staffing a 30-computer network???

Hi.

You have proposed a question with far too many variables to just shot back a "%" of time.

My suggestion is to hire a single "dedicated" network administration person.. He/she will take care of it all for you.

That person, in their idletime (after everything is initally set up) could use their time handling IT management issues like inventory tracking, developing a recovery plan, routine maintenance on the machines, IT budgeting issues (obviously this has to be worked out with theowner/CEO/President/CFO, etc.).

But that's just my opinion.

good luck.

I guess there are two questions in response. One, is everything getting done that should be? And two, what action is generating the question?

If everything is getting done, and done well, then the staffing level is adequate barring the answer tothe second question.

If there are things on the horizon that will directly impact the required resource then it may/maynot remain adequeate, even though there seems to be much room in the time allocation.

My experience has been that the amountof time devoted to administration is most widely affected by the amount of change within an organization and the ability/failure to recognize the influence this has.

In a highly stable environment, one with little end user turnover and/or a mature set of applications, the level is often low. One caveat would be can be when processes or activities occur that are by nature admin intensive.

As an example, I encountered a full time person doing operations work which had been done routinely for years even though the business model had changed significantly downward. Process review showed that over 50% of the activity was no longer supported or was of questionable value. Thus reorganizing this effort achieved an administration reductionof 50%. Hardware and software changes can have similar impacts.

In an environment where user turnover is high peaks can occur and a leveled view needs to be taken while allowing for the peaks.

In environments where process changes or new process introductions are present there is a greater amount of time required as both processes have to be taken care of. This added impact should decline over time but the length of time before decline can vary widely. Additionally, the how of processchange, planned versus spur of the moment, does directly impact the requirement for and allocation of resources.

In my opinion one of the primary considerations for staffing

I guess there are two questions in response. One, is everything getting done that should be? Two, what action is generating the question?

If everything is getting done, and done well, then the staffing level is adequate barring the answer to thesecond question.

If there are things on the horizon that will directly impact the required resource then it may/maynot remain adequeate, even though there seems to be much room in the time allocation.

My experience has been that the amount of time devoted to administration is most widely affected by the amount of change within an organization and the ability/failure to recognize the influence this has.

In a highly stable environment, little end user turnover and/or a mature set of applications, the level is often low. One caveat would be when processes or activities occur that are by nature admin intensive.

As an example, I encountered a full time person doing operations work which had been done routinely for years even though the business model had changed significantly downward. Process review showed that over 50% of the activity was no longer supported or was of questionable value. Thus reorganizing this effort achieved an administration reduction of 50%. Hardware and software and business growth changes can have similar impacts.

Likewise, where user turnover is high peaks can occur and a leveled view needs to be taken while allowing for the peaks.

Where there are process changes or new introductions there is a greater amount of time required as both processes have to be handled. This added impact should decline over time. Additionally, the manner of process change, planned versus spur of the moment, does directly impact the requirement for and allocation of resources.

In my opinion one of the primary considerations for staffing expectations is a realistic view of change impact to a going concern.

I'm a full time Net Admin with about 30 users. We have an NT network and host our own email, intranet sites and Outlook Web Access site. I've had slow time occassionally (maybe 10% of my time is slow), but a net admin with a little slow time is a good thing! That's when I research ways to make things better instead of just trying to keep up with existing problems. Having someone full time would enable your computer person to be proactive with your issues instead of reactive.

Just my thoughts!
Kristina

I want to point two different answers (in two different messages):

First Answer: Outsource

30 workstations and one NT server will not require more than one person to administer.
Other possibility is to outsource the preventive and correctivemaintenance to a hardware oriented company, and for the network administration tasks you could hire a network administrator (as needed or in a monthly basis). This will save you some money, and will give you some advantages about spare parts and continuous training in high-tech issues. If in the near future you want to add some new features (in-house web hosting, technology migration, users training, etc.) you will be able to find the right professional (individual or organization) that meets your selection about quality, price, and expertise.
If you look at your IT system as the business tool it is, you will see that the answer could not be answered from an exclusive IT point of view.

Jose P. Mir
jpm@jpmir.net

I provide support to an accounting firm with 28 employees and approximately 40 PCs and laptops. It is a full time job. I admin the network, fix PCs, printers and Laptops, created and administer the website, document everything, research and purchasenew products, update and install software, create brochures etc?

When I first took the job I thought I would have nothing to do after six months. That was 4 years ago. The IT function will take up more of your time as you meet more challenges. The more technology you invest in the more stuff that needs to be serviced and looked after. Your company will need a fulltime technology staff member in the future.

If you and your boss agree that you will provide the full time IT support for thecompany be sure to get yourself some training as well. If you don?t have a pure IT background you will find yourself in over your head very soon. It could get ugly as levels of expectations are not met by you because you are not an IT professional.

That happened to my predecessor, a CPA who was expected to know how to do all of the above listed items and do client work as well. He was a CPA not a CNE, you don?t go to a plumber to have you taxes done. Be sure that you and your boss define your role before you jump in.

Always is good to hear about someone that agree at least with some part of our own opinion.
You have said the right words in your response: “On the surface its easy for one to make this assumption. But depending on the needs of the company this can change, even for such a small network”. I like seeing that both of us agree in the tremendous dependence that this topic has with the needs of the organization. That was exactly my point, and maybe I wasn’t clear enough expressing it.
Depending on the same needs, the organization should analyze the Outsourcing possibility. Some organizations (whit some needs) will find it helpful, while others (whit other needs) won’t. This is not, at first, an IT issue; it’s a business one. That’s why I suggested Outsourcing as “Other possibility” to the “no more than one person to administrate [the network]”. It’s true, I use the title “Outsource” in the answer, because this was the difference between mine and the rest (if all the answers were the same the discussion is worthless). I apologize again for be unclear.
The “IT jack of all trades” you suggest is, again, a very good solution for some organizations (with some needs), and maybe the “cost overhead” I have mentioned for other kind of organizations (with other needs).
Once again thank you for your comments, and I promise be clearer next time.

Regards,

Jose P. Mir
jpm@jpmir.net