Slashdot Mirror
A Title To Replace "Systems Administrator"?
sjanich writes "A discussion has begun at SAGE on an updated title to replace "Systems Administrator". I figure more sysadmins are reading Slashdot than are reading SAGEwire. Rob Kolstad of SAGE wrote: 'What in the world do we call the collective group of those people who make computers work properly? I'm not talking about users, and I'm not talking about software developers. I am thinking of: system administrators, LAN administrators, network administrators (both kinds!), security administrators, e-mail administrators, desktop support groups, database administrators, and all the other kinds of support that keep the IT function of an institution running -- what is this huge group called?' My favorite options are "Computer Infrastructure Practitioner" or "Computer Infrastructure Specialist". The original discussion can be found here at SAGEwire."
Wanker?
The unemployment line.
Computer Techs?
Seriously though, what's wrong with all the current names for these people? It's not like "Computer Infrastructure Specialist" is less verbose, which is the only problem I see with the current designations. If it ain't broke, don't fix it.
What's wrong with the current titles? I mean, if someone tells me they're a network administrator, I have a pretty good idea. If they say they're an e-mail administrator, likewise.
Why replace useful titles with some generic contrived name?
I'm known as "bitch".
adventure-today.com
Keep it simple and descriptive:
technological janitors.
I never get called unless something's fucked up, and nobody gives a damn
what I do until it's broken. My job's just about as glamorous too.
Network Engineering Responsive Dedicated Specialists
You shall call them Sir/Ma'am.
C8H10N4O2 | Developer > Code
like MCSE? oh, you were talking about IT
is IT guy. Nobody outside of IT, engineering and HR can even tell the difference between the job distinctions. Just like I cannot tell the difference between the different HR positions. They're all just HR people to me.
What about BOFH ?
John Dobson, h4x0r hunter, at your service. Aull roight, time to geht to work on this server. Oh, a skript kiddie, the worst koind!
In the long run, we're all dead.
What do all these terms have in common? That's right, administrator. And what about System, LAN, network, security, email and database. Well, you'd have to go for something generic like computer.
Voila, new term: computer administrator. Though personally I don't see what is wrong with the specific terms they had before.
Highly desirable employees.
There are so many names that are possible. I see two solutions. One is where people can make up whatever title they choose, this is basically what's happening now, except only the managers and other bigwigs get to decide. The more thoughtful practice though would be to set some (inter)national standards, much like the W3C web standards. That way if you carry a certain title, it means a certain something, not like now where anybody can (and do) say they are anything and that really doesn't help anyone either.
System Administrator.
I'm sick of all this puffery like domestic engineer (housewife), sanitation technician (garbageman), administrative assistant (secretary).
According to dictionary.com a system is "A group of interacting, interrelated, or interdependent elements forming a complex whole." Sounds pretty accurate and all-encompasing to me.
If you can't be proud of the work you do without changing its name you have a lot bigger problems than your job title.
~~~~~~~
"You are not remembered for doing what is expected of you." - Atul Chitnis
...you guys actually get called by your title? I usually get called "the internet's down".
I've been sys admin'ing now, professionally, for over 5 years. I love my job.
I've had many titles over that period of time, and they include:
Computer Operator
LAN Administrator
Systems Administrator
Systems Analyst
Computer Technician
Network Analyst
Web Developer
and finally,
Network Administrator
The latter is my current title, though they're about to slap and additional one (Web Developer) on there as well. I have no problems with that, though regardless of my Network Admin/Web Dev status, I will still be called out to fix a printer, or switch out RAM, or go through old RS/6000 logs looking for some stray error message.
I've worked all of my sys admin jobs at financial institutions. I've worked for both banks and credit unions (credit unions have the edge, in my experience), in groups large and small. The largest group was about 8 guys, the smallest just me and my boss. They both have their problems. But that's not what this discussion is about.
This discussions is about how to label a guy who can't really have a label. Technician is so vague that it doesn't carry merit. Specialist too suffers from the same thing. Stick "Computer" in front of them, and you still have the vagarities that reek of any title that a job may provide you with.
Most places, unless they're Conglomerates (and all that that implies), want you to go above and beyond. This means that sometimes titles are left by the wayside as you throw a box in your car and hightail it to a destination, ready to provide that quick fix.
This discussion is moot and pointless in my opinion. Network Administrators and System Administrators will, in small shops, most likely be doing each others job at least part of the time.
No title is infallible, no title can encompass everything that you do or provide. Do not look for one to do so, because it does not, and can not, exist.
The difficulty with titles is the are often usurped by people who believe they do the same thing. Human Resource departments have become expert at this.
Programmer - codes programs
System Administrator - Reboots computers. Called when mail not working or I cannot open Outlook or the network is down.
etc.
Rather than look for a new name, they should be working on describing a lists of talents, duties, and capabilities that define a system administrator. This should be augmented with a level of competence to allow for Junior Systems Administrator, Systems Administrator, Senior Systems Administrator, and finally Master Systems Administrator.
It probably also needs two paths. One Unix/Linux and one Windows. You could probably even make an argument for splitting Unix/Linux if you wish.
I have taken this approach internally and it has smoothed things greatly. Now when I speak with HR, and tell them I am looking for a Systems Admin they know what criteria they need to look for. A global standard would only make it that much easier for everyone.
"God."
The coolest voice ever.
And my job description? I'm a
## W.Finlay McWalter ## http://www.mcwalter.org ##
I did not just spend two years on helpdesk so I could be a "Computer Infrastructure Practitioner". Think that's gonna scare anyone?
Carousel is a lie!
While "manager" denotes job security, it also implies cluelessness.
This sig no verb.
In a word... root
MCSE's need not apply.
$0.02 (CDN)
Jack
It doesn't matter. If sysadmins change their title to be X people will still refer to them as sysadmins. Just like "software engineers", "developers", "systems architect", etc. are still called "programmers" by most people.
This is *NOT* funny! Not even as sarcasm.
The preceding comment has been reviewed and declared to be compliant with HIPPA Phase II regulations.
How about CRAP (Computer repair and administration practitioner)? ;)
Quit playing Monopoly with Bill.
Linux - of the people, by the people, and for the people.
Specialites:
Levels of Ability
"Learning is not compulsory... neither is survival."
--Dr.W.Edwards Deming
[100% ISO 646 Compliant]
SVM, ERGO MONSTRO.
That's a mouthfull, so we could just replace it with a symbol. Perhaps '~'?
Why not call them network engineers. Seems like every profession has stolen the engineering name to make themselves seem more important, why not IT people too?
Network engineer is taken, it refers to someone working in telecommunications.
Maybe administration engineer?
--Drunk as in Beer
I've always had problems with titles like "expert" and "specialist" (even though my title contains the word specialist in it). Mainly because I don't believe in experts or specialist. People who actively WANT to be addressed by these titles are typically not very qualified to carry them. And in general, the titles are quite misleading. I'm VERY GOOD at what I do, but I am no expert or specialist by any means. Anyone who has the pride to think that they can fill those titles is delusional.
I've always preferred "admin" myself since it carries the correct ring of authority, but still stops at classifying the holder as a complete expert. The problem is that a lot of suits don't like it because they feel it's their term. I remember once proposing to a former employer that they change my title from "Technology Specialist" to "Network Admin" since that's what I really was. they balked at that. But about a year later, the employer conceded that it was a legitimate title and more fitting of what I did. Their hesitance seemed to have to do with the fact that they felt that the word "Administration" applied to the suites on the top floor and not with the grunts on the ground floor. (Or in the basement as was my case at the time)
On the other hand, some other titles that might fit are:
-IT Manager (as in, the manager of the information technology used by others)
-Digital Information Stylist (tongue in cheek here folks)
-AEtherlord (OK... now I'm going way over the top)
One particular title I can't STAND is "Knowledge Manager". These guys are typically suits who wish they knew about technology but are really an obstruction standing between the computers and the people who know how to ue them. It's sad because Knowledge Management really DOES have a real purpose, but it's been co-opted by the middle managers who want to "orchestrate" things they don't understand. (And schmooze and play golf three days of every work week)
Just my $.02
Un-news
Do I need a title change? I've changed the names I use online more frequently than my title. :)
I use "Senior Systems Administrator". If anyone questions what that includes, the answer is "yes". As far as I'm concerned, the full description is "The person directly responsible for any event within any part of the company."
I'm the company psycharist, listening to people's personal problems.
I'm the company mechanic, fixing broken cars in the parking lot.
I'm the company plumber, fixing broken sinks usually.
I'm the general handyman, fixing little things here and there.
I'm the electrical repair guy, changing fuses in microwaves, and repairing broken speaker wires.
I'm a customer support rep on occasion, when stupid calls get handed off to me.
I'm the always-available tax consultant.
I'm the free and usually right legal advice department (go find a lawyer, dammit)
I'm the company librarian, who can always point you to the right book or reference.
I'm the senior transportation coordinator, when someone needs a ride somewhere, or equipment needs transported between locations. Usually that also makes me the company driver too.
I'm the company accountant, explaining bills from various vendors to the boss, or even the vendor. (ask UUNet why they billed us $30k for a line they never installed).
I'm the air conditioning repair guy, resetting thermostats, replacing broken thermostats, repairing electrical problems in the A/C unit, and diagnosing further problems. I also end up designing ways to cool overheated rooms, and counsel people who are always too hot or too cold, and very frequently both.
And now on to more reasonable tasks.
I'm the printer and copier tech, fixing paper jams and cleaning rollers.
I'm Microsoft Technical Support (tm), helping every poor user who's MSIE, Outlook, or Windows (tm) product that doesn't work right. Oddly enough, Unix and Mac users don't come to me whining like the Windows users do.
I'm the bastard that has to explain that Microsoft programs do crash, and you will have to accept this. It doesn't matter to me that you worked on an Excel Spreadsheet for 6 hours before your machine blue-screened. No, I can't save your data when your machine is locked up. Yes, you should have saved it.
I'm the LAN specialist, diagnosing every time someone kicks a cable out of the wall.
I'm the Nortel tech, configuring, reconfiguring, and yet reconfiguring again the phone systems.
I'm the tech that cleans up the mess after you try to subcontract out the work for the phone system, and he leaves all the lines down and says "I don't know, maybe you need an upgrade. That'll be $6,000".
I'm the PC tech, repairing every little hardware problem they may have. No, covering all the holes on your PC to make it quieter is *NOT* a good idea (had that last week)
I'm the monitor repair guy, resizing you screen because you played with the buttons too much.
I'm the mouse repair man, cleaning the guk out of your mouse.
I'm the bastard that has to explain that when your drive crashes, the files are gone. And I love listening to users complain that they had their life's work on there, and I absolutely *HAVE* to get it back. Bribes don't help drive crashes, they tell me you think I'm lying to you.
I'm the Cisco engineer, who selects your routing hardware, and then configures it.
I'm the hardware engineer who selects the parts, and builds the servers to handle the requested capacity.
I'm the guy that uses a hammer, torch, and dremel to make your old case accomodate your new hardware, just because you refuse to do the simple thing and buy the right case.
I'm the network engineer who makes a network that'll handle your load, and laughs when you want a GigE lan for your 2 workstations on a 384K DSL.
Serious? Seriousness is well above my pay grade.
Why not to use the old and tried name for all those guys: BOFH, I say!!!