Discussion on:
View:
Show:
There is a lot more to IT than being a server jockey, and most of those positions allow one to set boundaries around work, and they provide ample outlets for the impatient. In fact, I believe that "patience" was used by the writer where "detachment" may have been the better word choice. Patience is largely measured in reaction of external pressures--you were sure patient with that belligerent ****** customer--while detachment is an internal choice to not allow anything outside of the self to matter so much that it affects one's sense of self-worth.
It's not clear what is meant by "an IT career." There was a time when this could only mean systems administration -- and this may still be true in smaller shops -- but now IT has more than 20 job descriptions.
The article seems to focus on escalated IT support. There are many positions that do not require being on call or sacrificing personal time.
I do agree that IT does not offer career advancement, and even if it did, most of us who are attracted to it have no interest in management. I have yet to figure out why it is that large IT organizations promote their most talented technical people into management roles.
IT is tricky. IMHO we haven't yet figured out how to do it right. The wave of consulting and outsourcing in the 90s was very damaging. Management still looks to IT first when it's time to cut costs.
The article seems to focus on escalated IT support. There are many positions that do not require being on call or sacrificing personal time.
I do agree that IT does not offer career advancement, and even if it did, most of us who are attracted to it have no interest in management. I have yet to figure out why it is that large IT organizations promote their most talented technical people into management roles.
IT is tricky. IMHO we haven't yet figured out how to do it right. The wave of consulting and outsourcing in the 90s was very damaging. Management still looks to IT first when it's time to cut costs.
I agree that it's stupid to promote your best techs to management (unless that's what the really want to do). Part of the problem is with the "industry standard" job model. If your good at this, you can have one of these job titles. Then within these job titles, you can make between this much and this much. If you're truly worth your salt, you will probably hit that ceiling pretty quickly. What's left for most people if they want to make more money, is to either leave your present company (which may or may not be easy depending on your circumstances) or go into the management track.
I once worked for a company that discovered their engineering team was becoming less and less productive because they kept promoting their best into management. They finally changed policy and started getting rid of salary caps on most of their positions. A few of the recent promotees opted to move back into engineering (at salaries way above the previous salary cap), and something happened that NOBODY could have seem coming (sarcasm intended). You had highly paid, but highly skilled and motivated people churning out their best work at breakneck speeds.
I once worked for a company that discovered their engineering team was becoming less and less productive because they kept promoting their best into management. They finally changed policy and started getting rid of salary caps on most of their positions. A few of the recent promotees opted to move back into engineering (at salaries way above the previous salary cap), and something happened that NOBODY could have seem coming (sarcasm intended). You had highly paid, but highly skilled and motivated people churning out their best work at breakneck speeds.
You should get paid for what you do and not for what is your position.Some hard skills might help you on managing other engineers but if you got a lot of knowledege on one area doesn't mean that you have to be a manager.
Over these 16 plus years, I've grown to hate people, become easily frustrated and lose my temper constantly, plus I've damned near become suicidal at the thought of not being able to advance to anything else. When you are in support, you are a jack of all trades - and that pigeon holes you to that job unless you do something drastic. I've waited too long and am too old to make a major career change - don't let yourself get in that position. Support positions should not be your career choice - just a stepping stone to something that has an actual advancement track. Don't make my mistake.
I have become a lot less patient with people and have become more spiteful since working in IT. I am getting to the point that I have to change my attitude(which may be impossible at this point) or look for a new career.
I work in infrastructure, the building blocks of all things computing. I enjoy it very much and have been doing it for 25 years. There's a never ending learning curve to challenge me and all kinds of things to keep me busy. I was privileged to work with, from almost the beginning (pre 1.0 kernel), as well as watch the then fledgling OS that is Linux go from a university student's project to an entire industry that runs a huge portion of the Internet and runs on millions of devices. You can't beat that with a stick.
As I've posted here, I don't deal with end users so I don't have those things to dampen the job. Maybe that's why it's enjoyable.
It's too bad that you feel so trapped.
As I've posted here, I don't deal with end users so I don't have those things to dampen the job. Maybe that's why it's enjoyable.
It's too bad that you feel so trapped.
#10 correction: the "the" in "it might be a good sign the you" should be "that" ..
I agree with what Jack says here. I've been woken up a lot in the night for problems that aren't my responsibility for one reason or the other - gets frustrating. My wife hates it but I guess it goes with the territory. What I do expect is that the people making the decision to wake me up to understand why I'm not the person to call. Sometimes I don't think anybody cares to be honest, they just want to wake up somebody to get the problem fixed.
I also am seeing companies and management expecting us to do more with less. More user calls, more server set ups, more after hours work with less head count, less money for tools, less time for lunch.
What ever happened to comp time? You work all weekend and you're expected to be there bright and early on Monday? Working 12 straight days gets old sometimes.
I agree with what Jack says here. I've been woken up a lot in the night for problems that aren't my responsibility for one reason or the other - gets frustrating. My wife hates it but I guess it goes with the territory. What I do expect is that the people making the decision to wake me up to understand why I'm not the person to call. Sometimes I don't think anybody cares to be honest, they just want to wake up somebody to get the problem fixed.
I also am seeing companies and management expecting us to do more with less. More user calls, more server set ups, more after hours work with less head count, less money for tools, less time for lunch.
What ever happened to comp time? You work all weekend and you're expected to be there bright and early on Monday? Working 12 straight days gets old sometimes.
Thank you for this list. Now I am second guessing my career choice, since at least half of those apply to me. Hopefully I made the right choices in the end.
Recognizing that these may be problem areas means you can try to change them. Many of these apply to other career choices.
First of, #7 is completely false. Studies have demonstrated that multitasking is almost impossible in humans. And most humans who say they multitask are really doing a number of lousy jobs, not focusing on one good job. #10 is also incorrect, the world doesn't revolve around you - Turn Off Your Phone (unless you are on-call). #3??? Many people strive for a normal work day, working outside the norm is the exception. If you find that you are constantly working outside normal hours, then there is a screw up somewhere. The systems aren't running correctly.
You are mostly wrong about multitasking but not completely. It depends.
Just like a CPU, you can only do one thing at a time. What is usually meant by multitasking is the ability to manage more than one project, more than one system, more than one problem, etc. at a time. Some people excel at this. Those are the top folks in IT for sure.
Having said that, we all multitask every day. Let's use doing laundry as an example of multitasking. It's a good analogy because of the automation a washer and dryer bring that can be used to illustrate IT.
To wash clothes, you:
1. put a load of clothes in the washing machine
Now, here's where multitasking comes into play, what are you doing while the clothes are washing? You can be doing anything. Hence, whatever you do, you are essentially doing two things at once. Why? Because the washing machine does it for you.
When the first load of clothes is done you:
1. remove clothes from washing machine and put in dryer
2. load washing machine with next load of clothes
Now, regardless of whatever you do, you are now doing _three_ things at once, again due to the fact that both washing and drying are automatic.
When the current dryer and washer loads are done, you:
1. remove dried clothes from the dryer
2. load load #2 from washer to the dryer
3. load the next load into the washing machine
4. fold the clothes from the dryer (this can be optional :-))
In any case, while you are folding the clothes, you are also washing another load and drying the previously washed load of clothes. True, while you are folding the clothes, you are only doing three things at once. But folding the clothes takes less time than the cycle of the washing/drying systems so you can do something else while the cycle finishes. If you loaded the dishwasher in this time, you'd be doing even more things-all thanks to automation.
And so on.
It's important to note that without automatic washers and dryers, you would only be able to do one task at a time. This is what IT et al allows for.
I work almost exclusively at the command line, even in Windows. I automate almost everything. Because of that, I can have a script do one thing, while I do another. It is working in this way that allows me to multitask.
Just like a CPU, you can only do one thing at a time. What is usually meant by multitasking is the ability to manage more than one project, more than one system, more than one problem, etc. at a time. Some people excel at this. Those are the top folks in IT for sure.
Having said that, we all multitask every day. Let's use doing laundry as an example of multitasking. It's a good analogy because of the automation a washer and dryer bring that can be used to illustrate IT.
To wash clothes, you:
1. put a load of clothes in the washing machine
Now, here's where multitasking comes into play, what are you doing while the clothes are washing? You can be doing anything. Hence, whatever you do, you are essentially doing two things at once. Why? Because the washing machine does it for you.
When the first load of clothes is done you:
1. remove clothes from washing machine and put in dryer
2. load washing machine with next load of clothes
Now, regardless of whatever you do, you are now doing _three_ things at once, again due to the fact that both washing and drying are automatic.
When the current dryer and washer loads are done, you:
1. remove dried clothes from the dryer
2. load load #2 from washer to the dryer
3. load the next load into the washing machine
4. fold the clothes from the dryer (this can be optional :-))
In any case, while you are folding the clothes, you are also washing another load and drying the previously washed load of clothes. True, while you are folding the clothes, you are only doing three things at once. But folding the clothes takes less time than the cycle of the washing/drying systems so you can do something else while the cycle finishes. If you loaded the dishwasher in this time, you'd be doing even more things-all thanks to automation.
And so on.
It's important to note that without automatic washers and dryers, you would only be able to do one task at a time. This is what IT et al allows for.
I work almost exclusively at the command line, even in Windows. I automate almost everything. Because of that, I can have a script do one thing, while I do another. It is working in this way that allows me to multitask.
Multitasking is a nice line used by supervisors for an excuse. People can only process one thing at a time. Try it. Spread 2 piles of paper a couple of feet apart. Now put a pencil inbetween them. You cannot pick up both piles of paper and the pencil at the same time using your hands without shoving them all together as one. Ask the experts, they will agree with me. Miss the birth of my child? If you do because of work, you will watch the kid grow up from work like I did. You never, ever, get that time back. IT will drive you to not like people as you do your best to help them and they will stab you in the back. After 30 years in IT I know a lot about that.
If I recall correctly Uncle Bob has a good story about IT, where they had a team working after hours to deliver a software on time.
They eventually did it, and to make the schedule it was needed that legal do some after hours work too, and someone came to Uncle Bob and said that it wasn't going to happen, because those people were professionals.
As in, IT guys are just kids, and the other professionals can't be bothered to work extra hours or weekends.
In my (albeit little) experience with IT, we as a group should cut that sort of stuff out.
I mean, I can work weekends and answer phone calls in the middle of the night, but you better be ready to pay me extra for it.
They eventually did it, and to make the schedule it was needed that legal do some after hours work too, and someone came to Uncle Bob and said that it wasn't going to happen, because those people were professionals.
As in, IT guys are just kids, and the other professionals can't be bothered to work extra hours or weekends.
In my (albeit little) experience with IT, we as a group should cut that sort of stuff out.
I mean, I can work weekends and answer phone calls in the middle of the night, but you better be ready to pay me extra for it.
"I can work weekends and answer phone calls in the middle of the night, but you better be ready to pay me extra for it."
That's why I am no longer salaried. I work by the hour. Sure, I'll put in the extra time if it's needed. And I expect to be paid for it. Time is money. If I am working for nothing, I'm either a slave or a volunteer.
That's why I am no longer salaried. I work by the hour. Sure, I'll put in the extra time if it's needed. And I expect to be paid for it. Time is money. If I am working for nothing, I'm either a slave or a volunteer.
I know guys who won't work ten minutes for double overtime, but will stay as long as the boss keeps calling Domino's and the Mountain Dew holds out.
I'm beginning to think Linux makes people negative.
Users are annoying and amusing at the same time, but they don't make me want to quit. I will say that I DO have designs of being a CIO or a CEO of my own IT Organization. I don't think I'm going to do it by mosying up the corporate ladder. I more plan to gather the knowledge and loyalty base I can, identify a customer base and great workers, and start my own company. For the time it all takes, I'm hoping the economy will have improved. Either that or I hope the Myans were right and I won't have to think about it.
I am developing my career in the IT Industry for the past 5 years and working the 24/7 is a bit crazy. I worked for IBM briefly supporting DB2 platform and oncall got out before it was my turn to go oncall because it was riduculous. I was there for a year and the things that you had to get up for was totally insane and unfair. many times the on call person was called at 2 in the morning to fix something that we wouldnt have to fix to begin with if other dept had recommended to there customers a permanent fix like upgrading hardware or someting to that effect. but since the customer refused to fix the things that were recommended we had to patch the problem everytime. how fair is that ? Granted we were not on call all the time but when that person was it was brutal. I like my ma and pa shops where the pace is not 24/7. I enjoy my personal time and dont see the value especially when I see doctors or air traffic controllers get better treatment.
I've done IT in the past, and it was M-F, leaving my weekends free. Now when I look at IT positions, every single one of them expects on-call for weekends, and my entertainment career, Saturday only, pays too well to tempt me to drop it. "Sorry, folks, I've got to leave the stage and go kick a client's server! Stay here and wait for me; I'll probably be back in two or three hours."
#1, If you have patience, you must be the Maytag repairman. Most situations I have ever faced in the IT industry is the client wants this yesterday and they only told you today. In that environment, patience is a vice.
#2, Yes the IT field demands a constant learning curve. But unless you are a ditch digger what high profile occupation doesn't these days? Learning has become a constant for just being in the game if you are in IT, a lawyer, doctor, pharmacist, technician, etc.
#4, Forty years in the IT biz and yes I DID NOT LIKE people. Most specifically certain kinds of people. You know the ones -- the one that is always at the top of the help queue because they should never be placed in front of a computer. Most of the rest were great, enjoyed their association. They were glad we could show up and fix their problem.
#3,10, Unless you are a one man shop why is this even going on?? Companies can get sued for abusing 24/7 on call. Any reasonably sized company they pass the beeper or call out phone among the staff. Companies recognise than staff need downtime. Plus I would wonder about the organisational effectiveness. I get updates on our network on my cell. If there is a problem I am usually on the way to a solution before the ticket is generated or have contacted the on-call member as to the situation.
#9, Have to be careful here. There are a lot of job descriptions that are IT paid for positions but are not functionally IT. Dir of IT Finance for example. They identify as a member of IT but have a likelihood of not liking tech in general. Its not their bag.
#8, Personal observation is that most IT movement Dir and above are outside hires. You have to leave your present employ to make that jump to VP for example. Whether you can make CEO with an IT background depends on the industry. Plenty of examples of Geeks making it to the top of the ladder -- Steve Jobs for a start.
#2, Yes the IT field demands a constant learning curve. But unless you are a ditch digger what high profile occupation doesn't these days? Learning has become a constant for just being in the game if you are in IT, a lawyer, doctor, pharmacist, technician, etc.
#4, Forty years in the IT biz and yes I DID NOT LIKE people. Most specifically certain kinds of people. You know the ones -- the one that is always at the top of the help queue because they should never be placed in front of a computer. Most of the rest were great, enjoyed their association. They were glad we could show up and fix their problem.
#3,10, Unless you are a one man shop why is this even going on?? Companies can get sued for abusing 24/7 on call. Any reasonably sized company they pass the beeper or call out phone among the staff. Companies recognise than staff need downtime. Plus I would wonder about the organisational effectiveness. I get updates on our network on my cell. If there is a problem I am usually on the way to a solution before the ticket is generated or have contacted the on-call member as to the situation.
#9, Have to be careful here. There are a lot of job descriptions that are IT paid for positions but are not functionally IT. Dir of IT Finance for example. They identify as a member of IT but have a likelihood of not liking tech in general. Its not their bag.
#8, Personal observation is that most IT movement Dir and above are outside hires. You have to leave your present employ to make that jump to VP for example. Whether you can make CEO with an IT background depends on the industry. Plenty of examples of Geeks making it to the top of the ladder -- Steve Jobs for a start.
Maybe that company is wrong for you if they do not have enough staff to cover for you while you are out with family matters. Then again, it usually falls to you to make sure you train someone that can handle it in case you are out.
#11. Can work in a job where the long term prospects are decentralization, government encouraged outsourcing, and decreasing pay and job prospects with age.
The author is horribly out of touch with the latest research regarding supposed multitasking. It is now known that multitasking is really primitive time-slicing, with each task receiving downgraded attention and resulting in a shoddy outcome. If the author believes that quality is generated from a constant head-bobbing between tasks rather than a continuous and solid focus on a single task, then he is just spouting the managerial shibboleths without really thinking.
It's not ideal to multitask, but you hardly have a choice when there is a lot going on at once. Don't multitask and you're going to miss something.
you can still multitask and miss things. Humans are inferior context switchers, as these studies claim. This is a situation where you can either do good one task at a time or do a really crappy job on everything that gets thrown at you. Sadly, most managers don't really care about the quality and only want it done so I guess it doesn't really matter.
While task 1 is working, you can easily work on task 2 and so on.
I believe multitasking only works well with very experienced people. Less experienced people will struggle every time they turn around...Its something that comes with time.
as "efficient use of time".
I often have to initiate and confirm unattended, time-consuming processes such as network disk reimages or scripted configurations (with downloads). Once I start the process, there's no interaction until the process completes. Why wouldn't I go do something else rather than sit there and watch the bits go by?
I often have to initiate and confirm unattended, time-consuming processes such as network disk reimages or scripted configurations (with downloads). Once I start the process, there's no interaction until the process completes. Why wouldn't I go do something else rather than sit there and watch the bits go by?
Nice article. There were some great points made. It's just that, the articles seems to be more about support personnel than say, software developers. I wouldn't say I like people. Fortunately, I really don't deal with people. Well, not much. So point four isn't too applicable in my case.
This article seems to have caused quite a lot of debate.
Personally, I feel that yes, at times there is a requirement to work outside of your hours. However, this usually depends on the job you signed a contract for in the first place.
I work as IT support within a 4 site business, other sites are in different countries in different time zones.
By rights, the business doesn't operate after 5.30 - 99% of the time, neither do i.
I think this goes back to what someone else was saying in another post - MANAGEMENT
Our users are consultants, they are forever working! If they have an issue, they have a world of IT written resources they can access. Although most of the time any issue they have won't stop them working and if it does it probably. Hardware related! What. Can you do about it at midnight??
The only time I work outside my hours is when I want to finish something that will make my life easier. I can do that because our end-users and systems are managed in a way that allows me to do so.
Personally, I feel that yes, at times there is a requirement to work outside of your hours. However, this usually depends on the job you signed a contract for in the first place.
I work as IT support within a 4 site business, other sites are in different countries in different time zones.
By rights, the business doesn't operate after 5.30 - 99% of the time, neither do i.
I think this goes back to what someone else was saying in another post - MANAGEMENT
Our users are consultants, they are forever working! If they have an issue, they have a world of IT written resources they can access. Although most of the time any issue they have won't stop them working and if it does it probably. Hardware related! What. Can you do about it at midnight??
The only time I work outside my hours is when I want to finish something that will make my life easier. I can do that because our end-users and systems are managed in a way that allows me to do so.
I think most of these are not correct for being valid reasons to stay out of IT. I have been doing this for over 20 years, and have not had bad experiences with the IT and workload aspects of it, the worse part it the lack of repect,gratitude, and disregard for a person's time. All of the BAD Jobs that I have been in were the faults of the Managers or owners of the companies. I mean when you feel that Technology is a burden not a necessary tool, then who is the one with the problem. I have no problems working hard but when it comes down to work you work. The same should go for when you are not at work or on call, that's your time. Unless the employer is paying you 24/7 or a lucritive salary (which we know anymore is not true) then why should we be a slave to their cause. But when you expect someone to jump to your every call when they are not at work, nobody deserves nor should take that. Most of the time it is the company not having in place the correct IT Department Structure or policies to cut costs and that is why their turnover rates are so high for IT employee's. All companies have their IT issues. It is usually not the IT personnel but managment that makes our jobs harder because the lack of knowledge or willingness to allow us to do our jobs and not hound with stupid questions like, "How long is it going to take", and "Why is that 4TB database still copying". Just stop treating us as your personal IT guy and respect our time too, we are only 1 person and can only get so much done in a day.
You don't have to be a people person to work in IT. But you have to be able to put up with people. I find being a people person is actually a disadvantage, because there are times you have to be nasty, e.g. when enforcing policies, if for example they've been trying to defeat the web filter or whatever. Also if you're a people person you end up chatting with people instead of doing your job and then because you become "friends" with that person they expect you to do them favors, e.g. fix their home computer. I know people in IT who spend more time fixing people's home computers than the computers in the office where they work.
Being able to deal with people is definitely second to be being good at setting up GPOs, imx.
Also on the subject of work hours I would go further - many IT jobs are exclusively outside of ordinary hours. I've had one job where I was hardly ever in the office during the regular hours. It was late afternoon, evenings and weekends pretty much all the time.
Being able to deal with people is definitely second to be being good at setting up GPOs, imx.
Also on the subject of work hours I would go further - many IT jobs are exclusively outside of ordinary hours. I've had one job where I was hardly ever in the office during the regular hours. It was late afternoon, evenings and weekends pretty much all the time.
The author is clueless about the general composition of IT. There's an inordinate concentration of introverts and near-autistic personality types who are attracted by the attention to non-social and things-centric activity. I have encountered countless individuals who claim they are not "people persons" and will declaim that loudly in front of others and wear it as a badge of honor! We encourage this type of behavior because we bestow honors and accolades and promotions on those IT superheroes by not working with others to solve problems but performing some outrageous and single-minded act to save the day.
Are you speaking from the perspective a current or former IT person?? I would guess neither...you never worked in IT--because "bestow honors and accolades and promotions" is not the reality of the position. Go work in IT for a few years, then post a comment based on actual experience..That is...if you can survive 5 years in the IT/IS field..LOL
I'm not sure how Jack used the word, but I see it as an aspect of efficiency. I'm definitely not talking about trying to do two or three things at once.
For me, it's more like efficiently using the delays that are unavoidable aspects of many tasks. For example, if you're imaging a system, there's a built-in 10 to 20 minute wait when you could be doing another, smaller task.
There's also the aspect of how quickly you can return to a major task after minor interruptions. After you spent ten minutes on a VP's questions, how long does it take you to remember what you were last doing on that program?
For me, it's more like efficiently using the delays that are unavoidable aspects of many tasks. For example, if you're imaging a system, there's a built-in 10 to 20 minute wait when you could be doing another, smaller task.
There's also the aspect of how quickly you can return to a major task after minor interruptions. After you spent ten minutes on a VP's questions, how long does it take you to remember what you were last doing on that program?
I have worked in places where they literally mean 3 to 4 things at the same time. While I do not disagree with your point of working on another simpler task while another is in a hands-off mode. What most people associate with multitasking, and have been subjected to, is not the case you present.
It is those cases where you are expected not only to have answers to questions from other people whom you asked two days ago (and are following up), but you have to have 5 to 6 other tasks (that are always critical when only 1 or 2 actually are) done two days ago, all the while trying to look into issues affecting 3 or 4 other systems that are totally unrelated to each other. Did I mention all of these should have been done about 15 minutes after they were assigned because after all it they are nothing more than 10 minute tasks. >.
I know this is an absurd example, but it describes the last job I worked pretty accurately. =D
It is those cases where you are expected not only to have answers to questions from other people whom you asked two days ago (and are following up), but you have to have 5 to 6 other tasks (that are always critical when only 1 or 2 actually are) done two days ago, all the while trying to look into issues affecting 3 or 4 other systems that are totally unrelated to each other. Did I mention all of these should have been done about 15 minutes after they were assigned because after all it they are nothing more than 10 minute tasks. >.
I know this is an absurd example, but it describes the last job I worked pretty accurately. =D
I don't know why this site and its articles always seem to focus around hardware. IT is also application development, data and business analysis, some of which requires a bit of extra time but rarely a 2am call. It seems to me that these authors are trying to scare folks out of IT. I have known way too many analysts and developers who work 7 to 4 and not a minute past 4. The rest of the expectations can hold true because even in reporting, things change, but it varies and the flexibility offered is a huge plus.
After 32 years of 24/7/365, with no reward for my work, I now put my family first. I leave my cell phone at work, don't have a pager and go home at 4:00 p.m. I had visions of being a CIO but lousy managers and supervisors cured me of that. Why did I stay? The job security and the money.
Now at 66, I can laugh all the way to the bank as I draw my retirement from those same lousy managers and supervisors.
Now at 66, I can laugh all the way to the bank as I draw my retirement from those same lousy managers and supervisors.
First off, 'IT' is a very generic term. It's akin to saying that every doctor is a surgeon.
What is the definition of IT, anyway? One does not have to be in the 'IT' department necessarily to do IT-type work, right? For example, every day how many countless employees who are not in IT create pivot tables/charts in Excel or use Crystal to develop reports?
Large companies offer training to those who want it to learn tech skills so they can become less reliant on others - including IT - to do their work.
The important thing is simply to take it for what it is: IT is simply a business unit comprised of inter-changeable pieces.
The best advice I can give in IT is to be a generalist who knows everything, or attempts to know everything. Be ready to customize every single resume you send out for a job spec. It's a game, so learn to play it.
What is the definition of IT, anyway? One does not have to be in the 'IT' department necessarily to do IT-type work, right? For example, every day how many countless employees who are not in IT create pivot tables/charts in Excel or use Crystal to develop reports?
Large companies offer training to those who want it to learn tech skills so they can become less reliant on others - including IT - to do their work.
The important thing is simply to take it for what it is: IT is simply a business unit comprised of inter-changeable pieces.
The best advice I can give in IT is to be a generalist who knows everything, or attempts to know everything. Be ready to customize every single resume you send out for a job spec. It's a game, so learn to play it.
The list of the 10 things are the reasons why labor boards are going nuts, IT folks are becoming burned out, and leaving IT all together.
A corporation that does not take careful steps to ensure that one single person is not performing 24/7 support should be taken out shot, skewed, and the sued. Plain and simple, when people have worked a 14 hour day - they need to be left alone so they can rest.
An unrested and tired IT professional makes mistakes - some of them VERY VERY COSTLY to any organization. A person supporting 24/7 will cause problems. It is now the weakest point in your IT infastructure that can cost millions to recover.
I think that revisiting some of these with some Real Management focus (not those clueless IT Managers who have a business degree) will give you a better top 10. I for one have no patience for a 20 something telling me that they don't know how to use Microsoft Word, when 3 days ago they tell me that is all they use.
The problem here is 10 items that show very poor IT Management and HR problems that are on the verge of creating the perfect storm.
A corporation that does not take careful steps to ensure that one single person is not performing 24/7 support should be taken out shot, skewed, and the sued. Plain and simple, when people have worked a 14 hour day - they need to be left alone so they can rest.
An unrested and tired IT professional makes mistakes - some of them VERY VERY COSTLY to any organization. A person supporting 24/7 will cause problems. It is now the weakest point in your IT infastructure that can cost millions to recover.
I think that revisiting some of these with some Real Management focus (not those clueless IT Managers who have a business degree) will give you a better top 10. I for one have no patience for a 20 something telling me that they don't know how to use Microsoft Word, when 3 days ago they tell me that is all they use.
The problem here is 10 items that show very poor IT Management and HR problems that are on the verge of creating the perfect storm.
Like people? You don't have to be a cruise director to be an effective IT professional. Politeness and patience aren't a quality of liking people, they're simply common sense when dealing with others, although there are limits to how patient anyone can be expected to be when faced with discourtesy on the part of those we are supporting. Liking people isn't really part of the equation.
As a developer and system administrator, I have to say that the 'multi-tasking' paradigm is getting a bit more than old, and personally, I'm more than sick of it. Multi-tasking is more than often the expectation by management & HR types that the entire world mold themselves into clones of the distracted, "half-there" management class to which these folks often belong (apparently including the author)... a virtual impossibility considering the focused output we're asked to deliver. (Although... I *do understand the impetus to promote such an idea as "critical", since it's a very good way to get 120% output for 80% of the pay, if you can convince enough people that it is "the way things work" that it becomes the normative)
Regarding #10. If you expect people to be on call 24/7/365, you're deluding yourself and doing a disservice to the profession and eventually to your company(s). I get emergency situations, but as SOP? In my opinion, It smacks of aristocratic leanings in the present management class. In the "good old days" your grandparents must have told you about affectionately at some point, they were often called "house slaves" and "indentured servants", and at least in my not so humble opinion, we don't need a rebirth of that world, thanks. My opinion is that we should encourage resistance to and repudiation of that particular international school of management goal whenever and wherever possible or face permanent re-entry into a very ugly future that resembles a very old world we only recently escaped in the past ~100 years. Technology was designed to free humanity from slavery, not create a new class of "mentat" slaves.
As a developer and system administrator, I have to say that the 'multi-tasking' paradigm is getting a bit more than old, and personally, I'm more than sick of it. Multi-tasking is more than often the expectation by management & HR types that the entire world mold themselves into clones of the distracted, "half-there" management class to which these folks often belong (apparently including the author)... a virtual impossibility considering the focused output we're asked to deliver. (Although... I *do understand the impetus to promote such an idea as "critical", since it's a very good way to get 120% output for 80% of the pay, if you can convince enough people that it is "the way things work" that it becomes the normative)
Regarding #10. If you expect people to be on call 24/7/365, you're deluding yourself and doing a disservice to the profession and eventually to your company(s). I get emergency situations, but as SOP? In my opinion, It smacks of aristocratic leanings in the present management class. In the "good old days" your grandparents must have told you about affectionately at some point, they were often called "house slaves" and "indentured servants", and at least in my not so humble opinion, we don't need a rebirth of that world, thanks. My opinion is that we should encourage resistance to and repudiation of that particular international school of management goal whenever and wherever possible or face permanent re-entry into a very ugly future that resembles a very old world we only recently escaped in the past ~100 years. Technology was designed to free humanity from slavery, not create a new class of "mentat" slaves.
I got derailed by the fallaciousness of #7, but the author's point #10 is every bit as careless. I can't imagine a company that expects a non-managerial employee to skip the birth of their child or be sleep-deprived as part of the job description. Put mildly, this is overblown, alarmist tripe. There are certainly periods where you must "do whatever it takes" in support of your customers, but those are the exceptions rather than the rule. Companies that actually do operate this way, if there are any, should be called on the mat for it. It's abusive and unnecessary.
Feels like IT consistently gets the short end of the stick. Willing to learn (of course), Love of tech (sure), but 24/7 support? Companies have to pay for that time.
Funniest darn article I've read in a while. Is this a parody, as written by Bill Lumbergh? LOL! I think the funniest part of the article is where the writer says IT isn't for you if you want to be CEO, then later suggests that flipping burgers is the only hope many non-IT people have as a career without further training in IT related fields. I suppose a Linux guru would have this view on IT; late nights of head scratching and constant down-time. Thanks for the laugh.
- Keyboard Shortcuts:
- Prev
- Next
- Toggle
