???Six things your IT department should stop doing today???
Thanks,
Gabby
Discussion on:
View:
Show:
here is the link to the other article.
http://www.techrepublic.com/blog/tech-manager/six-things-your-it-department-should-stop-doing-today/7739?tag=content;siu-container
http://www.techrepublic.com/blog/tech-manager/six-things-your-it-department-should-stop-doing-today/7739?tag=content;siu-container
Haven't dealt with reports in years, but the last time I did it was assisting in the creation of the report.
I use physical servers where appropriate and virtual where apprpriate. If someone wants a test server it will be virtualized. My Exchange server will remain physical.
Marketing comes to me for major changes to the web server, but they handle the web page themselves. I usually don't even know whern changes are made.
I have an account for cell phones and one for desk phones. All I need to do is change service as necessary, ie new users or foreign travel. The bill payment is handled by accounting and they only come to me if something doesn't look right.
I use physical servers where appropriate and virtual where apprpriate. If someone wants a test server it will be virtualized. My Exchange server will remain physical.
Marketing comes to me for major changes to the web server, but they handle the web page themselves. I usually don't even know whern changes are made.
I have an account for cell phones and one for desk phones. All I need to do is change service as necessary, ie new users or foreign travel. The bill payment is handled by accounting and they only come to me if something doesn't look right.
In the several organizations I have worked for over twenty plus years, the number of end users capable of writing a report involving more than two tables and a simple one-to-many relationship can be counted on two hands. Everything from new college grads to pilots to MDs/scientists to accountants to whatever.
They all want to be able to write their own reports but that only lasts until they find out what they have to do to actually create the report - then it's too much work, and testing - well, that's right out. The reports must be guaranteed to work right just as the user has written them; that's ITs job to ensure, not theirs.
Since my policy is to avoid doing other people's jobs for them, lots of useful reports don't get written or never are productive.
They all want to be able to write their own reports but that only lasts until they find out what they have to do to actually create the report - then it's too much work, and testing - well, that's right out. The reports must be guaranteed to work right just as the user has written them; that's ITs job to ensure, not theirs.
Since my policy is to avoid doing other people's jobs for them, lots of useful reports don't get written or never are productive.
If the user don't know their data, you can bet they will (and always do) find a way to do a do the classical star join on a non-indexed fields of a table. Then watch the system slow to a crawl. Then they blame IT. Either you should have prevented it or why can you do it!!!
Report engines are nice -- if you understand them and the data. The problem is that most users don't -- they just want an answer when they press a button.
Report engines are nice -- if you understand them and the data. The problem is that most users don't -- they just want an answer when they press a button.
There will always be exceptions. Moving IT to handle more of these kinds of exceptions and fewer routine things that belong in userland may create issues from time to time.
Virtualization, especially hyper-v, is going to be a preferred method among IT guys from now on because like you said, the benefits outweigh the disadvantages. Hyper-V is a snap to setup and my preferred brand, but I haven't tried out VMWare or any other virtualization brand.
Yep. Chevy is my preferred car. They're great! The best! Of course, I've never owned or driven any OTHER brand of car out there... 
I went with VMWare ESXi 4.1 on the advice of a consultant I've been working with. Seemed a bit better for my smaller shop, Boots and works from an internal SD card, freeing up more resources for the actual server operations. HyperV doesn't seem much worse, except for needing the install of Windows necessary to run the VMs, along with MS's arcane licensing and rapidly increasing costs once they've 'locked you in'. You'll find fanboys for both, but they each have their own pros and cons.
I went with VMWare ESXi 4.1 on the advice of a consultant I've been working with. Seemed a bit better for my smaller shop, Boots and works from an internal SD card, freeing up more resources for the actual server operations. HyperV doesn't seem much worse, except for needing the install of Windows necessary to run the VMs, along with MS's arcane licensing and rapidly increasing costs once they've 'locked you in'. You'll find fanboys for both, but they each have their own pros and cons.
I went with hyper-v because it was there. If I was looking for a machine to specifically run virtualized machines then I would definitely shop around and weigh the pros and cons of each brand. The server was already there, as a second DC, so I decided to install the hyper-v role and play around with it. It has actually helped us out with our operations, so we've kept it running.
The culture of some businesses has not evolved since the 80s and 90s, when the IT staff were considered magicians with keys to some hidden and mystical knowledge. Computerization has advanced well beyond that point now, and there is no reason in the world why the technical staff should do for business professionals what they should be doing for themselves.
No one expects the non-techie to have the wherewithal to match the skills of the IT pro, but there is no excuse for a non-techie to refuse to learn how to do simple things such as create reports or update websites. Learning to use these tools is for the non-techies' own good, unless they want to see their careers stall as the rest of the business world moves on. Of course, it sometimes seems that this is only true for all business professionals except upper management.
No one expects the non-techie to have the wherewithal to match the skills of the IT pro, but there is no excuse for a non-techie to refuse to learn how to do simple things such as create reports or update websites. Learning to use these tools is for the non-techies' own good, unless they want to see their careers stall as the rest of the business world moves on. Of course, it sometimes seems that this is only true for all business professionals except upper management.
Outsourcing communications billing adds another IT expense and costs more than the salary of the person doing it..............I do agree it would be nice to offload that task, however..........
Writing reports, or running reports? Unless the app allows users to write their own reports it will remain up to IT. With that said I do agree that IT should not be running reports. More than once I offloaded that responsibility to the appropriate person.
I don't have a problem creating reports. Software I've written doesn't have that much user flexibility for creating them anyway. However, the users can run them on their own. I'll take the time to train users in the programs and reports where necessary, but if they ask me to run a report, I go to their machine to do it and make them do the clicking.
As for Web work, that is entirely within I.T. responsibility. Don't even know if anyone else in the builiding has the abilitiy/knowledge for it.
As for Web work, that is entirely within I.T. responsibility. Don't even know if anyone else in the builiding has the abilitiy/knowledge for it.
I disagree with you on the web work. I think for building, coding and creating, yes IT is involved. However, for the day to day running no. Marketing / Communications and other key people need to be able to manage the content. It would be such a drag on the IT resources to be posting products, announcements, white papers, etc. Content should be done by other departments, not IT. There is no reason not to build a solid content editor into a website or train users on how to use software such as Dreamweaver to manage the content.
I just read it the other day, and this would be another contributing factor. As easy as most of these tools are (to US) to use, a LOT of end-users don't find it so. When 'forced' to use them, they get petulant and, once again, hate IT... Their work becomes shoddy and not as 'professional' looking as before, and where do you think the blame gets laid when asked about this by their managers?
WARNING: Sarcastic quotation marks ahead...
IT implemented an "end-user-oriented" web content maintenance solution that would allow different departments to "easily" update/maintain their own content areas on a public-facing site, and it included an approval workflow for managers and our PR department to prevent anything non-releasable hitting the public view. As I understand it, the business areas had been asking for an "easier" way to get content updates out, because it was taking a few days in many cases just for text changes using our existing work request procedures. (What they really wanted was a streamlined skip-the-approvals process.)
Somebody thought this new system would solve our problems. Someone else signed off on it. No one got around to telling the end users until they arrived for one of the multiple three-hour training sessions that I was assigned to deliver. After the first session, I started asking in the first minute of class "Who knows why they're here?" and the YES ratio was usually one in seven or worse. Epic, utter failure, and two years or so later, I'm pretty sure that 95% of our content changes go through the same workflow that this new system was intended to replace.
IT implemented an "end-user-oriented" web content maintenance solution that would allow different departments to "easily" update/maintain their own content areas on a public-facing site, and it included an approval workflow for managers and our PR department to prevent anything non-releasable hitting the public view. As I understand it, the business areas had been asking for an "easier" way to get content updates out, because it was taking a few days in many cases just for text changes using our existing work request procedures. (What they really wanted was a streamlined skip-the-approvals process.)
Somebody thought this new system would solve our problems. Someone else signed off on it. No one got around to telling the end users until they arrived for one of the multiple three-hour training sessions that I was assigned to deliver. After the first session, I started asking in the first minute of class "Who knows why they're here?" and the YES ratio was usually one in seven or worse. Epic, utter failure, and two years or so later, I'm pretty sure that 95% of our content changes go through the same workflow that this new system was intended to replace.
Several years ago I convinced our team to not write special reports.
Instead, we wrote report engines that gave you all the data might possibly want in various sections (with date range and other criteria of course).
The output can come as a web page or as a spreadsheet.
If you want something different or special, mess with the spreadsheet.
The users love it and now we only have one or two extra-special reports we end up doing every year because of specific requirements for programs that actually bring money.
If you want to analyze stuff, you can do it on your own with access to data.
Instead, we wrote report engines that gave you all the data might possibly want in various sections (with date range and other criteria of course).
The output can come as a web page or as a spreadsheet.
If you want something different or special, mess with the spreadsheet.
The users love it and now we only have one or two extra-special reports we end up doing every year because of specific requirements for programs that actually bring money.
If you want to analyze stuff, you can do it on your own with access to data.
Here's a link to the first six: http://www.techrepublic.com/blog/tech-manager/six-things-your-it-department-should-stop-doing-today/7739
Scott
Scott
FOR 27 YEARS, I HAVE SEEN A COMPLETE CORPORATE/ORGANIZATIONAL DISCONNECT IN WIRELESS COSTS AND MANAGEMENT
WHERE ARE THE DISCONNECTION POINTS? WHO GETS INVOLVED?
INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY (IT)
(CONNECTS)
1) KNOW MORE ABOUT THE TECHNICAL SIDE OF THE EQUIPMENT
2) HOW THE EQUIPMENT FITS WITHIN THE CORPORATE STRUCTURE
3) FUTURE CORPORATION PLANS AND NEEDS.
4) WHICH CARRIER, REGARDLESS OF PRICE, MATCHES COVERAGE BETTER, DOES EQIUPMENT MEET TECHNOLOGY DEMANDS?, ETC.
(DISCONNECTS)
1) WIRELESS CONTRACT NEGOTIATION (EVERYBODY SPENDS TIME ON DISCOUNTS AND IGNORES THE OTHER 88 PAGES OF ???GOTTCHAS???) (DISCOUNTS ONLY APPLY TO SOME COSTS AND NET ABOUT 1 ?? % OUT OF 3%)
2) INVOICE AUDITS (LACK THE TIME, SOPHISTICATED TECHNOLOGY, RATE PLAN DATA BASE, AUDIT SKILLS, ETC)
PURCHASING
(DISCONNECTS)
1) TECHNICAL KNOWLEDGE (3G-4G)
2) DOES EQUIPMENT TRUE UP WITH ORG. NEEDS
3) WHILE THEY HAVE CONTRACT NEGOTIATION EXPERIENCE, WIRELESS CONTRACTS ARE 99% IN FAVOR OF CARRIERS. THEY DO NOT HAVE KNOWLEDGE OF THE ???GOTTCHAS??? AND SPEND MONTHS NEGOTIATING DISCOUNTS = ONLY 1%-2% OF SPEND.
SALES
(DISCONNECTS)
1) REQUEST EQUIPMENT W/O KNOWING NUANCES OF DIFFERENT FEATURES & SERVICES OFFERED BY VARIOUS CARRIERS.
2) OFTEN GIVE IN TO SALES PEOPLE THAT WANT ???NEWEST??? PHONES
3) CONTRACT RAMIFICATIONS
LEGAL
(DISCONNECTS)
1) CAN DOT THE ???I???s BUT DO NOT HAVE THE EXPERIENCE DEALING WITH THE WIRELESS CARRIERS. THE CARRIERS ONLY CONSIDERATION IS RETAINING RECURRING INCOME.
2) DO NOT HAVE EXPERIENCE TO SPOT THE ???GOTTCHAS??? AND EVEN IF THEY DID, CARRIERS ARE TOO GOOD AT THIS. (THEY HAVE HUNDREDS OF STASTICIANS, ATTORNEYS, ETC. )
DEPARTMENT, REGION MANAGERS
(DISCONNECTS)
1) THEY HAVE NO ACCESS TO RAW DATA AND CONSEQUENTLY, CANNOT BEGIN TO AUDIT BILLS. THEY MAY LOOK FOR UNUSUAL CIRCUMSTANCES, BUT IF BILL TOTALS ARE SIMILAR TO PREVIOUS MONTHS, IT IS USUALLY SIGNED OFF ON AND SENT TO A/P.
A/P
(DISCONNECTS)
1) IF IT IS GOOD ENOUGH FOR MANAGEMENT, IT IS GOOD ENOUGH FOR A/P.
2) THE DO NOT HAVE THE CONTRACTS IN FRONT OF THEM AND EVEN IF THAY DID, THEY DO NOT HAVE THE RAW DATA, NOR DO THEY HAVE THE THOROUGH UNDERSTANDING OF THE MANY RATE PLANS, ETC. NOR DO THEY UNDERSTAND THE CONTRACT LANGUAGE
3) IF IT IS $65,000 THIS MONTH AND WAS $65,000 LAST MONTH, IT MUST BE RIGHT.
MOST CORPORATIONS DO NOT HAVE THE TIME OR THE DATA, OR THE DATABASE OF EVERY RATE PLAN AVAILABLE TO PROPERLY OPTIMIZE EVERY LINE, EVERY MONTH OR QUARTER. NOR DO THEY UNDERSTAND THE CONTRACT THEY SIGNED. MOST OFTEN, CORPORATIONS PAY ???LATE CHARGES??? AS WELL.
WHERE ARE THE DISCONNECTION POINTS? WHO GETS INVOLVED?
INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY (IT)
(CONNECTS)
1) KNOW MORE ABOUT THE TECHNICAL SIDE OF THE EQUIPMENT
2) HOW THE EQUIPMENT FITS WITHIN THE CORPORATE STRUCTURE
3) FUTURE CORPORATION PLANS AND NEEDS.
4) WHICH CARRIER, REGARDLESS OF PRICE, MATCHES COVERAGE BETTER, DOES EQIUPMENT MEET TECHNOLOGY DEMANDS?, ETC.
(DISCONNECTS)
1) WIRELESS CONTRACT NEGOTIATION (EVERYBODY SPENDS TIME ON DISCOUNTS AND IGNORES THE OTHER 88 PAGES OF ???GOTTCHAS???) (DISCOUNTS ONLY APPLY TO SOME COSTS AND NET ABOUT 1 ?? % OUT OF 3%)
2) INVOICE AUDITS (LACK THE TIME, SOPHISTICATED TECHNOLOGY, RATE PLAN DATA BASE, AUDIT SKILLS, ETC)
PURCHASING
(DISCONNECTS)
1) TECHNICAL KNOWLEDGE (3G-4G)
2) DOES EQUIPMENT TRUE UP WITH ORG. NEEDS
3) WHILE THEY HAVE CONTRACT NEGOTIATION EXPERIENCE, WIRELESS CONTRACTS ARE 99% IN FAVOR OF CARRIERS. THEY DO NOT HAVE KNOWLEDGE OF THE ???GOTTCHAS??? AND SPEND MONTHS NEGOTIATING DISCOUNTS = ONLY 1%-2% OF SPEND.
SALES
(DISCONNECTS)
1) REQUEST EQUIPMENT W/O KNOWING NUANCES OF DIFFERENT FEATURES & SERVICES OFFERED BY VARIOUS CARRIERS.
2) OFTEN GIVE IN TO SALES PEOPLE THAT WANT ???NEWEST??? PHONES
3) CONTRACT RAMIFICATIONS
LEGAL
(DISCONNECTS)
1) CAN DOT THE ???I???s BUT DO NOT HAVE THE EXPERIENCE DEALING WITH THE WIRELESS CARRIERS. THE CARRIERS ONLY CONSIDERATION IS RETAINING RECURRING INCOME.
2) DO NOT HAVE EXPERIENCE TO SPOT THE ???GOTTCHAS??? AND EVEN IF THEY DID, CARRIERS ARE TOO GOOD AT THIS. (THEY HAVE HUNDREDS OF STASTICIANS, ATTORNEYS, ETC. )
DEPARTMENT, REGION MANAGERS
(DISCONNECTS)
1) THEY HAVE NO ACCESS TO RAW DATA AND CONSEQUENTLY, CANNOT BEGIN TO AUDIT BILLS. THEY MAY LOOK FOR UNUSUAL CIRCUMSTANCES, BUT IF BILL TOTALS ARE SIMILAR TO PREVIOUS MONTHS, IT IS USUALLY SIGNED OFF ON AND SENT TO A/P.
A/P
(DISCONNECTS)
1) IF IT IS GOOD ENOUGH FOR MANAGEMENT, IT IS GOOD ENOUGH FOR A/P.
2) THE DO NOT HAVE THE CONTRACTS IN FRONT OF THEM AND EVEN IF THAY DID, THEY DO NOT HAVE THE RAW DATA, NOR DO THEY HAVE THE THOROUGH UNDERSTANDING OF THE MANY RATE PLANS, ETC. NOR DO THEY UNDERSTAND THE CONTRACT LANGUAGE
3) IF IT IS $65,000 THIS MONTH AND WAS $65,000 LAST MONTH, IT MUST BE RIGHT.
MOST CORPORATIONS DO NOT HAVE THE TIME OR THE DATA, OR THE DATABASE OF EVERY RATE PLAN AVAILABLE TO PROPERLY OPTIMIZE EVERY LINE, EVERY MONTH OR QUARTER. NOR DO THEY UNDERSTAND THE CONTRACT THEY SIGNED. MOST OFTEN, CORPORATIONS PAY ???LATE CHARGES??? AS WELL.
- Keyboard Shortcuts:
- Prev
- Next
- Toggle
