How come my users never understand the simple things..
-
@MattSpeller said:
That's not to mention developing patience, understanding and the early years of refining one's ... bovine turd detector.
I see this as bad. Should IT or anyone on the business side of the house become callous to the worthlessness of staff? Patience for people not being willing or able to do their jobs is probably not a good thing to develop.
-
@DustinB3403 said:
Soft skills are absolutely something that will be learned from personal experience. It shouldn't be required that an adult, who pays taxes, cooks food, drives, has kdis etc needs to have their hand held for simple tasks like connecting power.
One could argue that IT should not provide soft skills to cover up a lack of hard skills in other staff
-
@MattSpeller said:
That's not to mention developing patience....
I like to refer to this as "lowering the bar of acceptability."
-
@scottalanmiller True, but by not having and applying said soft skills it becomes "Well I asked IT and they refused to help"
Which doesn't get anything done, because management expects IT to help whenever applicable.
-
@DustinB3403 said:
@scottalanmiller True, but by not having and applying said soft skills it becomes "Well I asked IT and they refused to help"
Managing that is a different skill set entirely. You simply need to document that you helped but refused to cover up them not doing their job. Document aggressively - show a ticket from before they complained that shows them trying to get IT to do their jobs for them, trying to get IT to hide from management ineptitude.
-
@DustinB3403 said:
Which doesn't get anything done, because management expects IT to help whenever applicable.
No, healthy good companies don't work that way. It makes zero business sense. You would just have IT do all the work if that were the case.
Working for unhealthy small businesses that arent doing well provides a skewed view into the enterprise expectations of IT departments.
-
The I must start looking for other places because everything I've ever been at wants / seems to want IT to do everything (or just about everything possible) so that the user / salesperson / accountant etc etc can "do their jobs"
-
@DustinB3403 said:
The I must start looking for other places because everything I've ever been at wants / seems to want IT to do everything (or just about everything possible) so that the user / salesperson / accountant etc etc can "do their jobs"
You are only looking in the SMB, I assume? SMB consists of two types of companies: those that are only temporarily SMBs as they are on their way to being big companies; and those that are never going to make it big. The former are rare both because the average SMB crashes and burns and because they disappear by the nature of becoming big. The later is more common simply because on average SMBs fail and of those that remain most fail to grow and just limp along forever. So the vast majority of SMB jobs is working for companies where management is failing to take the company to what most people consider success. So the nature of work in the SMB is focused around the concept of failed or failing management.
-
The upside is that users like this truly do generate a lot of jobs, one way or another.
-
@Reid-Cooper said:
The upside is that users like this truly do generate a lot of jobs, one way or another.
That it does. Jobs of "shadow workers." You've heard of "shadow IT" where one department does the visible IT and another does the systems that the company actually uses? Well this is "shadow workers." IT often becomes a department that does the work of other departments when they are too lazy or too incapable of doing the work themselves. So the company ends up hiring two people per production position and being very inefficient while the IT department is just a name and is actually doing lots of non-IT work for every other department.
-
I had another simple issue today that one of my users simply was to lazy to do anything about.
A 3rd party client of ours provides access to their systems for testing / training and what have you. Well my user received an email today saying "Your account password is going to expire, click here to reset it.
Instead of doing this himself, he creates a help desk ticket.
I see the ticket and reply with : What was the original password for this account "
The user replies with "my username is ##### and the password is XXXXX"
I reply with "You new password is YYYYY" all while thinking what a lazy bastard.
-
@DustinB3403 This is where you confirm for them that it is okay to click that link and tell them to reset the password themselves and let you know if they have any problems. If they send in a nastry gram (helpdesk ticket) about why wasn't their password reset... You can say "I gave you instructions and told you to let me know if it didn't work" and cc their boss on the ticket.
Of course, then one would only be so lucky that their boss would reprimand them for not doing their job... maybe... in a future... far, far away...
-
I'd have a quick talk with HR about the liability of you having passwords. Why are you being shown passwords for a system for which you have no responsibility? That's a security breach.
-
Yeah... for some odd reason here, there is a policy that IT needs to have every 3rd party login credentials for those "Oh crap" moments that something may go wrong.
Now without getting into the argument of password management or anything along those lines. I don't even care to question the fact that this request more than certainly flies in the face of every corporate policy out there in regards to passwords.
Someone here at some point made it mandatory that IT be aware of every client login credential that we have access too. And no matter how many times I've said its incredibly stupid to have such a policy it won't be changed.
-
Scott,
I've been writing HR policy for everything from cell phones to services to assets. I've brought this one up and told to just do it this way because "IT needs to manage it for the users. "
-
@DustinB3403 said:
Scott,
I've been writing HR policy for everything from cell phones to services to assets. I've brought this one up and told to just do it this way because "IT needs to manage it for the users. "
See previous statement about bad management in SMB.
-
@JaredBusch said:
@DustinB3403 said:
Scott,
I've been writing HR policy for everything from cell phones to services to assets. I've brought this one up and told to just do it this way because "IT needs to manage it for the users. "
See previous statement about bad management in SMB.
Link?
-
@DustinB3403 said:
Scott,
I've been writing HR policy for everything from cell phones to services to assets. I've brought this one up and told to just do it this way because "IT needs to manage it for the users. "
Did you bring it up as a security violation and asked that you have it in writing from HR that they understand that they have removed the ability to identify who is taking actions with accounts?
Have you also asked why IT is doing other departments jobs? If the other people can't do their jobs, why is IT not being paid to do both jobs? Ask HR if HR feels HR should do the work of other departments if those departments are too lazy to do them themselves? In fact, ask HR to do some IT work for you based on the same ruling.
-
@DustinB3403 said:
Link?
@scottalanmiller said:
So the vast majority of SMB jobs is working for companies where management is failing to take the company to what most people consider success. So the nature of work in the SMB is focused around the concept of failed or failing management.
-
In many of these cases, while I feel that SMBs very often have terrible management and this sounds likely to be more of that, IT exacerbates the problems by not presenting the situation correctly. It can be presented like this "User is poorly functional and lazy, do I need to do their work for them?" In this case, HR is going to roll their eyes and say yet.
In the other way you can say "This is an HR issue for me and for the IT department and we need HR to step in and protect us from having a security exposure both for the company and to keep us from being put into a position in which we are uncomfortable."
In one case, you are simply asking HR to make you "not do other people's work." In the other, you are putting security responsibility into the hands of HR and making them responsible for the decision.
