CMDB systems and application discovery and dependency mapping, but instead are seeking more innovative approaches in their adoptions. The data also reflects a dramatic outreach to support mobile, cloud, agile and enterprise needs — some of which show astonishing uptake from levels just assessed two years ago when we looked at the changing role of the service desk.

What the future will bring is always open to interpretation, as well. But this research seems to indicate a clear trajectory that in many respects is ahead of existing "market thinking." A trajectory that underscores the need to bring process, workflow, automation and dialog between the service desk and the rest of IT into a far more unified whole than in the past. It also suggests that technologies like "big data for IT" — so often referred to as IT operations analytics — belongs as much to this shared mix of capabilities as trouble ticketing and workflow.

Needless to say, the role of culture, leadership and more effective process and dialog is probably an even more important part of ITSM transformation than pure technology adoption, and we looked at many of those issues, as well. So stay tuned. We’ll be doing a webinar with more information on April 7, and hopefully this will whet your appetite for more data and more insights. In the meantime, I welcome the chance to get some of your perspectives and ideas.

Hot Topics

The Latest

Like most digital transformation shifts, organizations often prioritize productivity and leave security and observability to keep pace. This usually translates to both the mass implementation of new technology and fragmented monitoring and observability (M&O) tooling. In the era of AI and varied cloud architecture, a disparate observability function can be dangerous. IT teams will lack a complete picture of their IT environment, making it harder to diagnose issues while slowing down mean time to resolve (MTTR). In fact, according to recent data from the SolarWinds State of Monitoring & Observability Report, 77% of IT personnel said the lack of visibility across their on-prem and cloud architecture was an issue ...

In MEAN TIME TO INSIGHT Episode 23, Shamus McGillicuddy, VP of Research, Network Infrastructure and Operations, at EMA discusses the NetOps labor shortage ... 

Technology management is evolving, and in turn, so is the scope of FinOps. The FinOps Foundation recently updated their mission statement from "advancing the people who manage the value of cloud" to "advancing the people who manage the value of technology." This seemingly small change solidifies a larger evolution: FinOps practitioners have organically expanded to be focused on more than just cloud cost optimization. Today, FinOps teams are largely — and quickly — expanding their job descriptions, evolving into a critical function for managing the full value of technology ...

Enterprises are under pressure to scale AI quickly. Yet despite considerable investment, adoption continues to stall. One of the most overlooked reasons is vendor sprawl ... In reality, no organization deliberately sets out to create sprawling vendor ecosystems. More often, complexity accumulates over time through well-intentioned initiatives, such as enterprise-wide digital transformation efforts, point solutions, or decentralized sourcing strategies ...

Nearly every conversation about AI eventually circles back to compute. GPUs dominate the headlines while cloud platforms compete for workloads and model benchmarks drive investment decisions. But underneath that noise, a quieter infrastructure challenge is taking shape. The real bottleneck in enterprise AI is not processing power, it is the ability to store, manage and retrieve the relentless volumes of data that AI systems generate, consume and multiply ...

The 2026 Observability Survey from Grafana Labs paints a vivid picture of an industry maturing fast, where AI is welcomed with careful conditions, SaaS economics are reshaping spending decisions, complexity remains a defining challenge, and open standards continue to underpin it all ...

The observability industry has an evolving relationship with AI. We're not skeptics, but it's clear that trust in AI must be earned ... In Grafana Labs' annual Observability Survey, 92% said they see real value in AI surfacing anomalies before they cause downtime. Another 91% endorsed AI for forecasting and root cause analysis. So while the demand is there, customers need it to be trustworthy, as the survey also found that the practitioners most enthusiastic about AI are also the most insistent on explainability ...

In the modern enterprise, the conversation around AI has moved past skepticism toward a stage of active adoption. According to our 2026 State of IT Trends Report: The Human Side of Autonomous AI, nearly 90% of IT professionals view AI as a net positive, and this optimism is well-founded. We are seeing agentic AI move beyond simple automation to actively streamlining complex data insights and eliminating the manual toil that has long hindered innovation. However, as we integrate these autonomous agents into our ecosystems, the fundamental DNA of the IT role is evolving ...

AI workloads require an enormous amount of computing power ... What's also becoming abundantly clear is just how quickly AI's computing needs are leading to enterprise systems failure. According to Cockroach Labs' State of AI Infrastructure 2026 report, enterprise systems are much closer to failure than their organizations realize. The report ... suggests AI scale could cause widespread failures in as little as one year — making it a clear risk for business performance and reliability.

The quietest week your engineering team has ever had might also be its best. No alarms going off. No escalations. No frantic Teams or Slack threads at 2 a.m. Everything humming along exactly as it should. And somewhere in a leadership meeting, someone looks at the metrics dashboard, sees a flat line of incidents and says: "Seems like things are pretty calm over there. Do we really need all those people?" ... I've spent many years in engineering, and this pattern keeps repeating ...