Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.
Rocket your D&D 5E and Level Up: Advanced 5E games into space! Alpha Star Magazine Is Launching... Right Now!

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="DethStryke" data-source="post: 3428243" data-attributes="member: 1309">While I agree with the observations on both sides independently, I think the root cause of the "fighting fires" in IT is not entirely on point. The FF syndrome comes down to money in most cases. This is in the form of both Funding for Projects and Job Security.In Corporate IT, you quickly get funding & approval to fight fires. Seldom do you ever get money to implement anything forward thinking. On the rare occasion that you do, it's always nickel-and-dimed to death, going through many corporate screens for "cost cutting" by people who have absolutely no idea what any of it means or how it goes together. This is true at large scale and small business in the same way.Remember, I'm not just talking about an IT director or manager trying to explain why you need XYZ to be implemented. Every other department needs money too - and none of them want to give up their own pet projects. So you're in direct competition with the rest of the company for those funding dollars, not just the single owner or manager who you have to explain the benefits of a backup system to.Conversely, if something is "on fire" it has a direct effect someone outside of IT... and that is something everyone can look at and agree that it needs to be fixed regardless of technical capacity. That's when you get checks signed immediately. The volume of support tickets directly decides how many techs you need.Ironically, good IT is rarely seen and commonly taken for granted. Especially when it comes to infrastructure. It's like any infrastructure or utility; everyone expects that when you push a light switch for their lights to come on every day. Few understand exactly what it takes to make that happen for hundreds of people, all of the time. Whether because of ignorance or apathy, people are not inclined to pay for anything that they cannot see a direct benefit for each of their dollars. I've seen great techs get laid off because they were "too good". This is more true in huge corporations, where lay-offs are decided more by upper management to whom you are only a number on a spreadsheet. If you have few support tickets because you've made a system that is air-tight and works very well, then a company may not be inclined to keep you employed - why pay someone to watch a system that never breaks?If someone understands maintenance and expansion then they may keep the tech, but people get promoted by a concept of Direct Results. It may screw the entire company a year or two down the line when a critical, custom-built machine fail... but that one who "let go" the tech and "saved" the company his salary got a nice Christmas bonus and perhaps a promotion. In fact, the one making that decision probably will get a severance package that pays for a year or more of their wage. So even if something does explode and that upper management guy/girl gets fired for poor decisions and actions, they just leave with their package and take a vacation while they look for another job that pays just as much. That's almost a win/win for them.This obviously doesn't happen everywhere, however the *threat* of it is enough to force people to form opinions, or take actions "just in case" it becomes true. How many people were fine in a company until a new manager was hired from outside who had no idea who the staff was and who was important to the running until they left? How many times had a person been laid off by upper management only to find they did the work of the entire department?Enough to make the average worker scared.</blockquote>

Verification