On Thu, May 28, 2009 at 4:44 PM, Tom Liotta <qsrvbas@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
But something about that paragraph seems backwards to me. (Your
other comments seem to kind of support my view.)
That is, your organization allows mass changes by non-tech people
("too much to expect the non-techie group responsible") to important
documents (spreadsheets or whatever) that act as some kind of
encapsulated 'routing tables', and expects them to be done in a few
days, essentially with no significant errors.
"organization allows" is not quite it. More like "organization is unaware
of this, ergo, allows". In the end, these non-techies are still solely
responsible for the contents, and if they mess up en masse, then they get to
fix it.
Yet, the trained techs can't implement techniques that should make
it mostly transparent to users without jumping through more hoops
than trained animals at a 3-ring circus.
Things that make you go "Hmmmm...".
Ain't business fun?
Dilbertesque, perhaps?
We roll our eyes quite a bit around here at the hoops we have to jump
through sometimes. My team of developers uses a software package called
DOC1 to develop forms. Anytime we have an issue regarding "periphery"
resources used by DOC1, such as the repository or SQL servers, requiring a
call to our internal service desk, we have to answer questions taking 5
minutes or more to get to the point where the service desk associate
believes us when we say that no one in the organization "supports" this
software, but that it is "approved" software. Recently I had a problem
related to one of the servers, and the service desk got so frustrated (and I
was close there as well), that they finally begged the "powers that be" to
allow me to have admin privileges turned back on my PC so I could deal
directly with the software vendor. (Persistence pays.) Otherwise, I have
to get instructions from the vendor to relay to the service desk, and, well,
there's the exercise in frustration. Much longer story behind all that.
The lawyers rule at this company. That said, I am not aware of any
pointy-haired bosses in my general vicinity. In fact, my manager is, by
far, one of the best I've ever had in my career. I am usually quite cynical
on this topic, given my career experience, but there seems to be a genuine
concern for associates' longetivity in this company.
The fact is, I've always been happier and more productive in companies when
the CEO is down the hall from my cubicle. Taking the job at this 50,000
employee corporation three years ago was something I weighed very carefully,
even though I'd been laid off for several weeks when I got the offer. I'm
generally happy here, but not nearly as productive as I could be.
- Dan
midrange.com
