ITIL Adoption Model Based on UTAUT

Faten Qutaifan, Azza Al HilaIi and Noha Tarek

American University of Sharjah
P.O. Box 26666
Sharjah, UAE
e-mail: g00014365@aus.edu, g00035377@aus.edu and g00023380@aus.edu
Abstract
As organizations implement ITIL to enhance the IT governance they either study critical success factors, or take
consultants advice on best practices for maximum probability of succeeding with the organizational culture change.
Meanwhile, the adoption of such change is not widely discussed owing to the lack of adoption models that address
governance frameworks. This paper proposes the use of the technology adoption model UTAUT as an adoption
model of IT governance frameworks, specifically ITIL. In order for the model to specifically cater to ITIL adoption,
it was supported by critical success factors of ITIL implementation. These critical success factors are proposed to
have a direct impact on constructs that define the adoption. The proposed model was then implemented by applying
it to a case study of a company where the ITIL implementation project failed. As a result to analyzing the case study
in light of the adoption model, a road map to successful implementation of ITIL is proposed.
Keywords
Information Technology Infrastructure Library, ITIL, ITIL Success Factors, ITIL Adoption, UTAUT,
implementation road map
1 Introduction
As managements recognize that the role of IT is essential to their core business, their demand increases for a
governance model or a quality improvement framework such as Six Sigma Total Quality Management (TQM) or
Business Process Reengineering (BPR). Two problems lie in adopting conventional quality models, first they are
basically designed for products not services, secondly, they are very general in scope. These two issues were
addressed by researchers and governmental bodies resulting in the development of governance frameworks targeting
IT such as CMMI, ITIL and COBIT.
Another interest started forming in the IT community directing companies towards a service- based approach rather
than the technology focus, forming the IT Service Management (ITSM) concept. Among the three stated IT
governance models, ITIL proved best adherence to ITSM. [7]
Implementing ITIL however has proven challenging and dependent on various critical factors each of which might
compromise the implementation project in all. This statement might seem generic and pessimistic; however, many
papers conclude very similar sets of critical success factors (CFS) which imply that each of these factors have equal
contribution weight to the success of ITIL implementation. Based on this, it was found that a large number of the
CSFs are not technology-based, that is, it doesnt depend on the vendor or application selected to aid in
implementing ITIL. On the contrary, most of the CSF relate to user acceptance of the framework. To aid in reducing
the friction of implementing ITIL, a methodology needs to be employed that takes into consideration both human
and technological factors. Accordingly, this paper will first study ITIL implementation challenges, then technology
adoption models in order to propose a roadmap for ITIL implementation.

John Q. Student, 2011: I grant the American University of Sharjah the non exclusive right to use this work for the University's own purposes
and to make single copies of the work available to the public on a not-for-profit basis if copies are not otherwise available.
1.1 Contribution
The limited research found on ITIL implementation concentrates on describing success factors and best
implementation practices. On the other hand, adoption models such as TAM and UTAUT are proposed for new
technologies but not frameworks. This paper aims to apply UTAUT technology adoption model to an IT
management framework, namely, ITIL. To do so, a roadmap for implementing ITIL in light of UTAUT is proposed.
Critical Success Factors (CSF) of implementing ITIL are identified through a comprehensive literature review. CSFs
are then related to the UTAUT adoption model which is then applied to a case study. The case study portrays the
initiative of implementing ITIL in a relatively young stock exchange market.
2 Literature Review
2.1 Information Technology Infrastructure Library (ITIL)
ITIL as stated by the ITIL on its official website is a documentation of process-based best practices that when
implemented successfully improve quality of IT services. ITIL provides guidance to a number of generic managerial
objectives; align IT with business; reduce IT cost and increase efficiency [1]. To summarize, researchers concluded
two major reasons explaining the move towards implementing ITIL one being the increased focus on customer
service [2] [3] [4] [5] [6]. Another reason stated is the increased interest in effective and transparent IT governance
[5]. Historically, ITIL V1 framework was constructed after research and interviews with IT experts conducted by
the Office of Government Commerce, UK (previously named: Central Communication and telecom Agency) in
1980s. [5] [6] [7] ITIL-V2 was released in 2000 were the service concept was incorporated into the model [2]. Being
a quality improvement framework, ITIL is similar to other quality frameworks in the aspect that it reorganizes
work, not staff [1]. Hence, reduction in IT operational cost is not a short-term achievement, also, simply because
ITIL adoption may take years. The difference between ITIL and other frameworks is mainly in 1) being designed
specifically for Information technology management 2) the service quality concentration.
ITIL implementation is not spelled out in documentations, leaving managers wandering, what is the best practice to
implement the best practice. [1] For that, consultants, vendor, deep training are essential. Another unappealing trait
of ITIL is the resistance it receives by staff due to poor change management, a study even showed that an
organization opted against ITIL after assessing their ability to implement it; the reason stated was Not enough of
the organization would participate. [1] To overcome, or at least reduce ITIL implementation limitations and
setbacks, researchers studied critical success factors (CSF), and how users perceive IT frameworks.
2.2 Critical Success Factors for implementation of ITIL
A literature review is conducted to identify critical factors for successful implementation of ITIL. The first paper
used is a meta-analysis of previous studies on critical success factors (CSF) [2].Two of the papers reviewed were
multi-case studies of organizations that have implemented ITIL were the authors interviewed ITIL stakeholders in
studied organizations [3] [4] [8]. Another paper used to identify CSFs was based on results of a questionnaire
completed by itSMF National Conference delegates [5]. The final paper studied was also a multi-case study where
authors interviewed ITIL projects stakeholders, however, the findings of this paper present barriers instead of
success factors- to successfully implement ITIL [6]. Hence we will negate these factors to their positive
counterpoints to use them as CSFs.
Management Support
Top management support is essential for successful implementation of any initiatives that might alter the
organization culture. Hence, as the case is with all quality improvement frameworks, the study conducted by [8]
shows that ITIL demands management involvement. Management support and commitment play two important
roles, first it endorse policy and enforce compliance to following newly implemented standard processes. The other
essential role management support plays is guaranteed funding needed for consultancy, tools, and training [3]. As
top management put their weight behind an initiative they trigger communication between stakeholders [1]. As
management support is only granted after solid proof of concept, management will be aware of the time lag between
investing resources in ITIL project and achieving goals [6], hence this critique aspect could be spared.

ITIL Awareness and Training
General training of ITIL fundamentals allows stakeholders to effectively communicate about ITIL processes [1].
Training and awareness reduced employee resistance [3] and increased cooperation and adoption of new processes
[1]. Besides formal training, learning, awareness and knowledge sharing comes in several forms; (1) lessons from
other organizations through consultants, (2) existing knowledge shared in workshops, cross functional teams and job
rotations 3) learning from completed implementation phases; lessons learned and feedbacks after every implemented
ITIL process [4].
Interdepartmental Collaboration
Interdepartmental collaboration is identified as a CSF by two papers [2] [3], the authors explain that this specific
CSF is needed to maximize knowledge sharing and communication that is essential for ITIL adoption. Collaboration
will make modifying when needed- cross-functional process smoother, hence, enhances the throughput of and
minimizing the risk of implementation project from running overtime. On the long run, effective collaboration
supports adoption [2].
Process Priority
From analysis of four organizations of different sizes, sectors and at disperse locations, authors of [3] concluded that
accurate process definition has priority over tool selection. Relating to Business Process Reengineering (BPR),
defining process accurately is fundamental as it might eliminate the need to go thought with a reengineer initiative.
Tool Selection
Toolset is critical in terms of time of selection; before or after processes are defined, for the IT department might
end up with an underutilized tool [3]. The same study presents another case were timely selection of a toolset was
not problematic, on the contrary, it allowed for easier integration of processes. On a different front, tool selection is
identified as critical by [1] because of its influence on perceived usefulness (PU).
Change Management
Alongside management support and appointment of skilled project champion CSFs, change management practices
(acknowledgement of organizational readiness, quick wins and marketing campaign of ITIL framework, etc) proved
to be result definers for several cases [4] [6]. Proper change management execution is critical in situations where big
bang (revolutionary) implementation strategy is adopted. Change management sits in the middle tying two CSFs
together: training and staff awareness facilitate smooth change within an organization, [3], which in turn influences
users perceived usefulness (PU) and perceived ease of use (PEU) [1].
Customer Orientation
In the reviewed literature, three different perspectives were found in relation to customer. one paper suggest that
setting customer-oriented metrics is key to successful ITIL implementation, this paper advocates service-based
statistics over machine-based for instance; server downtime [3] [6]. The other paper that identified customer focus as
a CSF stressed on the need to keep customer/user best interest in consideration before and implementing ITIL [4].
The final perspective in customer-orientation might seem to contradict with the previous paper in claiming that
focusing on process quality shouldnt be the ultimate goal, however, it should be product quality. Authors of this
paper believe that as long as IT-customer interaction occurs after problems occur, then, ITIL efforts are classified as
firefighting rather than proactive [6].
Use of Consultants & Consultant selection
Throughout ITIL implementation, consultants role might go from strictly being trainers to IT/project managers or
going all the way to being process owners [4]. The involvement level of consultants is decided by the
implementation strategy, that is, a clean slate (implementing ITIL as a project replacing all legacy processes)
requires- and is recommended from an Business Process Reengineering- heavy consultant intervention. Knowledge
transfer to permanent staff becomes critical once implementation is completed.

Implementation Strategy and Design
Two implementation strategies were discussed in [4] incremental and revolutionary, the first is implementing ITIL
processes one at a time, and the other describes implementing ITIL as a project of several major concurrent
activities. Authors of this paper relate the choice of implementation strategy to initiation trigger; either genuine
business needs identified by the IT body or an opportunity to document systematic practice with in the IT body
(here, the decision making is autocratic as it comes from outside the IT body). The paper concludes by suggesting
contingency approach to ITIL implementation where a proper assessment of IT needs is carried out in order to
define ITIL implementation goals. With the contingency approach, the authors argue minimizing risk. Looking at
the same implementation strategies from a different view, paper [4] first related the strategy choice to sector type;
public and private. However, the authors eventually concluded that principles of good project management are to be
adhered to regardless of the sector, and of the ITIL implementation strategy choice. The same is stressed on project
management skills as argued by [1] as it directly impacts perceived usefulness (PU)
Project Champion
Out of 109 of itSMF conference questionnaire respondents, 77 strongly agree and 29 agree that in addition to having
senior management commitment, assigning a project champion to advocate and promote ITIL is critical to the
success of ITIL initiative implementation [5].
Ability of IT staff to adapt to change
Out of 108 of itSMF conference questionnaire respondents, 65 strongly agree and 37 agree that ability of IT staff to
accept change is critical to the success of ITIL initiative implementation [5].
Quality of IT staff allocated for ITIL
Out of 108 respondents to the questionnaire distributed at the itSMF conference, 65 strongly agreed and 37 agreed
that competency of ITIL staff association with implementing ITIL is a CSF [5]. If ITIL training general training
positively impacts communication and collaboration on ITIL processes [1], it can be drawn that competent
knowledge in ITIL is critical to smoother implementation. Further proof is some organizations preference to hire
external consultants with longer firsthand experience.
Monitoring and Evaluation of ITIL Implementation
IT staff feedback on implementation performance ultimately effects attitude toward use ATU [1]. The concept of
Knowledge creation (or learning from completed implementation phases) in [4] can reasonably be viewed as an
evaluation method.
The table below summarizes the conducted comparison between five different research papers in terms of reported
critical success factors:
Table 1: Identified CSF for successful ITIL implementation
Identified Critical Success Factor
Paper
[2]
Paper
[3]
Paper
[4]
Paper
[5]
Paper
[6]
Paper
[7]
Paper
[8]
Paper
[9]
1 Management Support X X X X X X X
2 ITIL Training, Awareness and Knowledge
management
X X X X X X X
3 Interdepartmental Collaboration X X X
4 Process Priority X X
5 Tool Selection X X X
6 Change Management X X X X X
7 Customer Orientation X X X X
8 Use of Consultants & Consultant selection X
9 Implementation Strategy and Design X X X X X
10 Project Champion X X X
11 Ability of IT staff to adapt to change X
12 Quality of IT staff allocated for ITIL X X
13 Monitoring and evaluation of ITIL
Implementation
X X
14 Realization plan X X X
In Table 2, the 14 identified CSFs for implementing ITIL are grouped into seven key classes of factors. The 7 key
CSFs were originally proposed by [2] as the main CSF relevant to ITIL implementation after conducting a
qualitative meta-analysis of available ITIL research. These factors were then used as input influencing the TAM
adoption model used by the paper which is explained in section 2.3. In this paper, however, the list of identified CSF
is extended to 14 in an attempt to have a comprehensive-and simultaneously detailed- set of factors. The same 7-
class classification will be used as follows:
Table 2: Classification of identified CSFs

CSFs Key Classes Identified CSFs
1 Top management support Management Support
2 Change management and organizational culture
Change Management
Ability of IT Staff to Adapt to Change
3 Monitoring and evaluation Monitoring And Evaluation of ITIL Implementation
4 Communication and cooperation
Interdepartmental Collaboration
Realization Plan
5 Project management and governance
Project Champion
Customer Orientation
6 Training and competence of involved stakeholder in ITIL project
ITIL Training, Awareness & Knowledge Management
Quality of IT Staff Allocated tor ITIL
7 ITIL process implementation and applied technology
Implementation Strategy and Design
Process Priority
Tool Selection
Use Of Consultants & Consultant Selection
As can be noted from table 2, and as was suspected, only two classes mapped one-to-one to the identified CSFs; Top
management support and Monitoring and Evaluation. These two factors as very essential and basic to any quality
improvement framework in any context whether it was ITSM or manufacturing. The remaining 5 key factors are
expanded into more specific and differentiated factors. Change Management and Organization Culture besides
conventional change management includes the ability of individual members in an organization to accept and then
adapt to change. Communication and Cooperation factor is achieved by interdepartmental collaboration and further
supported by means of Benefits Realization Plans. Project Management and governance suggest two critical factors
to be considered, assigning a project champion, following customer-oriented strategy when defining implantation
scope of ITIL and finally setting customer-oriented metrics are all essential to the success of an ITIL project. As for
the training factor, two CSFs are involved for a successful implementation, first the ITIL knowledge which covers
the flow if ITIL knowledge throughout the project (starting from stakeholders acquiring appropriate training, to
spreading awareness among staff through workshops to gaining first-hand knowledge from completed
implementation phases). The second part being quality of IT staff allocated to ITIL initiative is a critical factor that
is a responsibility of management. Lastly, the key factor of ITIL Process Implementation and Applied Technology is
constructed of 4 CSF: Implementation Strategy and Design, Process Priority, Tool Selection and finally, the Use Of
Consultants and Consultant Selection, each of which are discussed in the earlier.
2.3 Adoption of ITIL
In fact few studies were conducted to determine the success factors that affect the implementation of ITIL; even
fewer researchers studied the adoption of ITIL.[2] is one of the very few studies which examined the effect of
critical success factors of implementing ITIL on the adoption factors represented by the Technology Acceptance
Model (TAM). This study had synthesized seven key success factors for Implementing ITIL including: (1) top
management support, (2) communication and cooperation, (3) training and competence of involved stakeholder in
ITIL project, (4) change management and organizational culture, (5) project management and governance, (6) ITIL
process implementation and applied technology, (7) monitoring and evaluation. The study had used Technology
Acceptance Model (TAM) to study the adoption of ITIL. TAM was developed by Davis in [10] and [11] and it
simply posits that perceived usefulness and perceived ease of use are major determinants for a users intention to use
a technology where, perceived usefulness is defined as the extent to which an individual believes that using
technology will enhance his/her job. Whereas, perceived ease of use is defined as the degree to which an individual
believes that using a technology will require minimum effort.
The paper [2] didnt only examine the critical success factors and their effect on adoption drivers but it also explored
the relationship between the critical success factors themselves. The study concluded that in terms of critical success
factors top management support has an impact on communication and cooperation, change project and governance,
monitoring and evaluation, change management, organizational culture, as well as an indirect influence on IT staffs
acceptance. The study also reported that Training and competence of involved stakeholders influence change
management and organizational culture. In addition, the study found out that project management and governance is
affected by Communication and Cooperation and it has an impact on ITIL process implementation and applied
technology and also monitoring and evaluation. On the other hand, [2] indicated that in terms of adoption factors
perceived ease of use is affected by Training and competence of involved stakeholders and Change management and
organizational culture. While perceived usefulness is impacted by competence of involved stakeholders, top
management support, Project management and governance and also Change management and organizational culture.
Moreover, [2] reported that Monitoring and evaluation has an impact on Attitude towards Use as depicted in the
figure 1 below.












Figure 1: ITIL Adoption Model Based on TAM
Despite being the most widely applied technology adoption model, TAM has some limitations and according to [12]
the most common criticism of TAM is the lack of actionable guidance or interventions to practitioners. Therefore
this paper will use an upgraded version of TAM, which considers a unified view of user acceptance, to study the
adoption of ITIL. The adoption model of choice is the Unified Theory of Acceptance and Use of Technology
(UTAUT) model developed in [13]. The UTAUT model is a result of synthesizing and reviewing eight different
technology acceptance models and it presents a unified view of user acceptance which has four main constructs:
performance expectancy, effort expectancy, social influence and facilitating conditions [13]. Also, the study in [13]
had compared the synthesized UTAUT model to all of the individual models which were used in developing this
model and the results of the empirical studies showed that UTAUT did better than any of the models in explaining
the variance in user acceptance.
Also, the UTAUT model considers four moderators for the key relationships: age, gender, experience and
voluntariness of use [13] as depicted in figure 2 below.








Figure 2: Unified Theory of Acceptance and Use of Technology
According to Venkatesh in [13] performance expectancy is defined as the degree to which an individual believes
that using the system will help him or her to attain gains in job performance. While effort expectancy is defined as
the degree of ease associated with the use of the system. In addition, Venkatesh defines the social as the degree to
which an individual perceives that important others believe he or she should use the new system whereas facilitating
conditions is defined as the degree to which an individual believes that an organizational and technical infrastructure
exists to support.
This paper will review the critical success factors (CSFs) for implementation of ITIL in the literature review and use
the synthesized CSFs to qualitatively study their effect on the constructs of the UTAUT adoption model in terms of
ITIL adoption.
The relationship between the critical success factors and the UTAUT model is proposed in the below table:
UTATU Constructs definition Affected By CSFs
Performance expectancy The degree to which an individual believes
that using the system will help him or her to
attain gains in job performance.

(1) communication and cooperation
(2) project management and
governance
(3) change management and
organizational culture

Effort expectancy The degree of ease associated with the use of
(1) change management and
the system.
organizational culture
(2) training and competence of
involved stakeholder in ITIL
project
(3) ITIL process implementation and
applied technology
Social influence The degree to which an individual perceives
that important others believe he or she should
use the new system
(1) top management support
(2) monitoring and evaluation
Facilitating conditions The degree to which an individual believes
that an organizational and technical
infrastructure exists to support use of the
system
(1) top management support
(2) training and competence of
involved stakeholder in ITIL
project
(3) ITIL process implementation and
applied technology
The proposed model is depicted in the figure 3 below:











2.4 Case Study: ITIL implementation at a developing stock exchange.
ITIL has taken the world by a storm and has become one of the most widely implemented approaches for
Information service management worldwide. Companies of different sizes and from different industries are
venturing into ITIL implementation; hoping to achieve the alignment of IT with business goals, the higher efficiency
levels and the operational cost cuts promised by ITIL. According to Forrester research, in 2004 20% of the billion
dollar companies had adopted ITIL and according to the same source ITIL adoption was expected to reach 40% by
end of 2006 and was expected to grow up to 80% by end of 2008 [12]. Also, according to a more recent study in
2008 Data dimensions reported that 59% of companies in United States (US) and 66% of organizations outside the
US had adopted ITIL [13]. This case study examines the experience of ITIL implementation at a developing stock
exchange in an attempt to identify the factors that drive success of ITIL implementation and highlight the pitfalls
which could impede the adoption of this framework.
Figure 3 ITIL adoption Model Based on UTAUT
2.4.1 How ITIL Implementation Was Initiated
The stock exchange of interest is fairly young; it was established about 11 years ago. From the conception of the
idea to the launching date in 2000, one year passed during which the exchange was set up and ad-hoc processes
emerged and evolved based on the constantly changing business needs; there was no formal planning for business
processes in general and for the IT processes in particular. Consequently, none of the processes reached maturity
level; scoring low on efficiency and service quality. At first, the lack of properly planned and defined processes had
no significant impact on the performance of the daily activities, but not until the year 2004 when the stock market
had experienced a strong economic growth. During the boom period, which started in 2004 and had stretched
throughout the year 2005, the stock market became active. There was a large number of trading activities with large
trading volumes which added an extra load on the trading system and increased the network traffic. This rapid
increase in the number of active traders and their trading activities rendered the trading engine inoperative and
caused the network to experience some technical glitches during the critical trading hours. Interrupting a trading
session is considered disastrous for a stock market as a split of a second can mean a loss of invaluable trades and
therefore a downtime during trading hours is deemed extremely costly. Unfortunately, the disruption of the trading
service doesnt only translate to monetary losses but it can easily shake the investors confidence in the reliability of
exchange as well.
When the trading session was suspended due to the technical problems, everybody on the IT team was literally
running around trying to resolve the issue. No one had a clear idea of where to start from or how to tackle the
problem as no defined procedures were available. This major event caused a fuss which made its way to the press
specially that some investors panicked over losing deals while brokers complained about losing connection to the
trading system. The whole situation was a big mess top management was dissatisfied while investors and trading
members were frustrated. The helpdesk was showered with phone calls and even office phones and personal mobile
phones of the IT team didnt stop ringing. This all had added up to the lack of defined processes and aggravated the
pressure placed on the IT personal which made it even harder for them to solve the problem in a timely manner.
Eventually, the issue was resolved but after that top management started posing questions as in what had caused the
issue? Why did it take so long to solve the problem? Was it a temporary fix or a permanent solution? Will the same
issue ever occur again? The operational manager who happened to be the IT manager as well was facing so many
questions that he had answers to none.
The Information Technology Department was listed under the Market Operations Division and consisted of eight
sections namely IT Quality Assurance and Complaint section, Office Technology section, Infrastructure section
(Network & Helpdesk), Clearing Settlement & Depositary System section, Trading System section, Information
Dissemination and Provision section, Business Process & Project Management section and Security & Business
Continuity section. The heads of the eight aforementioned sections report directly to the head of the Market
Operations Division.
The operational manager got an advice from a friend who happened to be visiting the company. This visitor was the
Chief Information officer (CIO) of HSBC bank which at that time had already implemented ITIL. The CIO of
HSBC bank had advised the operational manager to implement ITIL as it will fix the situation. The CIO of HSBC
promised the operational manager that ITIL will help increase the efficiency, minimize the downtime, cut the
operational cost and improve the service quality. The operational manager acted upon this recommendation and
appointed one of IT team members to be responsible for the implementation of ITIL in the exchange. That was how
the ITIL initiative started at this exchange.
2.4.2 The Implementation Journey
The employee who was nominated to lead the ITIL implementation didnt initially know what ITIL is and had no
clue what it does and how can it be deployed therefore he contacted a consultancy company to help with the
implementation of ITIL in the exchange.
During that time period, the year of 2005, ITIL-V2 was around and ITIL-V3 wasnt planned yet. The ITIL
implementation coordinator along with the consultancy company planned for the implementation of ITIL. As part of
plan, the consultancy recommended sending the employees for ITIL training courses. The IT team was assigned to a
three day crash course training for ITIL. Afterwards, they were asked to take the ITIL exam certification.
Unfortunately, the IT team didnt take the training seriously and as a result the majority wasnt able to pass the exam
and some of them required extra training sessions by the consultancy company. The reason why the IT team took the
training lightly was because they were not part of the decision of implementing ITIL. The IT team wasnt informed
of the perused goals of ITIL implementation. No one had explained to them why did the company go for ITIL nor
had anyone informed them of their new positions on the restructured IT organization. In addition, no clear or defined
roles were given to IT team thus none of the team members was aware of his/her responsibilities. The operational
manager didnt formally inform the team about the intentions of deploying ITIL which explains the lack of
commitment towards the training.
As the implementation plan progressed, the appointed ITIL implementation coordinator and consultancy team
reached to a stage where the IT processes needed to be tailored to have them adhere to ITIL-V2 standards. That is
when the implementation team realized that no clearly defined processes exist and no documentation was available
on any of the processes. Consequently, the project coordinator decided to start a reengineering initiative with the
help of the internal IT quality officer in which they made two major mistakes. The first mistake was that they have
not sorted out all the available processes nor did they prioritize their need for reengineering. Instead they went ahead
reengineering every possible process. Moreover, people who work on these processes were not involved during the
reengineering phase and this was the second mistake. The reengineering initiative took a lot of time and effort and as
result, the ITIL implementation was delayed.
2.4.3 ITIL Tool Selection
After the bases of the ITIL implementation was laid down i.e. processes were defined and tailored to comply with
the ITIL-V2 standards. It was the time for actual implementation, however the defined processes according to ITIL
are somehow complex and time consuming to be implemented manually or without an underlying system to
automate and streamline the processes thus, the company decided to purchase a service desk tool that has ITIL
compliant processes and are able to be customized to fit the functional requirement of the company. The company
chose two of the available suppliers in the market namely: HP and CA to evaluate their service desk management
tools. Obviously and like all other processes there were no defined procedures for tool or supplier selection in the
company. The team who was nominated to recommend one tool out of the two available tools consisted of two
people who couldnt reach consensus so they had to go back to the IT manager to help break the tie. The IT manager
recommended HP since it is the largest IT Company in the world and therefore their products should be trusted.
2.4.4 ITL tool Implementation
At the point of implementing the ITIL compliant service desk tool, vendor related issues surfaced. HP was the
chosen vendor for the tool implementation and the selected tool was HP Open view. The main problem with HP was
that their technical team lacked the skills required to customize the new version of the tool which is to be
implemented at the exchange. The HP technical team couldnt tailor the system to fit the processes as required by
the exchange. Also, they claimed that the required customization cannot be reflected in the system which opposed
HPs initial promises of the system capabilities to adjust to all the mandatory functional requirements. This forced
the exchange to redesign most of the processes so that it can be implemented by the tool. The changes started as
minimal and then started to build up till it reached a stage were the processes became complex and almost entirely
changed. At that point, the exchange got into a conflict with the HP which this resulted in suspending the ITIL
implementation for an entire year. The need for documenting and implementing standardized processes persisted,
forcing the exchange to resume ITIL implementation however, limited to Incident management, Problem
management and Change management.
2.4.5 ITIL Adoption
After the HP Open view was rolled out, implementing only limited processes, it was not welcomed by IT employees
and the other business employees. Users initially refused to use the system and it took a lot of patience and planning
to make them utilize the system for posting their requests. At some point the ITIL implementation coordinator
requested all IT staff to deny any request that doesnt get through the defined processes. Even the IT members
themselves didnt follow the newly imposed procedures. For example, firewalls and anti-virus software would be
updated and network switches would be upgraded without following the proper change management process. The IT
manager had to discuss such cases during the IT teams weekly meeting and had to ask the responsible people for
justification on why changes were made without following the defined procedures. Consequently, the IT team had
finally started to follow the new procedures as no one wants to answer to the manager. Besides, the software
customization was poorly tested and most of the bugs appeared during actual usage of the system which discouraged
users to continue using the system and because experiencing bugs had them view it as unreliable. Moreover, the
changes that were applied to processes in order to implement them using the system rendered the processes flow to
be too long and complex for users to follow. In addition to the process complexity introduced by the system inability
to map the processes as is, the user experience of HP Open view can be described as poor because the system was
complex and not user friendly.
At the end, it took the company a total of five years to implement few selected processes of ITIL. One of the reasons
why is the way the ITIL implementation was handled; the ad hoc, event driven and reactive approach because the
company doesnt have any project management strategies nor follows any project management methodologies.
2.4.5.1 Performance expectancy
Performance expectancy is the degree to which an individual sees that the new system is helping him/her in
performing his tasks in an easy and efficient way [11]. According to the modified UTAUT model shown above in
figure 3, performance expectancy is affected by project management and governance, communication and
cooperation, and change management and organizational culture.
It goes without saying that project management is essential for a successful implementation of IT projects [14].
According to [15], project management is one of the real success factors of a project. Applying proper tools and
techniques of project management would help employees realize the benefits of the new system [16], thus, increase
the perceived usefulness of ITIL. Besides, according to [3], incremental implementation of ITIL would help
employees experience the benefits of the system over a shorter period of time.
Communication and cooperation is a critical success factor. ERP, like all IT projects, have communication and
cooperation in the 6
th
rank of the list of its critical success factors for project implementation [3]. Communication is
important between management and employees to make them realize the usefulness of ITIL [2].
Finally change management and organizational culture counts towards performance expectancy of the employee.
The organization is better off representing ITIL as a project rather than a usual business [9]. This means that ITIL
implementation should go through a business case representing benefits, risks, costs and schedule, a solution
development and a service design for continuous improvement [9]. The highlighted benefits of ITIL in the business
case shall be aligned with the employees interests. Alignment of ITIL benefits with the employees interests shall
help them better realize the benefits of the execution of their daily duties through ITIL [17].
2.4.5.2 Effort Expectancy
According to [11], effort expectancy is defined as the degree to which an individual sees how easy it is to use the
new system. According to the proposed model, effort expectancy is affected by three main factors; training and
competence of stakeholders, change management and organizational culture, ITIL process implementation and tool
selection.
Implementing ITIL is like many other projects implies major organizational change and therefore faces the
challenge of overcoming the obstacle of organizational culture acceptance [18]. Therefore Change management is
quite essential for facilitate the acceptance of ITIL implementation by the employees. In fact training of stakeholders
is part of proper change management process. Training and awareness of stakeholders is also ranked as the second
most important factor after top management support to gain the interest of stakeholders [3]. Training does not only
help employees to cope with the new system, in addition, it provides them with a sense of involvement throughout
the implementation journey [3]. In other words, training will help employees learn what ITIL means how it will
impact their jobs consequently affecting their idea of how easy is it to use/ follow ITIL processes and standards.
ITIL process implementation and tool selection, like other success factors is critical for a proper implementation of
ITIL. Proper tool selection criteria will ensure that the selected tool for implementing ITIL is user friendly and
therefore users will not view the system s hard to use. Also, it is important to study the current IT critical processes
and conduct a gap analysis between their current status and the desired ITIL adherence status. This will eventually
result in a simplified focused process which is easy to perform; thus requiring less effort [2].
2.4.5.3 Social Influence
Social Influence as defined in [13] is the degree to which an individual perceives that important others believe he or
she should use the new system. According to the model proposed in this paper Social Influence is affected by two of
the synthesized critical success factors namely top management support and monitoring and evaluation.
Usually, top management controls the communication activities in IT/IS projects [19] consequently when employees
see that top management is interested in the success of the project they will tend to be more committed to the project
as they care about what the management thinks of them. In addition, if the project succeeds the employees would
want the top management to acknowledge their efforts while incase the project fails or was delayed they dont want
to be blamed for not being cooperative.
Likewise, when the employees become aware that their feedback will be solicited for the evaluation and monitoring
process to review the implementation performance of ITIL and determine whether or not it is achieving the business
goals [2]; the employees will feel more obliged to cooperate and support the implementation of the project.
2.4.5.4 Facilitating Conditions
Facilitating conditions as defined in [13] is the degree to which an individual believes that an organizational and
technical infrastructure exists to support use of the system. According to the proposed model in this paper, this
construct is influenced by three of the synthesized critical success factors in [2]. The critical success factors of
interest are top management support, training and competence of involved stakeholder in ITIL project and TIL
process implementation and applied technology. As a matter of fact, the reason why the aforementioned critical
success factors may have effect on the construct, i.e. facilitating conditions, is that they actually makeup this
construct. In other words, the above mentioned critical success factors resemble the technical and organizational
aspects of the work environment that if they were made available will help eliminating barriers to use the system.

If top management commitment is present it would result in granting a project the required funding for resources,
consultants, employee training and acquiring required technology [2]. The presence of these critical success factors
turns the environment into one that fosters a sense of urgency among the employees to be part of the wheel which is
pushing the project forward.
3 Applying the proposed UTAUT adoption model to the Case Study
3.1 Effort Expectancy
For an attempt to relate the above to the case study presented, the related success factors were not properly
implemented. First, training was not mandatory by management. In addition, the goals of the training were not
communicated properly resulting in many employees not taking it seriously. Second, the company didnt spend
enough effort in understanding its culture. However, the company should have implemented the right strategy to
meet its stable environment. This can be done through phased implementation. Finally, the developing stock
exchange organization didnt implement the right methodology for tool and vendor selection which resulted in a one
year delay trying to customize the tool.
3.2 Performance expectancy
In regards to the case study presented above, the three corresponding critical success factors were missing. There
was no proper project management involved in the ITIL implementation in the company. The absence of project
management highly contributes to the failure of projects [14]. In addition, the management neither did communicate
nor chased feedback from employees throughout the implementation process of ITIL. Finally, the management
didnt account for the stable organizational culture and attempted to implement ITIL as part of the business not as a
project. This resulted in the employees looking at it as an extra work load. Therefore, handling ITIL as a project may
help the employees realize the benefits of it [9].
3.3 Social Influence
With reference to the case study of ITIL implementation at the developing stock exchange, matching critical success
factors were missing which contributed to the employee lack of interest to adopt the implementation of the ITIL
framework. Top management didnt communicate the need for ITIL implementation in the company to the
employees nor did it ask for the employee feedback during the implementation. Consequently, the employees didnt
feel the urge to commit for the project implementation.

3.4.1 Facilitating Conditions
Referring back to the ITIL implementation in the developed stock exchange, although management had approved
the purchasing of an ITIL compliant tool, hired a consultant to guide the implementation process and provided the
required training for the employees, the acceptance of ITIL was not as high as it is expected to be according to the
adoption model. The reason behind that is the absence of other critical factors that affect other adoption constructs.
The management only provided financial support to the project but not the required organizational empowerment
and full support. As discussed earlier the lack of properly defined change management procedures, project
management methodologies and effective communication had played a role in poor adoption of ITIL in the
exchange.

4 Proposed Roadmap for ITIL Implementation
After presenting critical success factors for ITIL implementation and examining their effect on the determinants of
users willingness to adopt the governance framework, this paper proposes a comprehensive road map for a
successful implantation and adoption of the ITIL framework. Figure 5 depicts the proposed ITIL road map.







Process Identification &
Selection

Construct a Project plan
Obtaining Managements
Commitment
Obtaining Employees
Commitment
Re-design processes to
adhere to ITIL standards

Identifying the Key
Customers, Collect and
analyze their requirements
ITIL compliant Tool Selection
& Customization

Transition Plan +
Designing Training
Select a Consultancy
Company

Understanding the social
sub-system people,
competencies, behavior,
attitudes, beliefs, values and
norms
Understanding
Current Processes

Processes
&Functions

Roles

The implementation starts by obtaining both management and employee commitment. First, the management
commitment will give importance to the project which will eventually help in getting employees commitment.
Moreover, employees will get committed to get noticed by management. In addition, management commitment shall
facilitate the implementation of ITIL by providing the needed support like funding, resources, and required training.
After that, the organization shall spend enough time and effort in selecting the appropriate consultancy company.
The consultant is required to provide the needed expertise for a smooth ITIL implementation. Next, the organization
and the consulting company shall work hand in hand to identify and select the main IT processes to be changed to
adhere to ITIL standards. In parallel to that, the culture of the organization along with the roles of the people needs
to be understood to prepare for a smooth change management process.
Subsequently, the IT employees will be involved in requirements gathering in an attempt to make comprehensive
ITIL re-engineered processes. Then, a project management methodology should be followed and a proper
implementation plan following quick wins strategy. After that, the selected processes should be re-engineered to
adhere to ITIL standards. This activity will require involvement from management, employees and the consultancy
company. To further smooth the implementation of ITIL processes, a proper tool shall be selected from the proper
vendor. Next, the transition plan and training activities should be designed to support change management and equip
both the culture and the employees skills for the new processes. At the end, the organization shall roll out the new
processes incrementally with detailed monitoring for proper observation and continuous improvement.
5 Conclusion
In this paper, ITIL synthesized critical success factors were identified from a comprehensive literature review in an
attempt to link it to technology adoption model, namely UTAUT. The model proposed advances the existing
literature by improving the process of ITIL implementation and adoption. The model was verified by proper
studying of the literature and linking it to a case study of a company that suffered from implementing ITIL.
Following the proposed work, several tracks exist for future work. First, the proposed model can be verified using
empirical studies. Another track could be to further enhance the practicality of the road map. This can be achieved
by applying it to a real life scenario(s).


11 References
[1] H. Marquis, Itil: What it is and what it isnt, Business Communications Review, vol. 36, no. 12, pp. 4952,
2006. [Online]. Available: http://ezproxy.aus.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/-
224971428?accountid=16946
[2] N. H. Sarvenaz Mehravani and M. Haghighinasab, Itil adoption model based on tam, in IPEDR, vol. 5,
no. 1. IACSIT Press,Singapore, 2011, pp. 3337.
[3] C. Pollard, Justifications, strategies, and critical success factors in successful itil implementations in u.s.
and australian companies: An exploratory study, Information systems management, vol. 26, no. 2, p. 164, January
2009.
[4] K. Pedersen, P. Krmmergaard, B. Lynge, and C. Dalby Schou, Itil implementation: critical success
factors a comparative case study using the bpc framework, Journal of Information Technology Case and
Application Research, vol. 12, no. 2, 2010. [Online]. Available: http://ezproxy.aus.edu/login?url=http://-
search.proquest.com/docview/608836648?accountid=16946
[5] A. Cater-steel and W. gee Tan, Implementation of it infrastructure library (itil) in australia: progress and
success factors, in in Australia: Progress and Success Factors, IT Governance International Conference, 2005.
[6] S. S. C. Shang and S.-F. Lin, Barriers to implementing itil-a multi-case study on the service-based
industry, Contemporary Management Research, vol. 6, no. 1, pp. 5370, 2010. [Online]. Available: http://-
ezproxy.aus.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/749780585?accountid=16946
[7] J. Iden and L. Langeland, Setting the stage for a successful itil adoption: A delphi study of it experts in the
norwegian armed forces, Inf. Sys. Manag., vol. 27, pp. 103112, March 2010. [Online]. Available: http://-
dx.doi.org/10.1080/10580531003708378
[8] W.-G. Tan, A. Cater-Steel, and M. Toleman, Implementing it service management: a case study focussing
on critical success factors, The Journal of Computer Information Systems, vol. 50, no. 2, pp. 112, 2009. [Online].
Available: http://ezproxy.aus.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/232573145?accountid=16946
[9] A. Cater-steel, Transforming it service management the itil impact, Service Management, p. 11, 2006.
[Online]. Available: http://eprints.usq.edu.au/1612/
[10] F. D. Davis, Perceived usefulness, perceived ease of use, and user acceptance of information technology,
MIS Quarterly, vol. 13, no. 3, pp. pp. 319340, 1989. [Online]. Available: http://www.jstor.org/stable/249008
[11] F. D. Davis, R. P. Bagozzi, and P. R. Warshaw, User acceptance of computer technology: A comparison
of two theoretical models, Management Science, vol. 35, no. 8, pp. pp. 9821003, 1989. [Online]. Available:
http://www.jstor.org/stable/2632151
[12] Y. Lee, K. A. Kozar, and K. R. T. Larsen, The technology acceptance model : Past , present , and future,
Communications of the Association for Information Systems, vol. 12, pp. 752780.
[13] V. Venkatesh, M. G. Morris, G. B. Davis, and F. D. Davis, User acceptance of information technology:
Toward a unified view, MIS Quarterly, vol. 27, no. 3, pp. pp. 425478, 2003. [Online]. Available: http://-
www.jstor.org/stable/30036540
[14] M. Keil, A. Rai, J. E. Cheney Mann, and G. P. Zhang, Why software projects escalate: The importance of
project management constructs, IEEE Transactions on Engineering Management, vol. 50, no. 3, pp. 251261,
2003. [Online]. Available: http://ieeexplore.ieee.org/lpdocs/epic03/wrapper.htm?arnumber=1236001
[15] T. Cooke-Davies, The real success factors on projects, International Journal of Project Management,
vol. 20, no. 3, pp. 185190, 2002. [Online]. Available: http://linkinghub.elsevier.com/retrieve/pii/-
S0263786301000679
[16] R. Atkinson, Project management: cost time and quality two best guesses and a phenomenon, it is time to
accept other success criteria, International Journal of Project Management, vol. 17, no. 6, pp. 337342, 1999.
[Online]. Available: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science?_ob=ArticleURL&_udi=B6V9V-3XD3JRK-
3&_user=1682380&_coverDate=12%2F31%2F1999&_rdoc=1&_fmt=&_orig=search&_sort=d&view=c&_acct=C0
00011378&_version=1&_urlVersion=0&_userid=1682380&md5=0a737a02b6dcd4456424bfdef20e4a16
[17] A. Cater-Steel and N. McBride, It service management improvement - actor network perspective. in
ECIS, H. sterle, J. Schelp, and R. Winter, Eds. University of St. Gallen, 2007, pp. 12021213. [Online].
Available: http://dblp.uni-trier.de/db/conf/ecis/ecis2007.html#Cater-SteelM07
[18] S. K. Grewal and U. of Canberra. School of Information Sciences & Engineering, EnglishIssues in it
governance & it service management : a study of their adoption in australian universities / by sandeep kaur grewal,
2006, thesis submitted in partial fulfilment of the requirements for the degree of Master of Applied Science in
Information and Technological Sciences at the University of Canberra, ACT, January 2006.
[19] S. J. L. Bueno Salvador, Tam-based success modeling in erp, Interacting with computers, vol. 20, no. 6,
p. 515, 12th January 2008.