Re: [9fans] go to this site

[Wes Kussmaul <wes@authentrus.com>]

erik quanstrom wrote:
>> There is a lot of residual "management doesn't understand networks and
>> databases and operating systems so we will make decisions for them"
>> attitude out there, even where the reality of management's background
>> has changed. While it's true that "cloud computing" is a nonsense
>> phrase, there are reasons why server outsourcing gains traction.
>
> if management really does understand things as well as
> the it guys, then the it guys were unnecessary to begin with.

Let's parse that.

If "things" means the details of what's happening on the server at this
minute that needs attention while management is distracted with matters
like revenue and stockholders, then obviously the IT guys are very
necessary, and management that doesn't recognize that is creating a big
problem.

If on the other hand a (name withheld) insists on a spam filtering
policy that is so tight it gets false positives on messages from a set
of important clients from the .int domain, and insists that it is his
perogative to determine said policy regardless of consequences... just
as a hypothetical of course...

> i would hope that anyone hiring someone in such a
> position would be interested in their input!

C'mon, that's a "when did you stop beating your wife" comment. Of course
  competent management is interested in the input of those who manage
the company's server resources. And if they're not interested, they're
not competent. There will be times when either side may be distracted by
fires that need putting out, and competent IT people and managers are
perceptive enough to understand that.

> it is a tried-and-true technique to blame workers for
> management screw ups and outsource 'em.

Yup, there is always the pointy haired foil to Dilbert. And there are
the Wallys. There is typically enough incompetence to go around at all
levels. That's what creates openings for us competent little guys.

> also, let's be honest.  there can be a certain amount
> of reluctance to use internal resources.  advice
> is more credible if you pay for it.

Ah yes, the fudili syndrome. Especially in this season we are thankful
for that trait in human nature. More openings for the agile.

I believe it was the Boston Consulting Group that came up with the
principle, "The low cost producer wins." One of our little companies is
eating the lunch of a big company that behaves in the way you describe.
Much fun.

> so if the manager who is now in charge of talking to
> rackspace says "rackspace can't x" there is a lot less
> pressure to tell $colo that they're wrong.
> $colo doesn't even have to give a reason.

Again, incompetence in big organizations is our friend. Please don't
share these obvious lessons with them.

Wes