---
title: IT4IT is the substrate — a hub of frameworks, not a competitor
pageKind: stance
status: published
abstract: IT4IT integrates ITIL, COBIT, TOGAF, DevOps, and SAFe at the operating-model layer. It does not replace them. Pitch it as a framework for managing IT, or as an operating model, depending on audience.
sources:
  - articles/briefings-direct-it4it-2019
  - articles/open-group-2017-managing-business-of-it
  - frameworks/it4it-v3
  - papers/shift-to-digital-product-w205
---

## The position

`[[entities/it4it]]` is not a framework that competes with ITIL, COBIT, TOGAF, DevOps, or SAFe. It is **the substrate that integrates all of them at the operating-model layer**. A hub of frameworks, designed as one architecture.

This positioning matters because every framework conversation tends to devolve into framework-vs-framework debate. IT4IT short-circuits that: ITIL owns service operations; COBIT owns governance; TOGAF owns the modeling vocabulary; DevOps and SAFe own delivery; IT4IT owns the integration between them.

## Why

I&#39;ve worked with IT4IT since the forum&#39;s 2014 inception (100+ engagements since 2013). Every successful adoption I&#39;ve seen starts with the same insight: the customer already has ITIL, already has some flavour of COBIT, often has TOGAF, and increasingly has DevOps and SAFe. The question isn&#39;t "which framework wins?" — it&#39;s "how do they coexist without contradicting each other?"

IT4IT&#39;s seven value streams (Evaluate, Explore, Integrate, Deploy, Release, Operate, Consume) are the seam where the other frameworks plug in. ITIL processes attach to Operate. DevOps practices attach to Integrate/Deploy/Release. TOGAF models attach to Explore. COBIT controls thread through all seven.

The executive pitch reflects this: **"I pitch it as a framework for managing IT and leave it at that. I might also say it&#39;s an operating model."** Lead with the simple framing the audience can ingest; let the integration value reveal itself through use.

## When this applies

- Any conversation that&#39;s starting to turn into framework-vs-framework.
- Executive sponsor briefings where the audience is fluent in ITIL or TOGAF but not IT4IT.
- Standards adoption decisions where the question is "which standard do we pick?"

## When it doesn&#39;t

- Pure ITIL or pure TOGAF shops with no cross-framework reconciliation problem. They don&#39;t need a substrate; they have one framework working.
- Greenfield startups where there&#39;s no installed framework base yet. IT4IT can be the starting point, but so can many things.

## Heuristics derived from this stance

- `[[heuristics/contextualize-before-transforming]]` — map IT4IT onto current operations, don&#39;t flip the operating model.
- `[[heuristics/pitch-simple-adjust-per-audience]]` — the executive-pitch tactic.
- `[[heuristics/find-at-least-one-champion]]` — adoption needs an evangelist.

## See also

- Entity: `[[entities/it4it]]`
- Entity: `[[entities/value-stream]]`
- Raw source: `[raw-sources/articles/briefings-direct-it4it-2019](../../raw-sources/articles/briefings-direct-it4it-2019.md)`
