Author Topic: Breibart's view of Women in IT  (Read 872 times)

JoFrance

  • CCF Winner's Circle - Supporter
  • Wise Sage
  • *
  • Posts: 2053
    • View Profile
Re: Breibart's view of Women in IT
« Reply #15 on: November 19, 2016, 02:49:38 PM »
As a former network person, your personal life doesn't matter, man or woman.  If that network is down and you're in charge, its up to you to fix it.  Some companies have multiple employees that fulfill the needs of the company, but if you're a one person operation like I was, your life goes on hold for the company in times of need.  I've done it all throughout my career.  That's the deal and if it's not your cup of tea, don't take the job.

It worked for me because I didn't have kids, but I gave up things in my life when I had to if the network was down.  It was a personal sacrifice sometimes.  Looking back, I'm kind of sorry I did some things, but it was my responsibility.

David Randolph

  • Trusted Member
  • Wise Sage
  • ******
  • Posts: 4355
    • View Profile
Re: Breibart's view of Women in IT
« Reply #16 on: November 21, 2016, 05:41:00 AM »
Still not getting it. When you have the time, please provide some examples of how IT jobs are incorrectly designed and how you believe they should be designed.

As a former network person, your personal life doesn't matter, man or woman.  If that network is down and you're in charge, its up to you to fix it.  Some companies have multiple employees that fulfill the needs of the company, but if you're a one person operation like I was, your life goes on hold for the company in times of need.

Here is a good example of a poorly designed job. Positions that require 24x7 response need to be designed with redundancy of people. People who are in response positions need to be cross trained into other parts of the company so that when (not if) they burn out on the response position, they can move on and still be part of the company. With multiple people doing the response, the company can rotate people through that position.

Look at how firefighter teams are organized. They make sure that the failure of one person does not put the whole team in danger. Too often, IT positions are designed on the assumption that the IT person won't make a mistake, get sick, have a child, or anything else.

The Gorn

  • I absolutely DESPISE improvised sulfur-charcoal-salt peter cannons made out of hollow tree branches filled with diamonds as projectiles.
  • Trusted Member
  • Wise Sage
  • ******
  • Posts: 21446
  • Gorn Classic, user of Gornix
    • View Profile
Re: Breibart's view of Women in IT
« Reply #17 on: November 21, 2016, 07:42:05 AM »
Still not getting it. When you have the time, please provide some examples of how IT jobs are incorrectly designed and how you believe they should be designed.
...
Here is a good example of a poorly designed job.

Here's another example: most developer jobs are grossly overpaid relative to what the job actually calls for in real time, but the jobs also demand miracles at scheduled or unscheduled times that generally aren't correlated with the previously stated goal.

Most developer FTEs I've observed over the last several decades spend a lot of time on idle mode wait for something to do and use the slack time for busy work that appears productive - meetings and "TPS reports". I've looked over people's shoulders and they try to look busy "researching". But on occasion, that person is expected to deliver something enormous or is given a no-win scenario.

Most humans are good at continuous, steady production and most developer jobs aren't constructed like that.
Gornix is protected by the GPL. *

* Gorn Public License. Duplication by inferior sentient species prohibited.

TechTalk

  • Wise Sage
  • *****
  • Posts: 555
    • View Profile
Re: Breibart's view of Women in IT
« Reply #18 on: November 22, 2016, 01:45:28 PM »
Quote
Most humans are good at continuous, steady production and most developer jobs aren't constructed like that.

Agreed and that is one reason why I stated I do not get it. One of my brothers gets paid on an hourly basis and has been an electrician his entire life. He gets laid off several times during most years. This occurs primarily because he eventually chose to no longer live a nomadic lifestyle (e.g. he has a house and a family) and has little to do with his cost or technical skill-set.

Quote
Here is a good example of a poorly designed job. Positions that require 24x7 response need to be designed with redundancy of people...

This is another reason I stated that I do not "get it". I was thinking about software development work rather than all jobs which happen to fall under the umbrella term of "IT jobs".

We all can probably agree on things like the following:

• There is no agreed upon single method or software process, there never has been, and there probably never will be.

• What might happen to work well for some arbitrary large corporation (e.g. specialization), simply cannot be mimicked (due to cost) by some mom & pop type of operation.

• A team that works on a particular project which is deemed to be successful is a very difficult thing to successfully duplicate for many reasons. For example, the team probably has a specific technical skill-set for what they are working on at that time, some of them probably have domain knowledge, they got lucky, etc. Those reasons and I am sure several others which I neglected to mention only describe a specific moment in time. I would argue that most, if not all, software project teams cannot reproduce that type of result consistently year after year, never mind projects where team members change constantly. Success appears to be a fleeting attribute, not a systemic by-product of process, unless the field is so narrowed so far that optimization is in fact possible (which is probably exceedingly rare and doesn't appear to manifest itself when discussing software development in general).

Quote
Most developer FTEs I've observed over the last several decades spend a lot of time on idle mode wait for something to do and use the slack time for busy work that appears productive - meetings and "TPS reports".

This un-productiveness which you have described is a by-product of how we build software. Companies (technical and non-technical) have always struggled with how to handle employment once most of the immediate or short-term greenfield development has been completed.

JoFrance

  • CCF Winner's Circle - Supporter
  • Wise Sage
  • *
  • Posts: 2053
    • View Profile
Re: Breibart's view of Women in IT
« Reply #19 on: November 22, 2016, 03:52:06 PM »
Still not getting it. When you have the time, please provide some examples of how IT jobs are incorrectly designed and how you believe they should be designed.

As a former network person, your personal life doesn't matter, man or woman.  If that network is down and you're in charge, its up to you to fix it.  Some companies have multiple employees that fulfill the needs of the company, but if you're a one person operation like I was, your life goes on hold for the company in times of need.

Here is a good example of a poorly designed job. Positions that require 24x7 response need to be designed with redundancy of people. People who are in response positions need to be cross trained into other parts of the company so that when (not if) they burn out on the response position, they can move on and still be part of the company. With multiple people doing the response, the company can rotate people through that position.

Look at how firefighter teams are organized. They make sure that the failure of one person does not put the whole team in danger. Too often, IT positions are designed on the assumption that the IT person won't make a mistake, get sick, have a child, or anything else.

Small companies can't afford an expensive backup plan on their network, so they use other management that know nothing about networks except the real basics.  I was mostly "it" for IT for a long time, and they paid me for it but looking back it wasn't fair to me.   It was a ball and chain for me, but I accepted the responsibility and the money and upheld my part of the bargain.

I don't know if I would call that a poorly designed job.  If you're a network person you're a fire fighter and that's part of the deal.  If you're paid a bonus for being there or paid well, that's great.  You're always the first responder.

 


David Randolph

  • Trusted Member
  • Wise Sage
  • ******
  • Posts: 4355
    • View Profile
Re: Breibart's view of Women in IT
« Reply #20 on: November 25, 2016, 06:03:14 AM »
The point I am making with the analogy to fire fighters is that never is fire fighting a one person job. There is always a team that is able to spread the responsibility around. I submit that the same is true for being a network person.

JoFrance

  • CCF Winner's Circle - Supporter
  • Wise Sage
  • *
  • Posts: 2053
    • View Profile
Re: Breibart's view of Women in IT
« Reply #21 on: January 27, 2017, 03:33:50 PM »
There isn't a team in a small business David.  As a Net Admin in small business, you're expected to handle most problems yourself.  You have a small budget to work with and consultants you can call in, but if you do it might cost the company money.  You're held accountable for that decision to spend.

I've worked in big environments and there are experienced people to step in if you fail.  They have all kinds of maintenance agreements in place so its much easier.  I had maintenance contracts in place, but it was always up to me to work with them to fix the problems.  If we didn't fix it right, I would suffer.  Looking back, what a ball and chain job.  I'd never do it again.