Slashdot Mirror
Are You Annoying?
cweditor writes "This Computerworld article looks at some habits of people in general and IT pros in particular that can drive co-workers crazy."
← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)
← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)
Yes.
Next slashdot article please.
James Tiberius Kirk: "Spock, the women on your planet are logical. No other planet in the galaxy can make that claim."
when I declared that every other Tuesday was pants-optional day. Needless to say, very few ever join me.
One thing IT geeks need to remember is that if a user is bothering us, something in the system is broken. Even if it's the user that's malfunctioning, they're still a part of the system. They can be repaired via retraining and also replaced via human resouce departments.
Yes.
I mean, its simple. All you have to do is click on use advanced options radio button, and then click the change advanced settings. No, the little circle first, right. Then the advanced button, and select check hosts file and check Internet Explorer preferences, then click on Next and Continue and, grrr. MOOOVE.
The snow doesn't give a soft white damn whom it touches. -- ee cummings
Are You Annoying?
Irritating behaviors not only annoy your co-workers, but they can also compromise your effectiveness and even derail your career.
News Story by Alan S. Horowitz
JULY 23, 2004 (COMPUTERWORLD) - Do you tell IT insider jokes that users don't understand? Do you sprinkle technical jargon through discussions with business people? Do you find that you've usually got the right answer to any problem and you let everyone know it? If so, you may be something you didn't think you were: annoying.
Everyone's annoying some of the time, says Kimberly Alyn, a corporate trainer and co-author of Annoying People and Why You're One of Them (Llumina Press, 2003). But annoying behavior can have serious consequences in IT, where it can compromise your effectiveness, wreak havoc with projects and even derail your career.
Annoying behaviors are tricky because what annoys one person may sail by another. "You can say the same thing the same way to two people, and one person will say, 'Damn, that's annoying,' and the other person will not think anything of it," says Dan Bent, CIO at Benefit Systems Inc. in Indianapolis, an administrative services provider to health care plans.
But annoying behavior in IT sends ripples through the whole business. Gary Langer, associate vice president for academic technology at Chicago's Roosevelt University, explains that when IT support people are annoying, "people lose confidence, and they just give up. They stop asking questions."
Bent concurs. "You're always communicating with other people, and if you're annoying them, it reduces the likelihood your message will get across," he says.
Projects may also suffer. Jackie Palmer, a senior product manager at CRM software maker E.piphany Inc. in San Mateo, Calif., tells of participating at a meeting for a large insurance company that involved implementing process change. "The only way to do it is get [users] to buy in themselves," says Palmer. But a consultant at the meeting began to dictate what would happen. "The users became very combative," she recalls. It took several weeks of meetings to resolve the issues, and the project fell behind schedule.
If you think that you can't be annoying because you often work alone, think again. You still deal with people for support, advice and information, as well as to get a promotion, notes Gini Graham Scott, author of A Survival Guide for Working With Humans (Amacom, 2004).
For the worst offenders, the consequences of being annoying are potentially dire.
"Say someone comes to you and asks you a question today, and they find you annoying," says Bent. "Maybe the next time, they'll ask someone else. Soon people stop coming to you and asking you things, and you end up without a job."
The IT Niche
IT has its own annoying quirks. Langer says some IT people label users as neophytes and then blame them for any difficulties. "The user insists their e-mail doesn't work, and the IT person says, 'My e-mail works perfectly,' and assumes the user is the problem. Users really find this annoying," he says.
Some IT people are so sure they know what the problem is that they don't even listen to the user, says Katherine Spencer Lee, executive director at IT staffing firm Robert Half Technology in Menlo Park, Calif.
IT people expect users to always know what they want, and they can get exasperated when they don't. "Business people have a right to change their minds, because the business changes," says Ellen Gottesdiener, principal consultant at EBG Consulting in Carmel, Ind.
And IT folks often require the "right" decision, says Gerry McCartney, CIO at the University of Pennsylvania's Wharton School in Philadelphia. "[They] have diffic
The article basically says "IT people can be annoying, and it can endanger your personal or work relationships. Never fear though, anything you do may or may not be annoying depending on who you talk to, so, for the sake of your job and your life, damit, stop being annoying!"
Whats so special about annoying IT people? arent there plenty of annoying people in any given profession?
The difference is that you don't approach your users - they approach you. If they are unapproachable by you because they are annoying, there's no loss. If you are unapproachable because you're an annoying prick, they will just suffer through whatever problems they have and you won't have a purpose for continued existence.
Plus, you are paid to deal with annoying users. IT salaries are high for a reason, and it has nothing to do with being the button-monkeys most of them are.
THIS JUST IN: People in the IT sector have the same behavioral traits as all of the rest of the humans on earth. HOLY SHIT!
Now, if you'll excuse me, I have backups to corrupt.
I think this is the only article in the history of Slashdot that could make GNAA comments, trolling and general bad behaviour -- ON TOPIC!
Annoying people exist everywhere. The trick is to direct their annoying behaviour at your foes.
The dangers of knowledge trigger emotional distress in human beings.
It may be annoying to my end users when I attempt to explain things to them and they don't understand the terms I'm using.
But it's annoying to me when they insist on being ignorant about the tools that they need to do their jobs, and that I'm paid to maintain. A tiny bit of effort on their part would pay huge dividends.
Why is is that people think being ignorant of how a computer works is something to be so damned _proud_ of? Nobody says "I'm car-illiterate" with a little chuckle after they wrap a sedan around a tree, but users who accidentally destroy their computers somehow think it's IT's fault.
--saint
The problem is IT people can interfere with my work, but what I do doesn't affect them. For example, I'm a scientist. I know Linux inside and out and have been using it at home and elsewhere for over ten years. Yet, I don't have root access to my *own* Linux PC at work, which is behind the firewall. So whenever I need something installed, I need to ask IT, wait weeks, explain what's needed ten times to different IT people, and my productivity is hindered. As far as I'm concerned, IT is more or less useless, as I could do their job in addition to mine. And of course they know that -- that's why they don't give root access to us scientists.
IT has its own annoying quirks. Langer says some IT people label users as neophytes and then blame them for any difficulties. "The user insists their e-mail doesn't work, and the IT person says, 'My e-mail works perfectly,' and assumes the user is the problem. Users really find this annoying," he says.
Ha! Here's how that typical scenario goes...
USER: My e-mail doesn't work.
IT: What's wrong?
USER: I can't send e-mail. E-Mail doesn't work. The system must be down.
IT: None of the other 1700 employees have had any problems at all today with their e-mail. Can you be more specific about what your problem is?
USER: It doesn't work for me.
IT: Did the computer give you any error message?
USER: I think so but I wasn't paying attention.
IT: You realize that when something goes wrong on the computer, it tells you what went wrong? That message helps us know what the problem is?
USER: Yes, but e-mail doesn't work.
The examples the article mentions really aren't specific to the IT field. Any field that requires a higher degree of knowledge has speciliazed jargon and inside humor. Guess what.. people annoy people. Amazing! Techs annoy end users. End users annoy techs. Chinese people annoy the English. Mac users annoy Windows users. Muslims annoy Christians.
That annoyance is usually the fault of the annoyed because he or she is frustrated because they don't understand. Sure, there are things you can do to not be condescending towards people, but thats more a life skill that everybody should have for everyday life.
A slip of the foot you may soon recover, but a slip of the tongue you may never get over. -Benjamin Franklin
It's not what you say, it's how you say it.
This is annoying:
"Well, my email is working, so it must be a problem on your end."
This is not:
"Hmm, let me check our mail server - well, everything seems OK there, let's see if the problem is on your computer."
Two ways of saying the same thing, one is antagonistic, the other is constructive.
That's what social skills are all about - learning to communicate effectively.
I think somebody has a case of the mondays.....
I know it's fun to be smug about this, but this is a serious problem amongst programming teams.
Two teams that I have worked in now seem to hold the belief the the size of one's penis is proportional to the amount of stuff you know - technical or otherwise. Yes, even if it's never going to be relevant to the job at hand, and certainly if it can be used to make someone else feel inferior.
I deal with this every day and now I dread coming into work. However, I doubt that relocating will solve the problem, just suspend it for a while as most programmers seem to be very shy to the new person.
I think what the funniest thing is, however, is that when you do it back to them - to see how they'll react, they get just as mad as I would. They simply have no concept of the damage they do - I mean, none of us are perfect and I'm sure I have done it a few times myself, but I work hard to make sure I don't come off like an ass, even when I want to.
My manager of course, fosters this kind of communication - he thinks (I was told this directly) it creates a more productive environment. In my experience, it disallusions me and makes me want to work less, take more vacation/sick days to get out of work, and generally feel unwelcome everytime I step into the office.
What do I do? I'm a lead programmer at one of the top 50 e-commerce websites in the world. I think I can hold my own and then some when it comes to doing my job, that's never been the problem. IOW, I'm not a marketing guy who's technologically illiterate.
This attitude pushes talent away (we've had several talented interviewees not interested in our team after they interviewed), and productivity will only increase when the people with the problem are either excised or learn how to effectively communicate with their teammates.
This all reminds me of a poll reported on by the Register about how end users don't see themselves as responsible for their own actions when related to IT. Relevent quotes: -One in five people surveyed said they are "too busy to download anti-virus updates". -Depressingly, nine in ten of the workers quizzed believe that have no part to play in preventing the spread of viruses, preferring to leave responsibility to "their IT department, Microsoft or the government". With this kind of attitude, it is no wonder IT workers get sufficiently frustrated so as to be "annoying".
Because he's my boss. And I'm a total pussy, so I take my gripes to Slashdot where they can be totally ineffective.
I'm just trying to fit in.
-----------
USER: My e-mail doesn't work.
IT: What's wrong?
USER: I can't send e-mail. E-Mail doesn't work. The system must be down.
IT: I don't think the system is down. Let me see. Hmm, I can send mail. I wonder why you can't.
USER: It doesn't work for me.
IT: Did the computer give you any error message?
USER: I think so but I wasn't paying attention.
IT: Ok, let me come look at it. Maybe something is wrong with your account.
-----------
You're supposed to have an attitude of wanting to help, not proving it's not your fault. Jeez, no wonder people hate IT users, with responses like that.
-Dan
How about because using a computer is more complex than driving car?
This is the exact lack of perspective in IT people that I wrote about in another post. Just because you understand what a "command prompt" is doesn't mean everyone else does. But the majority of us knows how to push a gas pedal and steer a wheel.
Computers, unlike cars, constantly have problems that require checking the internal hardware or software configurations. Do you know how to refit your car's exhaust manifold? If cars were as flaky as computers, wouldn't you feel annoyed at the anti-social, nerdy car mechanics whose lives are spent arguing over car model brands as though they're religions, and taking time out of their oh-so-busy schedules of bitching to each other in order to fix your incessant problems?
Yeah...perspective is good.
The article says that IT people should improve their communication skills in order to communicate more effectively with other people.
BUT! There is an underlying assumption that the IT person's communication skills are sub-standard.
What if it is the OTHER person's skill that is sub-standard. Well, the easy solution is to say that if the IT person was an even BETTER communicator, then s/he could compensate for the failings of the other person.
From the article: "If I'm dealing with a [nonintuitive] person, I need to put things in concrete language. This person doesn't want abstractions."
Now, the REAL PROBLEM is that it is MUCH MORE DIFFICULT to develop expert skills than it is to develop average skills.
So it will ALWAYS be easier to blame the IT people for not having excellent communication skills than it is to realize that LOTS of people have POOR communication skills (and they're not all in IT).
Again, that quote from the article...
The person you are talking to understands ONE approach and is UNWILLING to work at grasping a different approach...
So YOU have to be able to handle BOTH (or more?) approaches, re-phrase the material in either (any?) format and be able to determine WHICH approach the other person is locked into BEFORE you annoy him/her by repeating your material.
Wouldn't it be so much easier for the other person to come up to an average level of understanding of abstract concepts?
Rather than the IT person becoming an expert in BOTH concrete and abstract forms of communication?
My problem with Windows is what people DO know how to do with it remotely.
"Learning is not compulsory... neither is survival."
--Dr.W.Edwards Deming
As an IT person, I find a few of the complainers annoying. Take, for example, Ellen Gottesdiener's statement that business people have a right to change their minds. Yes, they do, and I don't mind that. Change is a fact of life. What I find highly annoying, though, is that those same business people refuse to acknowledge that they changed their minds. They change their minds, don't bother to tell me they have or what the new decision is, then squawk when I'm still working based on the old decisions and then squawk more when I tell them the changes will take more time because I've got to go back and re-do work that's already done.
Another is Gerry McCartney. Certainly often there's no one right answer. The problem is, usually IT doesn't get the luxury of budget and schedule to cover every possible answer. At that point it's supposed to be the business people's responsibility to decide which answer they want to go with, so IT can get on with the job of implementing it. It's horribly annoying when they won't do that, or even indicate priorities so IT can work on the most important (to the business people) stuff first.
The final annoyance is when business people expect me to respect them but they refuse to respect me in return. I was hired to solve technical problems. The business people were hired to solve business problems. If you've got business constraints on the acceptable solutions, don't come to me asking only for the technical solution and then whine when my answer isn't the one you have to have. If there's constraints, tell me what they are so I can factor them in. And be prepared if I have to tell you that there aren't any solutions to your problem that'll actually work that also meet the constraints (real-world example: you want a vehicle with 3750 cubic feet (25x15x10) and 80,000 pounds of cargo capacity, under the constraint that it has to fit into a compact-car parking space). If there's non-technical factors that dictate the solution then don't bother asking me, and don't blame me if the dicatated solution doesn't work.
That people have a 'tact' filter. Some people filter inbound, some people filter outbound, some people filter both ways (rare), and some people don't filter at all.
Non-IT people tend to filter outbound - they don't say something for fear of offending someone. Not always the case, certainly, but by and large that's my experience.
IT people tend to filter inbound. In the days of yore, it wasn't uncommon to see discussions where "What are you, stupid?" was said, and generally it wasn't taken personally. It was just one of those things that was understood.
These days, there's more of a mix of people fitting the inbound vs. outbound filtering groups, and that leads to problems in business.
This article does a pretty decent job of highlighting one of the things I find to be the most ironic about IT personnel (and I have been one for almost 15 years now) - they tend to get into the business because they don't have to deal with people and don't want to. Yet IT work these days requires more interaction with people, not less.
Take Directory Services technology; according to Burton Group's studies, implementation of directory services technologies is 80% politics and 20% technology. The technology isn't really that difficult, but getting agreement between the various groups who own parts of the data about who owns particular pieces of data requires a fair amount of negotiation and people skills.
Insanity is a gradual process; don't rush it.