Ethics, Professionalism, and IT

"Finally, here is a question that I've never gotten a satisfactory answer to:
You say "Having been one to play all of those roles during my career (employee, owner, executive) I can tell you - without any doubt - the employee role is easier. At least in terms of risk, stress, and difficulty."
I've heard this from just about every manager or owner I have ever talked to, including my own brother. So my question is, why do these people never go back to being just an employee ever again, once they've been a manager or owner? I've never met one yet that did.
Cheers,
Scott"

In America, you are seen as successful if you climb the ladder.
The reward for doing a job well is to take you out of that job and move you into a new job that you now have to learn.
You make more money, thus start to live at a higher level of debt.
Many can't go back because they can't give up that bigger check.
Others see it as a demotion if they go back down the ladder, and what everyone think about them. The ego factor.
Would you go back willingly to help desk?
Didn't think so.

Here's a response had your opening line read "There are at least two problems with requiring certifications SOLELY based on written tests. "

Basing certifications SOLELY on written tests is always a mistake. I support the SANS model, which requires NOT ONLY a written test (in some cases two) but also a practical/lab assignment. There is definitely a place for written tests , however.

Your first point is valid. Test-taking is a stressful event for many people, and the test-taking environment play large factors into things for many people.

However, to be competent in an organization, the ability to read and analyze and interpret what a person may want is an important skill. Memos, helpdesk equests, RFQs, and many many many other examples IT people deal with in the business world often don't have as much information as we need, or are filled with questions worded in a way to make it unclear what the deliverable is. Being able to think these through and NOT fly off at the most obvious (and probably not correct) answer is a valid skill. And while memorizing some lists, I agree, is not practical, there are some features where you don't want to be sitting in front of a CEO and saying "I can just go look it up". You want the answer. And the CEO/Board thinks you are more competent if you know the answer. Also, that brings the question in...where do you look it up? While Google is my friend as much as anyone's, I am aware of misinformation and "armchair experts" that spout off on lots of different subjects...and are often wrong. Perhaps better questions are "where would you find this information?" and make sure the certification application can list reputable sources. This is one of the reasons I always stress to my team "I don't expect you to know everything. I DO expect you to know what you don't know, Honestly tell me you don't know, and know a reputable source to find the answer." I think your third point is valid but maybe doesn't even go far enough, in that the tests often are NOT updated as often as the product, which means that some certs are based on technology that no longer applies. This sucks. And your fourth point is valid to a point, but also goes back to asking sometimes the wrong questions. If the questions are asking about theory and are appropriately asking about this then this should provide the user building blocks to understand and analyze problems on systems going forward - regardless of new technologies, many of the building blocks are the same.

You have a point here; weaknesses in management are also clearly exposed here. Especially tough if you need that specific client as a contract worker - it may well drive you mad...
you have my sympathy.

RknRlKid wrote:

> The hallmark of an occupation calling itself
> "professional" is a shared set of values,
> a shared set of standards, and shared
> expectations.

That's not the hallmark of an occupation; that's the hallmark of a collective. We are not a collective. You will not be assimilated. Resistance is not futile.

> Anyone can call themselves a mechanic; only
> those with ASE are professional.

Wrong. The fact is that there was a host of professional mechanics before 1972, when ASE was established; and there is an even greater number of them now who have no need of ASE for their work.

> If I was a CEO and knew absolutely nothing about
> IT workers...

... then you'd be just like every other clueless suit in the industry.

> TipsForSucces.org web site has this interesting
> analogy:
> "A professional [does this and that]"

You're passing along an opinion about the behaviour of "a professional" from a bunch of *Scientologists*?? Snap out of it, Kid!

The occupation is largely irrelevant, it is the fact that to be a true professional you have to have an extremely in depth knowledge of your subject and be able to utilise it as necesary.

for example, anyone could man an IT helpdesk and solve users problems given a computer and the correct books and enough time - that however does not make them professional. It is the one who can respond to these querys based on true knowledge and experience without the aid of such resources who is truly professional.

I think you just proved his point in 14 words!

For a few years and yes it has changed. It was like any professional job, you did what you were told to do. At first it was try to do this and if it works, great and tell me how. Then it was make it work and document it, so we can do it again. Now it's do it and I do not care how! I have had many certs. and have not renewed them because of the price and the companys that I worked for will not pay for them. I do not help hackers or support them. I have a great resume and rep. with the companys that I have worked for. It seems that you are looking at the wrong area or threads to see whats being posted.

All the posts to this thread DO NOT deal with just sysadmins!!!
What thread are you reading?

I think a few things got mixed up here. You've hit on it, but didn't identify it. This is it...

Professionalism is a mindset, not a piece of paper as you suggest when you say "Anyone can call themselves a mechanic, only those with ASE are professional." Being a professional is a decision one has to make. It is the mindset that separates the men from the boys. Unfortunately the IT industry is no different than anyplace else. From roofing a house to building the Space Shuttle, there are few "professionals" left, and it shows in their work.

Keep in mind that professionalism and qualifications are two separate things. You can be a professional and not be qualified. You can be qualified but not professional. You can totally hate your job and still be a professional and qualified.

Show me someone who approaches me with their credentials, with their "paper," and I'll show you a paper tiger. Usually someone who keeps touting their certifications is the guy who is not qualified enough to let their skill speak for itself. On the flipside there are many fully qualified and professional individuals who are not making what they're worth becuase they didn't put enough credence into the paper and it's the paper that helps keep the resume out of the trash.

I say this only to note that anyone can get "certified." Anyone can get a degree. That still doesn't make you qualified or a professional by any stretch of the imagination.

Signing an agreement that you will abide by a code of ethics is nothing without the person having the character required to control themselves. A professional has the integrity, character, honor and ethics built in that would make them feel guilty if they didn't abide by something they agreed to. Do we not as IT professionals agree to abide by at least a dozen plus EULAs every day that we previoulsy accepted? Does it really make a difference if I signed something or didn't? When I hit the "I Accept" button at the end of a EULA, it is no different than signing a document that stated the same thing.

I fully agree with you about the status of our industry. Too many people came into this industry for the "big payout." If you came here for the quick money, then you probably don't have the character needed to become a professional. There has to be something more. The relatively large knowledge gap between an IT person and the customers they support exaserbates the issue as it allows a person made of lesser stuff to hide their incompetence by baffling the user with BS, and somehow allowing that same IT person to think they are better than the people they support. Don't forget that CEOs are our customers too. If I were a CEO reading these boards, I probably wouldn't recognize that a lot of what is said here is unethical and wrong in the industry as I would have no knowledge to identify it. This hurts all of us unfortunately.

The saddest thing is that what I think you're seeing is not isolated to just our industry. Everywhere I look, I see more and more imcompetent people, who don't care enough to make themselves better as a person or at their job, and none see themselves as a part of the bigger picture. A member of the team. Half-ass seems to be about as good as I can get from people these days, at any job, and any industry.

Having been through the training mill from complete beginner to now (I think) a professional. I mostly agree.

I am a tradesman technician (having completed a four year apprenticeship which included both practical and theoretical competence) with no particular speciality rather a good grounding in most aspects of computer and associated eqipment repairs and maintenance and a number of years practical experience.

The discussion threads in general show a lack of understanding of basic knowledge by the writers. On many occasions while reading these threads I think " HOW DO THESE PEOPLE JUSTIFY THEIR EXISTENCE WITHIN THE INDUSTRY, they cannot in all conscience call themselves technicials, they have no knowledge or pride. I am ashamed to be be in the same industry."

What this industry needs is a governing body where, to be a member, you must have completed and passed an entrance exam which is designed to show, at least, a satisfactory level of knowledge and competence.

You don't think you should report instances of copyright violation? Interesting ...

If you saw a rape in action, would you call the police?

Of course you would.

Let's take it a step down from violent crime.

If you saw someone breaking into your neighbor's house while they were at work, would you call the police?

Of course you would.

See the connection?

If not, how about this ... if someone took money out of your wallet and just said "you won't miss this small amount", would you do something about it?

Well, pirated software increases the cost of unpirated software in the same way that "uninsured motorist" insurance increases the cost of operating a car. You're paying because the other guy isn't.

So, why would you allow pirated software? (And why call it something nearly romantic sounding, like "pirated"? Why not call it "stolen software" and make it really clear what's actually being done? There's a question for the IT community at large.)

One time somebody told me "There are two types of people you shouldn't trust: lawyers and [IT personnel]... they always try to cheat you". That was in 1994. It was downright bitter to hear a customer say that. But it seems things have changed little since then...

You have brought forth a subject that has spread out into several subtopics. I'd like to comment on a few I have seen so far.

1. Being "professional", "ethical". I understand what you are looking at. It may be a need to agree on what is meant by "professional", or a need for another word to express it. But the thing is that IT shouldn't conform to being seen as a group of cheapskates, as in the introductory quote of this post. As a group that believes the end justifies the means: "who cares if I'm violating the license, I just want this computer up and running...". We should really live up to the respect we think is due to us for our role in the company. Not just because we're high-tech up-to-date junkies, but because we represent key, active agents of progress.

Now, when speaking of ethics, that will also depend on the business culture and society in general. I say that because here in the Dominican Republic (and in other countries, like somebody else posted), unethical behaviour is standard. Businesses cheat on the government, and the government cheats on everybody. Here you will most likely find a corrupt systems with tax-evasion features, among other things. 99% of the time. Not that it's right or an excuse, but it is reality. On what you can control, do it right. On what you can't, bear it till you actually find a fair company, or change profession.

2. Knowlegde vs Certifications. I agree that one without the other leaves you incomplete. You certainly can't gain if you have no knowledge. But you can't show what you've got before you're in. Without some kind of documentation, hirers can't really be sure if you have what they are looking for. Fair? Maybe not. But it's the way it works.

A related topic is that of continuing education. One thing is to have or not have a certification for what I know, and another is the drive I have for learning more. It's not just the raking in of certifications, it's the learning opportunity involved. The IT field is constantly moving, and those who don't move with it will be left behind. Better yet, we ARE the ones that are supposed to make the IT field move.

In the context of the topic at hand, we will be better players in the role we're getting paid for when we try to improve ourselves in every aspect possible, instead of being just lazy salary-collectors. And yes, IT personnel should at least know how to write correctly, as also any educated person should.

3. IT vs the user. I love this one. The eternal war between IT and the end-user. I agree with those which posted about mutual respect of each one's field. If IT at a moment comes to be an internal customer of our end users, which in reality is not uncommon, we will become conscious of our relation to them. I know it's not easy. But if our users seem to be stupid or bothersome, maybe we are not empowering them enough for their normal chores. Maybe we could suggest training. Or the solutions we offered didn't adapt to their needs. Only they can give us guidelines on what they need... and probably not in exact, precise, "IT" terms.

4. Doing the job right the first time. To mind comes the fact that what we could call a "professional" has much to do with what you feel and believe in. It's about respecting and appreciating yourself and what you do. If you don't have it in you head and in your bloodstream, if you don't breathe it, then you still have a way to go.

I hope this topic, apart from the question if IT overall is "professional" or not, gives us a chance for introspection.

I agree with you observations, especially about what happened with ACA. The ultimate goal should be professional self-regulation, and keeping governmental controls out.

Self-regulated ethics codes come about to protect the profession more than to protect the client. Governmental rules come about because someone in the profession broke the rules at the expense of a client.

Does either make someone "good" at what they do? Not necessarily. But it may help prevent newcomers to the profession from falling into problems that have already been identified. And like a lock, should keep honest people honest.

I was wary of using that as a quote, because I do fully know of the reputation of the organization. However, these are not original with them, but can be found in other sources too. (I used to hear these over and over when I was in the military.) That particular web page had the most reasonable compilation I could find on short notice.

Like any generality, there are exceptions, but as science teaches us, exceptions do not make the rule.

I had this exact same problem when I was in the military.

There were several subordinates who I rated directly that we in leadership KNEW were having affairs (their wives complained, and the girlfriends would call the unit). When it came down to evaluation time, I was informed I COULD NOT legally use this ethical violation as part of the evaluation unless legal action had been taken against them, and they were convicted. (There was a Yes/No block on the form to the effect of "highest standards of ethics on and off duty.")

Personal things are a two edged sword, and I can understand both sides. Apply this to politics, too: should a candidate be disqualified because he/she smoked marijuana in college at 18, and they are now 45? John Tower was in congress for decades, yet when he was nominated for Secretary of Defense suddenly it is revealed he has an alcohol problem and cannot have the job. But wait...its ok for a congressman to be an alcoholic, but not the Sec of Defense?? Its all a matter of perception, apparently, and a matter of who sits on the hiring side of the table.

Which I disagree with, btw.

Other than the "tipsforsuccess" piece, everything is original writing.

I think you missed the big picture more than I did. This post was an offshoot of another one.

CEOs are not required to know everything in a technical sense. But, if they are worth their salt, they do know about personnel, ethics, and leadership. Now, I fully realize that the Peter Principle is in effect in America (and elsewhere). CEO competency would be a completely different posting!

Thinking outside the box DOES NOT mean tossing the book. This is a common misconception. You cannot think outside the box until you mastered the box (or book) first. What I wrote is a generality to spur discussion. Nothing is amiss with it.

First off, there is no professional jounalism here. This is a board! My post was a commentary about a different thread that had become to big to answer.

I am fully aware that what is on these boards does not represent 100% of IT workers. But it does represent those that post. It was to these posters that I was writing.

The sole purpose of it was to generate some thought and comment, and I was successful. However, your venomous attack is more juvenile than my attempt to create conversation about an issue that IS a problem in these threads.

I totally agree with the lack of ethics in the IT arena. However, one thing we must understand is that normal techie's look at business different then most folks. I believe it's always been that way. Typically an IT pro comes in, fixes the problem (or sets one up...), and moves on to the next job. They don't normally look at the part they actually play in an organization, which is of course to provide service, and not to have someone service them. It's our job to make technology work for us and the person whom we work for. An IT pro must realize to truly make it in the industry it will require a different mind-set. They need to focus just as much on their soft-skills as much as their technical skills. In fact often times soft-skills are something that can't be learned as easily as technical(ex: true customer service skills). IT, like any profession requires a person to develop themselves, hence an education. Another thing to keep in mind is IT is just a profession like any other, it just requires different skills. The tax guy could just as easily have a lack of ethics and think the world revolves around him instead of remembering that he provides service. Without the client we're just sitting around building networks in our house. People are just as interested in you caring about the job you do, as much as you having the skills to do it.

And there was a time when a generalization of CEO's might have been adversely influenced by the Enron scandal.

If a CEO reads these postings and has concerns, he should consider bringing in an independent reviewer. That would either assuage his concerns, or give him the ammunition to change his IT staff.

Why does there seem to be a lack of ethics and professionalism in the IT field. While I have had very limited experience (just under a year) actually working in the IT field I do know some people that have worked in the IT field for a few years and based on what I heard from them and from what I experienced I have my own theory as to why there is a lack of professionalism and ethics in the IT field.

My theory is that alot of the workers in the IT field are usually working by themselves or with a small group of people and make up just a small minority of the company. this probaly gets them to think that they are above the others in the company and think that they cannot be replaced very easily. I mean who else knows how everything in the network is setup. They probaly feel that it would cost the company more to find and train a replacement and feel they can get away with murder so to speak.

I think that as more and more people get into the IT field (and I think more and more will, since the IT field is often billed as "the fastest growing career field") the bar for ethics and professionalism with be raised significantly and in due time (I'm talking within the next few years if that) the IT field will be regarded just as much a profession as any other career and the days of unethical unprofessional elitist mentallity of some current IT's will go the way of the dodo.

Intriguing how you scold someone for their "personal diatribe" and using quotations, then you do the same.

Presenting yourself as a professional "Fortune 100" consultant guru while mispelling "plagiarist" (plagorist?) and "perhaps" (prehaps?) at the same time is rather self-defeating.

Perhaps you should exercise a bit of professionalism yourself and proofread your work before submitting it to the world's perusal.

President Eisenhower's wonderful statement tries to teach us that to effect change we should offer positive examples, not personal attacks - it seems to me that you missed its point entirely.

Sorry, just my thoughts (from 37 years in the IT business field).

I've been working in Tokyo as either a network administrator or systems designer for large Telecom manufacturers for the last 20 years (NEC, Ocean Cable & Communications, NTT) so maybe I am out of touch with some of the problems people posting on this board are facing in the offices there in the USA (and the UK?).

I know the Japanese have a reputation of being a 'nation of nerds', but think on this; I am now in a new start-up division and in the desks facing me a team of new admin people spend all day at their desks studying and discussing all the nuances of Excel and other software tools they are expected to use in their new jobs. Many of them will take their notebook computers with them and continue studying on the train commute to their home.

As a result, they will become very proficient at their jobs, and will only ask for my support when something is definitely wrong with their PC, an upgrade is needed, or some new software needs installing.

They know very well that their jobs (and their personal pride) demand that they give their utmost to support the company, and they spend their personal effort to do so.

In today's employment environment, they know they are lucky to have a job, and proud to be part of the company, returning the company's trust in them by doing the best job they can for their pay instead of complaining. It is a matter of honor, gratitude, and personal pride. Perhaps these values are what have been lost or forgotten by some people in the American office.

To me, these people are professionals - it doesn't matter how esoteric or technical your duties may be, provided you do it to the best of your ability. Here in Japan, no one will ever be fired for being less talented than others, provided he gives his best effort (Japanese recognize that not everyone is born with the same set of tools). A talented, experienced, intelligent employee would be fired much faster for refusing to be a "team player" or treating others with arrogance around the office.

So my perspective is a bit different, but over here, people take pride in their work, making it easier for their co-workers since no one has to 'baby-sit' them like it seems non-technical employees expect in the USA.

Sorry if I ruffled anyone's feathers, I just have little tolerance for people who prefer complaining over rolling up their sleeves and getting on with the job.

There is an easy way to spot a professional.

Since I have become involved in the recruitment process, I have realised that you find IT Professionals in the same that you find, say, professional civil engineers, accountants, or even plummers.

When it comes to programmers and techies, I am more likely to hire someone who belongs to a professional organisation. Here in the UK, the Institute of Analyists and Programmers, and the British Computer Society are the two best known, but I am sure that all over the world there are similar organisations that require similar high professional standards of their members.

A professional organisation requires that its members continually develop their knowledge and skills. Those that do better at this gain higher levels of membership within the organisation. Basic membership level indicates a willingness to be professional, higher level membership indicates that you have what it takes to BE professional.

When I hire a plummer, I get one who belongs to a professional organisation. When I hire an accountant, I look for one who is a Chartered Accountant. When I hire a civil engineer, I hire a Chartered Engineer.

Professionals are easy to spot, but it takes effort to be one. A professional does not whine about unreasonable expectation of his bosses, or about colleagues who don't pull their weight, or about tidying his desk once a week. A professional doesn't devalue the point of view of another by character assasination. A professional does not look for excuses why the highest standards should not apply to them. A professional is respected, non-professionals cry about how unfairly they get treated, about how the odds are stacked against them.

In this industry, like in any other, there are professionals, who live professionalism, and there are wannabe's. I know which type I will be inviting to an interview. I know which type I will listen to the recommendations of. I know which type I will recommend for promotion. I also know which type I will give all the donkey work to.

Could it get any simpler?

I see top engineers with multiple projects whose desks get messey. I also see them take the time to clear them, at least once a week.

I also see non-achievers who tell me they are too busy to tidy their desk, ever.

Funny how the people who manage to find the time to clear their desks occasionally are the ones who most often make it to the top. I recommend everyone take a look at their bosses desk, and use that to make a judgement about what it takes to get on in the company that they work for.

For crying out load, how hard can it be to tidy up once a week? Call yourselves professional?

The accountant to learn how to use the accounting software.

I don't expect the accountant to become an expert in the OS or the Network, or the nuances of what happens on email servers etc.

I do expect that the end user will report things through the right channels. And have some patience with the answers they get. And work with the experts to resolve the problem.

One cannot be a subject matter expert in everything. When people used to tease me about support salespeople or executives (in a high tech company) I used to say I'd rather these people concentrate on their job, and rely on me to help them with their PCs, than to distract them from their purpose. The salespeople earn the revenue that pays my salary. I'd rather I spend an hour helping him than him spend a couple of hours not selling.

James

I think this dude is simply trying to get excited about some new pitch he picked up off some convention on E&P. I think the yardstick for professionalism is very relative and a lot of superficial measures (such as a clean desk :-(, STFU alrady) are used.

No I'm not unhappy. I really like my current job and employer. Bitter? Yes there are some events in my past that I am bitter about. If you had been through what I went through and wasn't still a bit bitter, then I'd have to say you are a better man than me.

I didn't lose the pilot job per say, I quit one airline to go to another. During the period between leaving the old one and starting the new one, the new one (ValuJet) had a crash that resulted in them going out of business. Within a few weeks of that, I was hired by a third airline. Before my start date with this third airline, I did a lot of thinking and just decided that there wasn't much of a future in the airlines (a fact that has proved to be true in the years since). I had been pursuing education in IT (as a backup career in case I lost my medical certification). So I made a decision to pursue that as a career.

Also, I am not suggesting that Execs learn our jobs. I'm suggesting that they learn the basics that any user of IT resources should know. Most execs and end users that I have dealt with have been USING computers longer than I have. I was first exposed to computers in 1989 when I went to work for the first airline. It was a mainframe system that the whole airline ran on. I didn't complain that I was a pilot and my job was to fly an airplane and not to know about mainframe computers. It was obvious that I would have to interact with this computer in order to function as a pilot with this airline, so I gladly learned it. I was first exposed to PC's in 1993 and have been learning ever since. How can someone who has been using a computer everyday as part of their job, for much longer than I have been using computers, have learned so little about it? I would have learned just by osmosis.

Yes, I was a member of an union when I worked for the airlines (you really have no choice unless you want to be a SCAB). The worst screwing I ever took in my life was from that union to which I paid a portion of every paycheck I received. The union sold us (the pilots) out. You see, it's all about money and unions don't give a damn about the workers. They (the unions) have become a business entity of their own and operate much like the companies' management that they oppose.

I AM happy in this profession but I am left wondering about it's future in this country. Can you answer this? If the companies keep outsourcing and down sizing and getting rid of jobs what are the workers to do? Learn management and become management? If you follow this scenario out to the end, at some point and time, everyone in this country will fall into one of two groups: (1)management (2)unemployed. For those that fall into group 1, who will they manage? Each other? The outsourced workers in India?

If you'd like you can respond via email sclowers@nexcheck.com.

Scott

With the exception of the desk thing... I would be considered professional. Above my desk is a sign: "If a cluttered desk signs a cluttered mind. Of what, then is an emptly desk a sign?
--Albert Einstein.

Obviously, there's more to professionalism than your work surface. My customers know my desk is a "mess" but they also know, I will help them when needed, and the desk doesn't mattter. sometimes you really can't judge a book by it's tattered cover.

The Human body and OS hasn't changed significantly over the last 500 years, whereas, computers and OS's changed significantly every 18 Months. Lets see a doctor do the same verbal question test with the odds evened out.
We're retraining with every new product we come across whether it's formal or not.

This depends upon who's "laws of society" you were brought up in. Palestinians believe their doing things the right way but you may believe their doing wrong. The same can be said for the Israelies. Professions are as the dictinary says. Ethics can only be forced on groups of people who want to use them. A whole profession cannot be classed as ethical because people are able to choose what they want to do.
Eliminate the people and you will then have an ethical profession.

And the point is there is no rule, otherwise, everybody would have to acheive a set qualification level before hanging up a shingle like in the majority of the "Professions".
Doctors have a set level of qualifications and rules that they must abide by.
Mechanics have set qualifications and rules that they must abide by.
Others have groups that they join who require standards of conduct and rules that they must abide by.
Each group mentioned has it's standard of ethics that once discarded bars you from the help and support network.
Ther are several IT groups that I know of here in OZ but they all require a level of qualification to join.
Although I have qualifications my qualifications are below the level of entry but that doesn't mean I'm not a Professional. Perhaps there needs to be a new group started ie... TechRepublic that provides a set of rules for those that wish to jion but doesn't require a set level of qualifications other than to be professional in your work(ethical).

I agree with an exception.
Early religion went to war without any reason other than to conquer. Current religion goes to war with the reason they could have done it to us if we didn't do it first. Perhaps religion isn't a good model to base a profession on.
Any long establish religion's standards without the base religion involved would be an acceptable basic start to ethics. Take out the people equation and follow the written standard and your off to a good start. We all know what the ethics are so lets create our own list of rules as a starting point to stop the Governments from stepping in and cutting out the 50% of people without the level of qualifications needed to regulate the industry.
Sorry I'm on a slow link. Part of being in country Australia.

The idea of a union for IT workers is the antithesis of professionalism. A union would reduce those in IT to automatons, with a prescribed set of rules to follow. In effect, the programmers would become programmed. That metamorphosis would make it even more desirable for management to offshore our services.

The definition of professionalism today seems to depend on one's profession. What may be deemed acceptable in one feild may not be so in another. I am new to the IT field but the way I see it this is a field in its infancy. It takes time for standards to take root. A few years ago one could probably get started in the field without any certifications. Today, as I hear, one will probably not get a foot in the door without any. I think that over time the IT field will become more organized and regulated. Employers will come to realize what the various certifications represent. IT people will be recognized as professional if they possess the necessary qualifications. Most likely a union will develop and begin to set the bar for what an IT professional is all about.

"If I was a CEO and knew absolutely nothing about IT
workers, ..."

This statement says it all. Most CEO's no very little
about the inerworkings of the of the tech-side of a
business, and prefer it that way. It allows them to turn a
blind eye to the $$$ problems that moral issues in IT
bring up.

I think you are right and wrong on some of these opinions about being a professional. Some professionals aren't earning high pay, don't keep thier area clean, faces other peoples problems, or use higher emotional tones. For the most part I agree with the other statements

Ithink you are absolutely right, Some IT Professional just perform a job and not a service. Service is where it's at, provide what your customers need and not look for what you need. Have an excellent work Ethic, and not a slackers profile

Call it whatever you want! Yes, it's still stolen. I won't argue with that a bit. But lets be realistic. I live in eastern Canada, where jobs are scarce. VERY scarce. If someone here is lucky enough to get a real IT job, they can't afford to be a whistle-blower. The last person I met who reported pirated software lost his job and had to switch fields because he wasn't able to get another.

It's not that we wouldn't like to be completely ethical. I mean, I don't want to lose my certifications for not reporting something, just like everyone else. However, these 'rules' are passed down from management, and by p*****g on the boss's cornflakes, you'll probably be replaced. Here there are a ton of qualified techs and little to no jobs. You can be replaced in a heartbeat. Once that happens, you'll be lucky to find another job.

Try not to judge the low people on the totem pole. We're just trying to keep working so we can pay our bills. If we can keep our noses clean in the process, then even better. But usually, keeping the job requires keeping our heads down and doing what we're told.

Maybe stiffer penalties for the management caught cutting corners or using the company software on their home pc would be the way to go. But at the same time, I think the software fees should be lowered. If they made it more affordable, more people would actually be willing to pay for it.

If you read my posts, I hope you think of me as a professional, with the ability to accurately verbalize my views. I know you may not agree with them, but that's fine. This is a discussion group, after all.

I have been a certified IT professional for several years now. I have a diploma, and I work hard to keep up with the changes, and to cover as many areas as possible. I started with computers when I was about 10 (I believe it was earlier, but at that age for sure), but I really got into them at 13. From that point on, I was hooked, and needed to learn everything I could.

I will be 24 next month. I have a very young face, and get ID'd on a regular basis. Though I work hard at my job, I have suffered from discrimination because of my age and gender. I've been told I am too young to be a tech or a network admin, that "girls don't work with computers", and was literally laughed out of an office by a government employee after he took one look at me. In the last instance, I want to make the point that I was professionally dressed and was not even given the opportunity to speak further than "good afternoon, my name is _______ and I'm here about the IT position."

When I see someone speaking as you have, I am highly disturbed. It's people like you that cause the problems I face in this industry on a regular basis. I know one other female technician, and she switched fields because of these issues. The last I heard of her, she was working in a call center, booking hotel rooms.

Please have some respect for us. A young person is just as capable of a high work ethic as an older person. We can be just as good as our jobs as anyone else. Perhaps you should let a person's work speak for itself, and treat everyone as individuals instead of a stereotype. I thought we were past that in 2004.

Not everyone should know everything, but they do need to know the program they use. For example, the accountant needs to use the accounting software. They don't need to know their OS, but they need to be able to tell the tech what the symptoms are and what any error message said.

I received a call from a customer today that proves my point. He could not tell me if there was an error message, let alone what it said. When asked what the program was doing, he told me he didn't know and that it was "just messing up". He wound up calling two more times before he had any of the information I'd asked for. Because of his location, I was unable to travel to the site. If he knew anything about the program he was working with, or if he'd bothered to read the error message and/or the help file, he would have only needed to call once. That's assuming he would have needed to call at all.

Again, I'm not saying people need to be experts, but they should know enough to read an error message and have it ready for the tech. It's common sense. Would you go to your mechanic and say your car was "just messing up"?

The BCS has recently commented on these issues through its Thought Leadership debates.

Check out http://www.bcs.org/BCS/News/ThoughtLeadership/pastdebates/ethical/

tabby80 says "I usually work 11 hour days when my job states that I should only be working 8."

If you can't do the job in the time allocated, then either the work is being inappropriately allocated, or you have not received proper training for the post. In either case it is your professional responsibility to alert your line managers to this fact.

I work for a company where overheads are considered the enemy of the bottom line (overtime is stricty controlled) and completing the job on or ahead of schedule is mandatory. The company also has a strong ethic for work / life balance. Add to that the company's desire to charge the customer what the job is worth.

Professionalism is expected to come from the top. The people allocating work are expected to do it responsibly. The people doing the work are expected to do their best work. This means that work is to be allocated according to how long it takes, not according to wishful thinking of when the allocater would like it to be done by. If the boss can't reach their targets without overloading their staff, either they have a good reason (which would be staff shortage) or they are seen as incompetent and risk being removed from their post.

The company believes that there are good business reasons for restricting overtime. One is that after ten hours on the job, you aren't doing your best work. Why should the company pay you extra for sub-standard work? Another reason is the desire to be able to plan ahead. The ability to plan ahead requires accurately forcasting the work involved in all its undertakings. To do this, there must be accurate records of the work required for tasks that have been done. Every minute worked on a job has to be recorded. Putting your free time into a job is not thanked - rather it is frowned upon. Working overtime also indicates an inaccurate forcast of the work involved, either by yourself, or by one of your line managers.

If I can't do my job in the hours allocated, as a professional person it is my responsibility to report that fact. Non-professionals may choose this point to whine "but that would make me look bad". Fine. Stay over-worked and under-payed. A professional attitude gets you noticed. The courage to say "I can't do this" means more to a company that wants to stay in business than 'bravely soldering on'.

Look at it this way. If you are the only person working regular 11 hour days, then the work is being allocated unequally, with no allowance for individual abilities. If 2 or more of you are working such hours, then the company would get better value from hiring more staff. As a professional, it is your responsibility to point this out.

As for keeping the desk tidy? I have the paperwork for 8 separate jobs on my desk, total value probably in excess of $2M. If you put the paperwork in a single pile, there is more than 40 centimetres of it. My documentation is current, so that I can be replaced at a moments notice. I have 5 reference books, 23 CDs, 2 mice, keyboards, monitors and modems, one mouse mat, a soldering iron, 2 note pads, various trade publications, a diary and a telephone. Today I roll out an AI solution that I am proud of my involvement with. One of my suppliers has just informed me of a 2 week delay, and I haven't figured out how I am still going to meet my target yet - but I will. My line manager acknowledges that my programming skills are equal to those of my colleagues, and my work output and dedication are all that could be asked for. And guess what? My desk is tidy.

Am I a hero? No. Am I especially clever? No - I never went to High School or University, and all my meaningful qualifications were gained after I found employment in the IT industry. I just learned to aim to be a professional in everything that I do.

Your untidy desk is a symptom of a much greater problem. Rather than blaming it on too much work (and critisising others who manage their time well enough to have some for cleaning their work space) you ought to be finding the cause of you having too much work, and dealing with that. It indicates a fault, most probably with one of your line managers. By allowing this to continue, you are not the asset to your company that you could be.

Of course, there are those who find having too much work to do gives them the illusion of being important...