The British Standards Institute and the International Organisation for Standardisation
are responsible for the drafting and publication of many thousands
of different standards covering everything from apples (ISO 1212 Guidance
on conditions for the cold storage of apples) to zinc (BS 2656 Specification
for zinc anodes, zinc oxide and zinc salts for electroplating).
With the publication of BS 15000 and its internationalised counterpart ISO
20000 IT Service Management has taken a giant lead towards acceptance and
legitimacy. Both standards are based upon the ITIL documentation library
and outline a system for the management of the IT function geared towards
the provision of IT services. It should be noted that external certifications
against these standards are available to enable organisations to demonstrate
that they comply with the requirements of the standard. Whether or not
they deliver excellent IT services is another matter entirely. Products cannot
be certified against the standards and as such any vendor claims or implied
claims should be treated as nothing more than marketing sound bites.
2.1 Are Standards a Good Thing?
Standards work best when they describe something in quantifiable terms that
can be independently tested and verified. Standards define a definite output
in unambiguous language to prevent miscommunications and misunderstandings.
Common understanding allows different parties to deliver something in
a standard manner. Standards enable standardisation. Standardisation aids
the commoditisation of an item. Commoditisation allows different items that
meet the standard to be used interchangeably i.e. standards improve the level
of interoperability that can be realised. Interoperability reduces dependency
upon any one specific vendor. Free market economics can then be applied to
reduce the cost of standards based items. Reduced costs are a good thing.
Therefore, standards are a good thing!
The above tongue in cheek analysis does hold true for some cases and
indeed standards can be incredibly useful. However, within the IT industry
standards compliance is not always consistent and just because something is
purported to follow a specific set of standards does not necessarily mean that
it does. Take for example the DOM standards laid down by the W3C committee
governing HTML and JavaScript implementations within web browsers.
Anyone who has had the pleasure of developing web content for multiple
browser platforms knows that the organisations behind browser development
often take dramatically different views of the meaning of the standard and
implement significantly different approaches to satisfy its requirements.
Let us consider the mission of Apollo 13 . . .
As the spacecraft was on its way to the Moon, at a distance of almost 200,000
miles from Earth, the number two oxygen tank in the Service Module exploded.
This created a series of problems which were overcome thanks to the ingenuity
of both the crew and the flight controllers in Houston. As well as working out
how to return the crew safely to earth, they had to contend with the minor irritation
of the Carbon Dioxide scrubbers in the Lunar Excursion Module (LEM)
lifeboat. The lithium hydroxide canisters available for the LEMs CO2 scrubbers
would not last long enough to get the crew home. Although the Command
Module (CM) had an adequate supply of replacement canisters, they were
the wrong shape to fit the LEMs receptacle; an adapter had to be fabricated
from materials in the spacecraft. Mission Control devised a way to attach the
CM canisters to the LEM system by using plastic bags, cardboard, and gaffer
tape – all materials carried on board.
However, had the scrubbers design been consistent i.e. standardised across
the LEM and the CM, then the potential for CO2 poisoning would have been
one less headache for NASA to deal with during the crisis in 1970.
