Skip to main content
Version: 0.7.0

SAF and RITM

Nature and status of the approach

RITM is an IT management model created by a professional community. The current public site expands the name as Rational IT Methodology; an earlier itSMF Russia page used Russian IT Methodology. This research uses the current name and records the difference as project history, not as two methodologies.

RITM has no published stable numbered release comparable with an ISO standard. The analysis uses the public snapshot from August 3, 2026; incomplete areas are a limitation of the analysis.

Purpose and audience

RITM is positioned as an open and practical IT management model for leaders, methodologists, software vendors, and the professional community. Its public principles call for systematic, proportionate, value-oriented management, a shared language, and coordinated use of process, project, and product approaches.

Management scope and unit

The scope is broader than ITSM: strategy, IT architecture, assets, finance, reliability, operational processes, products and services, production of changes, continual improvement, and automation. The management unit depends on the area: service, product, asset, process, configuration item, measure, or change.

Concepts and SAF mappings

RITMClosest SAF conceptType / confidenceComment
Consumer and management participantActorPartial / mediumRITM distinguishes management roles in more detail.
Product or serviceService and its groupingsPartial / mediumProduct remains an external package or collection of SAF services.
Process and operational activityProcessPartial / highRITM adds management context, roles, and control.
Resource, capability, competenceCapability and external resourcesComposite / mediumNot every RITM resource is a SAF compute resource.
IT architectureSystem, component, interface, integration, deployment, and infrastructureComposite / highSAF can be the architecture model within the corresponding RITM area.
IT asset and configuration itemAny relevant SAF object plus an external management recordComposite / mediumA shared real-world subject does not make the records identical.

Relationships

The public model emphasizes connections across management areas. The most important bridges for SAF are “architecture object is accounted for as an asset,” “CI represents managed configuration,” “service is supported by architecture,” “change modifies configuration and architecture state,” and “reliability is measured for a service and its supporting elements.”

Lifecycle and organization of work

RITM connects strategic and tactical management, planning, operations, current control, and development. Its areas evolve iteratively. SAF should therefore be used as a durable connected model, not as a copy of every RITM work document. A change enters SAF after an architecture decision or a verified fact change.

Roles and governance

The RITM project uses management-area owners, an architecture council, authors, and experts. A particular organization defines its own composition. SAF can show the owner of a significant object but does not replace a RACI, authority of a collegial body, or an area's work queue.

Measures, maturity, and tailoring

The public principles require management complexity to be appropriate to the organization's size, specifics, maturity, and needs. This aligns well with SAF profiles but does not create a direct equivalence between scales. Reliability, value, asset, and process measures remain in their specialist systems; SAF uses their definitions and aggregated assessments.

Using the approaches together

  • the IT Architecture area uses SAF as a compact domain model;
  • the Products and Services and Operational Processes areas connect through service, process, capability, and actor;
  • Assets and Reliability add external projections over the same systems, deployments, and resources;
  • Production of Products and Services connects changes with target and actual models without mixing work and state.

Mapping limitations

RITM is evolving, and its public areas have different levels of detail. This page does not fill missing definitions with assumptions or transfer ITIL or COBIT terminology into RITM without open evidence. Confidence will be revisited as the public library develops.

Sources for the approach