IT Employment

General discussion

Locked

Is IT degenerating into a field where idiots rule?

By NZBN ·
I dont know about the rest of the world but IT in New Zealand is degenerating into a field where people think anyone can do IT. People dont recognise the skill and training that goes into a degree in IT and would rather trust MCSE which is not even NZQA accredited so in truth is not a qualification.

People seem to trust the advice of idiots these days. No research is done by technicians on the products they sell, they just sell the product they sell cos.
Ask a technician why he/she sells x antivirus and 99% of the time the response is because the x antivirus company is big or because it is good, no research done on the product just go by gut feeling, how utterly and totally pathetic is that. And that is just scraping the surface.
Case in example - true story
Large company in NZ (over 250 pc's per loc, several locs), uses large IT company in NZ to support its IT infrastructure, relys on this company for advice and providing the neccessary IT infrastructure. When we did our case study on the large company last year they had no network monitoring software for thier LAN, MAN or WAN, poor av, protocols bouncing from one side of thier lan to the other causing it to eat network bandwidth for lunch, Windows servers where Linux/Unix would have done the job better, I dont know about you lot but I have had a real gutsful of IT companies saying they can provide a service but all they do is cost thier clients money and dont do a good job about it.

This conversation is currently closed to new comments.

Thread display: Collapse - | Expand +

All Comments

Collapse -

Dido

by sheldonmoss In reply to Sure Blame IT for it ...

Well said - it is hard enough to stay on top of technology than to try to explain it to someone that can care less anyway.

Collapse -

No better in small companies

by tony In reply to Sure Blame IT for it ...

I work supporting a number of small businesses in my area. In one case, the months it has taken to persuade them that they need someothing like arcserve for their backups, instead of the free stuff that came with their tape drive, which doesn't back up Exchange (I support a lot of SBS). Why do we need to backup Exchange, they ask. We can copy stuff into PST files.

Someone complained that for a large company only 1% of budget went on IT. In some smaller companies, it is higher, but they forget that the costs are mostly for server and infrastructure support, much less per desk support.

At least some are slowly coming to realise that their business actually relies on IT.

Collapse -

Who's responsible for all this anyway?

by maelorin In reply to Sure Blame IT for it ...

Back when I was doing end-user support, I realised that the best answer for this kind of question was to tell them who was responsible for the decision. As a lowly techie, my job was to fix things and try to keep stuff running. Making decisions was the reason _the boss_tm got paid the extra money.

By *who*, I mean the position. Jake may have made the decision, but he made it as Head of IT or whatever. He might not be in the chair by the time the poor sufferer asks me they're stuck with something that doesn't work, or whatever.

The most common question I was asked was actually not about why any particular software, but why they couldn't change their background, or whatever. I got my answer down to a few dozen words.

They want to understand why they are not allowed, not what we've done to prevent it or whatever. Explain the reason for the policy. *Especially* if it's in their Policies and Procedure Manual - and then tell them where it is in the damn thing.

Collapse -

Good Point

by b8zs4 In reply to Sure Blame IT for it ...

Over paid and bloated management runs equipment PO?s through the bowels of read tape, while their activities committee has the same size budget. Outsourcing IT is cheaper but when local systems are not working you must pay more to have someone come to the site. I don?t think IT is ?degenerating into a field where idiots rule? but degenerating to where non IT managers make IT decisions.

Collapse -

Because

by bbeckett2000 In reply to Methinks the problem's wo ...

That's because IT is a cost center. It is what it is and that's how management views it. They have no clue how much it costs to keep things running, not to mention moving things forward.

They see it as an expense only, a necessary evil.

Collapse -

Cost Center

by CodeBubba In reply to Because

That is exactly correct. What's weird about it is the cost center is what produces the product so they can have a profit center in the first place. Still - I.T. is the last one to get consideration in the operation. Weird but fact-of-life.

-CB

Collapse -

More on track...

by AASmith In reply to Methinks the problem's wo ...

Actually it seems to be a bit of both. As you note budgets remember the largest expense in most companies is payroll. As such it is likely that the senior IT professional may not be hired as quickly as the newbie just out of college.

Second of course is the infrastructure, and there is a lot to deal with there that upper management does not understand, but can be educated on. In the end it all depends on the understanding and level of commitment of the company.

Isn't firefighting what we all signed up for?

Collapse -

You can tell how far downhill its going...

by robertcleiper2003 In reply to Methinks the problem's wo ...

...by checking out how pretty the average IT geeks's girlfriend is. If she belongs on the cover of vogue you know its too trendy to be a geek. Time now to find another virgin industry where knowledge wins over LA Law type suits and a copy of Loaded under one arm.

Collapse -

I agree

by sheldonmoss In reply to Methinks the problem's wo ...

I totally agree with your comment. I am in that situation right now, and to add to that my boss is steady loading my plate with stuff he wants me to learn, remind you I am also the only consultant in the field going to different client sites meaning different networks and user habits that I have to take into consideration. This is really burning me out. I think it is because management do not see us running around like chickens with our heads cut off, so they don't think that we are doing anything but costing them money; however, if most administrators that I know of including myself was to stop keeping up with their companies network and technology it would cost these companies would have to pay much more than they are paying now, trust me I have seen it happen.

Collapse -

Totally agree

by PeteH In reply to Methinks the problem's wo ...

Yep ApolloCDR you're so right!

So often IT management are looking at costs, costs of servers, ditching backup solutions always going for cheap options. It does seem that anyone who has a home PC is fully qualified to not only discuss but to set IT policy for hundreds of users because they used it once at home (or their twelve year old did.

It's funny how the HR department get shirty if IT people go sick too often but conveniently forget how often they work late unpaid, it's odd how the Sales guys don't drive around in Ford Fiestas and don't like the suggestion that they should... and yet they all know exacly how IT should work, what they should be allowed to do and install and we're all just killjoys who want to stop the efficient running of the business by evaluating and testing first.

Related Discussions

Related Forums