Premise: we are an e-commerce company based in Silicon Valley with a ‘manufacturing’ facility in an east state. As Director of I.T. it is my job to make sure both I.T. infrastructures are not only safe and secure (as well as functional of course), but are also SOX compliant. In essence, I remotely manage the I.T. through one employee in the east state. The other two I.T. staff do not report to my department. Therein lies part of the issue.
Issue One: The two other I.T. staff report to an operations manager, and not an I.T. trained staff member.
Issue Two: The operations manager is not I.T. and makes decisions based on his knowledge of I.T, thus sometimes effecting the wrong solution which either causes a hiccup in the system (which gets blamed to my staff) or causes more work for my staff.
Issue Three: The operations manager has domain admin rights, against my requests to upper management.
The VP of the facility rules by an iron hand. He is effective and extremely successful and I want to help him understand that I am not taking anything away, I am empowering him to be successful. That being said, I don’t want to create adversarial issues through managing the process the way I do. I am passionate about my job, my role and maintaining an SLA! Not to be confused with being emotional!
So, here’s the discussion points I’d like input on.
1. Is it acceptable for I.T staff to report outside of I.T in this case? If so what is the best way to manage the manager?
2. How do I effect change when the two entities appear to be at loggerheads? We are all the same company with the same aim, but it feels like it’s ‘us against them’.
3. In effecting the change I am not getting executive buy in. All seem to agree change needs to happen, no-one wants to push it – except me of course, and that makes me the bad guy. Does anyone have input on how to address both sides and still maintain decorum? The aim, of course, is for the business to be successful. I have an idea on how I want to move forward, but am open to others thoughts.
4. SOX compliance will push the boundaries since the changes to the infrastructure remotely are going to force the issue. Has anyone addressed this in a manner that is not obtrusive?
I have a skeletal view on what needs to be done, and I have a few ideas on how to do it. It is not an easy path I tread and I visit the site every six weeks to show faith, to reinforce my commitment to them as a business unit, and to let them see that I am a team player. I have already stepped over the line once and am still smarting from it. I have pushed the boundaries since then and have been warned not to push my luck.
My thought: this is a business. I was not hired to make friends I was hired to empower the departments to facilitate the business. I will walk through the brick wall if I have to, but I would rather do this without boxing gloves.
Has anyone been through this situation; dealt with the remote management portion and/or managed to effect the change successfully?
On the other hand has anyone forced the hand of the remote site and lived to tell the tale? Or force the hand of the remote site and rued the day?
I am not new to adversity since I.T can sometimes seem adversarial by pushing (I call it managing) change. My starting point is getting buy in on a roles and responsibilities document. Even that is proving difficult since, in real terms, on myself and my staff really know the true nature of what we do.
I think I’ve opened it up enough for some rounded discussions. I am extremely interested in all points of view as long as they are professional!
Thanks
Steve
