Slashdot Mirror
Cross Skilling Across Multi-OS Platforms?
drtheman asks: "I have been working in the IT industry for the last 10 years, 7 of those as a UNIX system administrator. I have been noticing over the last year or two that companies are becoming very pedantic about specific skills that a UNIX sysadmin should have. Most troubling for myself is the so called multi-skilled UNIX/NT administrator.
It's a given that any seasoned UNIX admin should have *some* Windows knowledge, and cross skilling is something that shouldn't be balked at. However, after coming from large enterprise environments, where the UNIX boys do the UNIX stuff and the NT guys do the Windows stuff, I just find it a little troubling that if I don't adapt with certifications in these platforms I may become unemployable. Do other enterprise admins think that this is too much for us to take on, and companies are just expecting more bang for their buck these days? I can understand that these multi-skilled people are needed in the smaller shops, but I would like to know how it would work effectively in larger ones."
I know Windows decently, Mac and Unix quite well. I've been asked to several interviews specificly because I can do two of them (Normaly they want Mac or Unix (so far not both), and a little bit of Windows as well).
I'm not certified in anything. I choose to actually know the subject than to have a pretty piece of paper. Besides, I have a colour printer for when they do care about pretty papers.
Actually, politics get in the way. A lot! From what I've seen, HR will as the IT dept. for a job description. The heads of the IT dept. will talk about what they really want, but then they have to take a step back from a lot of it because it might not be "politically correct". For instance:
Manager A: "We want the candidate to know his limits within the department. That last guy had a Messiah complex and he was damn near useless".
Manager B: "Yeah, but we can't really say it that way. Hmmm... how else can we phrase that"?
Manager C: "How about, 'works well with others'"?
Manager A: "Yeah. It's cliched, but it should filter out the people who are god's gift to IT".
Or this scenario:
Manager A: "We need someone who can work on their own with just a little nudging and who has really good Unix skills for this position".
Manager B: "Well, don't forget that this guy will also be managing some Windows servers that interact with the Unix systems because the Windows guy doesn't want to touch them".
Manager A: "Yeah. I forgot about that. Hmmm... cross-platform admin"?
Manager C: "Well, he (or she) is really going to be mostly Unix".
Manager A: "Let's leave out the Windows part".
Manager B: "We can't because it's essential to the job and the Windows guys will have a fit if they still have to try and work with Cygwin".
Manager C: "OK. What about this, 'Must have strong Unix background but be willing to work closely with Windows servers and possibly train or simplify Windows/Unix interaction'"?
Manager A: "That's going to make it sound like a big job. Anyone really think that we'll get a competent Unix admin who would want the job"?
Manager B: "OK. Let's leave out the Windows part and just filter the folks when we get the second interview".
So you see... sometimes, the fault for the generic job listings lie with the politics.
-"...bad old ideas look confusingly fresh when they are packaged as technology" - Jaron Lanier (Digital Maoism on Edge.o
I work in a 11 man IT shop and most people are in a niche. IT is mostly windows with a bit of HP-UX and AIX thrown in. I am one of two people who have cross platform skills. When our HP-UX admin got fired I took over the hardware and OS (not application) duties on that. Nothing much to learn other than HP-UX is not BSD. I got a 6k raise. When we needed an actual cisco guy instead of contractors and freely avalible configs they called on me. I recieved a 5k raise. I also picked up another 4k at my yearly review.
So now I am Jr. Windows Admin/Network Admin/HP-UX admin making good money and more importantly enjoying what I do. Most importantly for the company I can talk Windows, network and big iron. I get a view of the whole IS infrastructure and have valuable input. I am also very hard to replace as they would need two or three people to do what I do.
I do exactly that. In fact, I think I may have stumbled across a whole new career path as a result.
I can't even go into much detail about it, but my dabbling in some (relatively) new tech, combined with attending a convention related to the industry that my company is in (not IT related), resulted in me being able to sit in meetings and say "why not just do such and such" and watch peoples jaws hit the floor. My ideas weren't brilliant, in fact they were painfully obvious. It's just that the IT guys didn't understand the industry well enough to see it, and the industry guys didn't understand IT well enough to see it. I've only been home from that convention for a week and there are already contracts being drawn up for my company to partner with some pretty heavy hitters to implement my ideas.
I don't say that to brag, believe me. I'm the type that will probably get so focused on the tech aspect that I get screwed on the business aspect. Nothing to brag about at all. I simply bring it up to point out the value of developing at least a working familiarity in as many different areas as possible.
You don't have to master everything you dabble in, but there is real value in being reasonably well versed in as many areas as possible. Never lose sight of the bigger picture.
I consider myself pretty useful on Windows and Unix/Linux. I have had some recruiters ask me what I specialise in. When I tell them I don't specialise they ask me again. I'm convinced that the varied skills I list on my CV have put some employers (or agents anyways). Maybe they think that if you know both then you obviously know them 50% as well as you could.