ITs Big Secret
-
@scottalanmiller said in ITs Big Secret:
there is no doubt that all people are not equal in this utility. But all of the, from
Utility?
and
"But all of the" should be "But all of them"
-
VERY true!! Especially when something goes wrong where we are unable to fix, or fix as fast as the user wants us to. They complain to their boss so they don't get in trouble for "not working" and blame IT for their incompetency. It's a battle we all have fought. A good manager can nip most of it in the bud, a poor manager makes the issue even worse by relaying it to the affected worker.
In our hearts we all want to help. We like working on something that we love. Once in a while, it just doesn't work out. I always hated when it doesn't.
-
@Son-of-Jor-El said in ITs Big Secret:
VERY true!! Especially when something goes wrong where we are unable to fix, or fix as fast as the user wants us to. They complain to their boss so they don't get in trouble for "not working" and blame IT for their incompetency. It's a battle we all have fought. A good manager can nip most of it in the bud, a poor manager makes the issue even worse by relaying it to the affected worker.
In our hearts we all want to help. We like working on something that we love. Once in a while, it just doesn't work out. I always hated when it doesn't.
If the machine is going to be down form more than 5 mins, it's not unreasonable that IT should inform that user's manager of the issue and allow the manager to decide what to do with the employee while you fix the machine.
-
@Dashrender said in ITs Big Secret:
If the machine is going to be down form more than 5 mins, it's not unreasonable that IT should inform that user's manager of the issue and allow the manager to decide what to do with the employee while you fix the machine.
It's unreasonable unless there is a workflow for that. Going over someone's head to report them to their manager is a weird workflow that, if official is fine, but I'd never recommend IT do that unless told to do so or asked directly. Just not how things work.
-
@scottalanmiller said in ITs Big Secret:
@Dashrender said in ITs Big Secret:
If the machine is going to be down form more than 5 mins, it's not unreasonable that IT should inform that user's manager of the issue and allow the manager to decide what to do with the employee while you fix the machine.
It's unreasonable unless there is a workflow for that. Going over someone's head to report them to their manager is a weird workflow that, if official is fine, but I'd never recommend IT do that unless told to do so or asked directly. Just not how things work.
What do you think the workflow should be?
-
@Dashrender said in ITs Big Secret:
@scottalanmiller said in ITs Big Secret:
@Dashrender said in ITs Big Secret:
If the machine is going to be down form more than 5 mins, it's not unreasonable that IT should inform that user's manager of the issue and allow the manager to decide what to do with the employee while you fix the machine.
It's unreasonable unless there is a workflow for that. Going over someone's head to report them to their manager is a weird workflow that, if official is fine, but I'd never recommend IT do that unless told to do so or asked directly. Just not how things work.
What do you think the workflow should be?
If there is a ticket, update it. If the person is standing there waiting, update them. Do whatever the policy is. But going to someone's manager is an "escalation" and not appropriate, even if the IT person is the senior person involved.
Imagine if you were having your car fixed and the shop called your parents or your boss to tell them how long it might take rather than telling you. Seems weird, right?
-
Also, it's a big assumption that we have to "turn in" the person for "not being able to work." We don't know their schedule, what they need to be working on, if they have a good opportunity to keep working in some other way. They know that stuff and can report up if and when needed. That their computer is down is just one little part of their day.
- Managers shouldn't need such minute details in most cases, this is just wasting management time to be interrupted and thinking about computer repairs.
- In most cases, other computers would be available to use anyway.
- Only the worker generally knows their schedule, workload and ability to work without a computer. Maybe they have paperwork to do, will be in a meeting, have to work from someone else's desk, etc.
- The standard reporting is for someone to report their inability to work to their own manager, not have random other departments escalating their status for them. It's like tattling, but when the worker has not even done something wrong. Does not make for a healthy work relationship unless the worker asks IT to report it on their behalf.
- Wouldn't good documentation make this visible regardless of reporting?
-
@scottalanmiller said in ITs Big Secret:
@Dashrender said in ITs Big Secret:
@scottalanmiller said in ITs Big Secret:
@Dashrender said in ITs Big Secret:
If the machine is going to be down form more than 5 mins, it's not unreasonable that IT should inform that user's manager of the issue and allow the manager to decide what to do with the employee while you fix the machine.
It's unreasonable unless there is a workflow for that. Going over someone's head to report them to their manager is a weird workflow that, if official is fine, but I'd never recommend IT do that unless told to do so or asked directly. Just not how things work.
What do you think the workflow should be?
If there is a ticket, update it. If the person is standing there waiting, update them. Do whatever the policy is. But going to someone's manager is an "escalation" and not appropriate, even if the IT person is the senior person involved.
Imagine if you were having your car fixed and the shop called your parents or your boss to tell them how long it might take rather than telling you. Seems weird, right?
Of course your example is weird, because I don't report to those people, unless the car isn't mine, it's theirs, in which case, yeah I don't have a problem with that - this person who showed up with a vehicle that isn't theirs wants work done on it.
The whole reason for my post was the notion that the employee would go running to their boss because IT is making them unproductive, at least in perception, if not in reality.
-
@Dashrender said in ITs Big Secret:
Of course your example is weird, because I don't report to those people, unless the car isn't mine, it's theirs, in which case, yeah I don't have a problem with that - this person who showed up with a vehicle that isn't theirs wants work done on it.
You don't report to the employee's manager, either. So that was my point. It's not your command chain, not your place to inject yourself.
-
@Dashrender said in ITs Big Secret:
The whole reason for my post was the notion that the employee would go running to their boss because IT is making them unproductive, at least in perception, if not in reality.
That's for them to do, not IT. IT would verify it if needed, but not by default be the tattle tales just for the sake of reporting on employees.
-
@scottalanmiller said in ITs Big Secret:
@Dashrender said in ITs Big Secret:
The whole reason for my post was the notion that the employee would go running to their boss because IT is making them unproductive, at least in perception, if not in reality.
That's for them to do, not IT. IT would verify it if needed, but not by default be the tattle tales just for the sake of reporting on employees.
which was exactly the post I was responding to above.
