Slashdot Mirror
Organizational Practices of an IT Department?
fbg111 asks: "I've recently joined a company, a regional airline, with an IT department that has grown organically (ie in response to immediate, rapid-growth-driven need, rather than according to any organizational plan). In the past five years the company has come to rely on IT, specifically the web team, for about 3/4's of its revenue. However, this unstructured growth has caused some problems, like this one: the lack of defined career paths and clear promotion 'triggers' makes techs feel 'stuck' in dead-end situations, and we tend to lose good people who find more transparent advancement opportunities elsewhere. I've recently joined the new CIO's task force for putting together a plan that addresses the immediate problem of defining career advancement paths and payscales. Does Slashdot have any ideas on this subject?"
"I'm particularly interested in industry best practices that cover providing breadth and depth of experience and training, dual (or more) career tracks that allow techs to go the management route or the technical guru route, and aligning promotion triggers and career paths with IT department & corporate goals, and anything else relevant to the matter. Do any of you have anything in particular to recommend?"
Unionize! That always fixes things.
This ilk of article is a tired saw, but its frequent appearance here at slashdot may be a sign of the times, i.e., the problem may be getting worse (I doubt it's getting better).
The bottom line is you, as an individual, fend for yourself first and foremost. If IT is messed up, management doesn't seem to care, or know how to do their job(s) that's not something you can fix. Decide what you want and need, weigh those criteria against what you experience in your job and management. If it's bad, it's unlikely to improve (much).
You, as an employee, owe the company little other than doing the work expected of you. (I used to be much more gung ho pro-company... but that's another and long story.) Businesses today don't view employees as valuable resources, nor do they care what upheaval they toss employees' ways. If you want something from your job and they say okay, get it in writing. Be suspicious. Be paranoia. The next visit to your desk from your manager may be a stroll to the front door.
Most companies aren't interested in grooming, triggers, etc., they're interested in their bottom line. Unfortunately they don't (typically) associate healthy career paths and directions with business performance. That you've been "tasked" (hate that word) by joining the CIOs task force is scant evidence of addressing the problem (I know, people will ask "what else do you expect them to do?"). But a company that doesn't "get it" isn't going to "get it" by organizing some CIO appointed task force.
As I mentioned, I used to have more faith in business and companies. Under the auspices of cutting costs, improving the bottom line, "right-sizing", (and very little mention of better customer service), articles are popping up almost every day about companies "making adjustments", but if you read a bit closer and between some of the lines, there are a whole lot of bent-over employees being victimized in these scenarios.
I'd be inclined to be more sympathetic and say "business is business" and companies have to make hard decisions, but when a recent article showed the average ratio of pay for CEOs compared to their employees increased to 431 times (did you hear that?, 431 times!) the pay of their employees it started to feel wrong (actually it'd started to feel wrong quite a while ago). When CEOs are getting this disproportianately higher compensation than their employees, I expect better performance numbers from businesses. I haven't seen that. Aside: Heads up, since you've joined an airline... make sure you keep the jackscrews lubed!)
Talk directly with each and every member of the IT staff, first as a group and then in private. Find out what they want. Find out what they expect. Collect all the data you can directly from them. Then discuss your findings with the CIO.
After you come up with a preliminary plan, again, discuss it with the staff. Get their input. Don't just come up with a plan and then implement it. Use all the feedback you can get, so that you create something that benefits everyone (potentially).
Cyric Zndovzny at your service.
There are plenty of compensation programs in the industry to copy. Find one that looks the most like your organization and copy it. Change whatever areas you feel don't suit your particular organization (how promotions are handled, vesting, etc.). Get a good HR professional in the discussion to avoid opening up a can of whoopass on your company by how you handle benefits.
"Rocky Rococo, at your cervix!"
Well how to feel like you not in a dead end job.
If you do good work you get better pay, also the longer you work the better you should get paid. This way we keep the most salt of the earth of the workers, if they can get better pay elsewhere then they will go there.
Titles and advantages to the titles. If the person doesn't want to go into management positions they still should get titles that represent their status. Sr. Programmer or whatever. Besides just giving the name there should be some benefits of earning the title, other then pay, they should have higher priority on what projects they want to do, depending on their status. If they have 10 years of experience and have done a good job for you in the past they should get earlier pick on the more fun jobs and leave the more mundane to the less experience people who need experience (But depending on the person you may be surprised what jobs are quickly taken up early)
Say in policy as people advance they say in company IT policy should have more weight.
Job Security, the higher position the more secure you job should be from layoffs.
Improved Benefits, Like allowing to work at home during normal hours, Flex Hours, More vacation time. With ¾ of the business they should also get some commission on their work.
Constant training, allow them if they choose to keep their skills up with modern technology, that way you are not stuck with software on a dead platform with a near dead language and IT staff who is afraid of changing because they don't have training on newer tech.
The main trick is to figure out what do you want in a job and break it into priorities and the higher you are the more you get.
If something is so important that you feel the need to post it on the internet... It probably isn't that important.
If the IT department is really bringing in 3/4 of an airline's revenue, either IT or the airline are going to be spun off.
B. Accept task requests
C. If too many task requests then
1. Deny addtional requests
2. Have users fight among themselves to determine what is highest priority
D. Work until you feel like going home. (if you like your job this may be late)
E. Be criticized for when you come in, despite having worked until x:xx AM previous night.
F. When time permits (often on employees on time) develop or research powerful new tools that make everyone's life easier with greater access to higher quality information and services.
G. Department gets outsourced to a bunch of chislers who end up providing terrible products and service because they adhere rigidly to terms of the contract.
H. Bonuses all around for executives.
(Ok, that was real and I'm still bitter about it...)
Seriously, you need to develop Positions. A position has defined certain skills and responsibilities and commensurate compensation. Set up a number of these like Webmonkey I, II, III, IV, ... When there is a need for a certain skill and responsibilty, assign the position to it and open it up for candidates to apply for.
A feeling of having made the same mistake before: Deja Foobar
make sure you keep the jackscrews lubed!
No shit. You know it will be a bad day when your tail section shears off.
"Rocky Rococo, at your cervix!"
I hate to sound mercenary, but if you want your employees to feel valued and appreciated, say it with money. Other gestures can be very nice, but in the end most people come to realize that money is the only metric by which businesses measure value. If the IT department is as important to the revenue of the company as you say it is (which I find a little hard to believe, but let's assume you're right..) then the employees should share in the company's success.
Indeed, it sounds like the problem may be more a case of there just not being anywhere for the staff to advance to. It would be pointless, and probably more problematic than beneficial, to artificially create managerial positions just to make the staff feel better.
Rather than waste money on useless managerial positions, give each staff member a raise. They'll get the financial benefits of having a higher position within the firm, while at the same time keeping a structure that is currently fairly functional, and without the overhead of excessive management.
Cyric Zndovzny at your service.
There are a ton of organizations that can help you, it all depends on getting the right help. I would look to the other organizations out there that are recruiting your people away and do some of the things that they are doing or have put in place. Training, pay/compensation, perks...etc. may solve problems short term but long term you need a strategy that will retain people because of the organization and the opportunities. Also, ask everybody there what they would like to see change to make the place better. You all work there together, why not figure out how to make it better together. IT people see through half-assed efforts to make them feel "valued". But when a person says "This will make me happy" and you provide it, they can't really complain. Also, some people will never be happy regardless of what you do so be careful of what you provide or promise.
I'm not clever enough for a sig...
And then there's the oral sex.
*shudder*
We think there's some sort of hierarchy with an advancement/promotion plan involving a Lovecraftian quagmire of Thunderdomes and quatloos, but scientific instrumentality can only accomplish so much.
I found that for companies that depends a lot on the technical staff, no matter what title or 'promotion' you spin, it's still the same role. The real techie guy almost never wanna be a manager of any sort. Think about it, like any other thing it's the 'leverage' that a lot of companies rank employees - the higher the management (hence the responsibility?) the better the benefit/pay..etc. I'd tends to think if the company give the employee a stake at the company (real stock, options), that is much better that 'promotion' or titles that doesn't really mean much. Even our chief system architect at where I work, he's still at the bottom of the totem pole - and there's really no need to 'promote' him; but giving such a guy stake at the company means a whole lot more.
How the heck does the web-site of an airline account for 75% of revenue? Do you mean that most of your ticket sales come from your web-site? Or do you mean the company is focusing on selling hats and T-Shirts from its web-site and isn't actually doing any flights? (Granted, with the cost of fuel lately, it might be a better solution than actually flying.)
Geez. I don't recall ever seeing such a formalized "choose your own career-adventure things".
There is no "you rolled blue, advance three steps towards tech-guru", or "you rolled yellow, advance to middle management".
I've worked for people who used to code for a very short period of time, but moved into management. I've known people who coded for a very long time and switched to management. And I've known the old-school holdouts like me who have no interest in becoming management.
If you want to be a tech guru, well, you'll just simply have to be more knowledgeable and skilled than most people. Knowledge of arcana is amust for guru status.
If you want to go into management, start reading books on that or enroll in your MBS program.
Sadly, in my experience, nobody is going to manage your career more than you will.
Lost at C:>. Found at C.
Career path's IMHO are the responsiblilty of the Human Resources department (AKA People Development). IT shoudl worry about nothing more than where the company needs to be as far as technology goes, and about keeping the current solutions in place running. Why should the IT manager have to worry about where his employee's are going to end up in five years? That's HR's headache.
-Pizentios
In my experience people don't leave because someone hasn't defined a 'transparent career path', but rather because there is NO career path, because their efforts aren't recognised and rewarded, and because they smell the stench of collapse just around the corner.
Forget 'industry best practice'. Forget asking Slashdot. Try asking those concerned what really matters, then delivering on it.
You won't find the answer in the failures of others, chart a new path that is in some way true. If you can't, resign.
Your salary grows 2-4% every year until the CFO decides to outsource your job to India for 1/10th the cost.
That is the future of IT.
Take it with whatever size grain of salt you want, but it is interesting food for thought for those in your position.
Recommendations... about IT people and career paths?
Given the trend of most companies to attempt to outsource IT, I'd suggest that. Outsource all of the web development because it is not the company's core business; they are after all a regional airline, not a web development shop. This co-source can support best practices and have a more defined career path.
That's right! Lay them all off. It also moves them from being an operating expense to a capital one. Human resources are costly.
Excuse me? Job protection? What is that? I have worked for so many companies that promote "technical people", usually engineers, into management paths that Do not want to be there, and Are not qualified to be there. So why would any web developer worth his weight in Javascript want to go from a creative hands on process to a managed hands off one?
Very few people in IT/IS these days expect employer loyalty. Allowing IT/IS people to somehow advance into management is about as rational as all geologists and accountants managing and designing all the software at the oil company I work at.
/\/\icro/\/\uncher
But let me know when you find something, implement it, have it fail, get laid off, get hired as a contractor somewhere else, get laid off again, and finally get hired by Google. Then you can tell me how Google does it...
And I lift my glass to the awful truth which you can't reveal to the ears of youth except to say it isn't worth a dime.
How does a Regional airline get 3/4th of its revenue from the web developer group?
I think what he meant is that they get 3/4th of the reservations via online..
Rapid Nirvana
SAGE (the System Administrators Guild) has published 4 levels of system administration, which is probably a good start for developing a track system. We use it here to quantify jr/admin/sr type levels. They also have some good documents on hiring practices, interviewing, along with their comprehensive salary surveys.
Other than that its also important to distinguish management and supervisory positions that make sense for the size of the group. Then you can chart a course for both the folks who want to head towards leadership roles, versus the pure techs who never want a single soul reporting to them.
Only partly humorous.
1) If you don't have senior leadership buy-in on this reorg, you're dead. Period. And, regretfully, oftentimes the CIO doesn't count as senior leadership.
2) Pay scales and advancement are good things to have, but I wonder if this is the root cause of the defection. How is the organization structured? Is a tech lead a road to nowhere? It might be, if the group is divided functionally. A true siloed organization ain't any good either, because of the risk of becoming an insect (i.e., so specialized that you aren't fit for anything else.)
Mit der Dummheit kämpfen Götter selbst vergebens.
Find one -outside- your industry - one that is even better. Stand out in your crowd. Don't take a chance on the same-old systems which has few happy participants already, especially in IT nowadays.
I interviewed for a position in the web team of a regional airline that gets 75% of its revenue from the web, has grown organically, and where their guys feel 'stuck'. You don't happen to work for Jet Blue, do you?
When they didn't call me back for a second interview (I had almost no IIS experience) I was somewhat relieved. The biggest reason was that I knew it would be a rough few years working for them while they worked out their issues. Their problem (which sounds suspiciously like your problem) is not just that you don't have a clearly defined organizational plan, but that you let the business drive the department. With three-fourths of your revenue coming out of the web site, *everyone* watches the daily and even hourly sales numbers. When there's glitches in the system, *everyone* from the sales guys to the CEO knows about it and *your* butt is on the line. Structure a business plan for the IT group. Lay out simple and clear lines of responsibilty, disaster mitigation plans, and (to get to the heart of your question) career paths. Make sure that all layers of managment understand that IT can be subject to forces outside of its control (network/power outages and acts of God anywhere in the world affect everyone else). Have set goals for each employee and set rewards for meeting them. Yearly bonuses, raises, and other perks will go a long way to the retention you seek.
I know it isn't the specific advice you were looking for, but you're not going to find that kind of answer on Slashdot. You know your business better than us. You know your IT needs, and only you can fix it. Start with the basics (career paths, goals/rewards, clear lines of responsibility) and the rest will fall into place. Good luck!
ASCII tastes bad dude.
Binary it is then.
http://www.joelonsoftware.com/articles/fog00000000 38.html 0 70.html
http://www.joelonsoftware.com/articles/fog0000000
Fleur de Sel
Before I acquired my most recent job, I worked for a company where I was in a similar situation. No raise/bonus/promotion in sight, etc. More importantly, however, I didn't feel like what I was doing was important.
Companies need defined ways of moving ahead. Performance reviews, raises to acknowledge good work, yearly bonuses for the staff - all great ways to help people feel motivated to go the extra mile. But in addition I would argue that you have to make their job feel needed - like they are the only ones who can do it, specialists in some way. Knowing people rely on you is a good feeling, and one that will make most people work harder and better.
Psy us, the IT workers out there, whatever we ask for. For fear that all your systems shall come to a grinding halt, and us in the back room having a party.
Well first, you'll need to "leverage" something. Actually, a lot of things (sometimes everything). Then, "where the rubber meets the road" is what you should aim for. You might have to be more than just "efficient". You'll need to be "pro-active". And then, "at the end of the day" you go play a round of golf with Billingsley and Schlopperman and find yourself heading a "task force". Wait ... that's where you are now? Forget it, you're hosed.
They call me the working man. I guess that's what I am.
paint ball in breakroom
Design a new IT structure and convert over. Very harsh and un-popular but it is probably the only way. Large organically grown structures tend to have huge inertia.
With almost 100% certainty their are many positions where the skill set of the person have evolved to fit the position and vis-versa. No other individual has the skill set to fill the position and the individual in that position can't fill another position because of his/hers skill set is unique (read diverse and yet incomplete). Their direct managers refuse to give the individuals up because they fear for the worst, and the individuals don't have the right skill set mix to get out. Catch 22, and you have inertia.
The first thing is to definite what jobs you have there. Web designer vs network engineer vs help desk level 2 or whatever you have. List out their responsibilities and required skills. Do this like HR, but make it seem important, don't over do it It's important to define the role as best you can and identify if the job that person is either completely unique or can be taken over by someone else. For example, if you have one DBA who manages the database for your system, and no one else really has his responsibilities or his skills then that's a specific job. If some guy is responsible for keeping an eye the email server but 5 other guys could do it, then his role is more broad, that of a generic IT tech.
Once you have a definition of their jobs, then create levels. Four levels is typical. Each position has levels for which for which the level gets both more responsibilities and more pay. First level is entry level. Second level is "certified" in that they've proven themselves over months or even up to a year as being good employee. 3rd level is senior in that they know the processes well, are fairly independent, and have high quality of work. 4th level are those few shining examples of great employees who do outstanding work on many different levels and would be very hard to replace.
Create paths to different groups to. For example, in a lot of IT departments, the path from a department that helps with desktop leads to network or server support as advancement.
Create requirements for each level to move from level 1 to 2. Some people use written tests to grade someone skills, others simply use management review. Some require a specific certification in a computer technology.
Finally, make sure everyone in IT starts out as level 1 and create a short term plan to have everyone move through the levels. This will help you figure out who's worth holding onto, and reward them appropriately. Be Prepared for a little backlash from those who don't warrant promotion, but if they don't warrant it, you have documentation as to why not.
And make sure you have guidelines for how managers should document everyone under their pervue so that they have a more standardized way of grading people and don't go off doing their own thing. When one manager grades easy and one grades hard, the people under the harsh manager feel left out while the easy guys get the money.
"All great wisdom is contained in .signature files"
Organizational Practices of an IT Department
Organizational Practices of an IT Department
Organizational Practices of an IT Department....
Oxymoron Exception!!!! Danger Will Robinson, DANGER!!!
"Career paths" are the sort of beauracracy and red tape that big companies waste their time talent and money on without getting anything useful in return.
is competition good, or is duplication of effort bad?
Run.
Like.
Hell.
I also suggest browsing the back issues of Rands in Repose, another blog about IT management.
Media that can be recorded and distributed can be recorded and distributed.
-kfg
What you said is what's leading to my question. How many companies are "good" with the IT dept. example valuing the employees, realizing the importance of IT etc compare to the bad IT shops? Since I'm a semi newbie, I only have one job to go on, my current job and I say its more negative than positive. My company sees the importance of IT in saying but doesn't do anything about it 'cause were just a cost burden to them and the uppers don't understand much about computers. Looking into my career future, I'm curious to know if the bad out numbers the good and if so what incentive is there to stay in this field?
"the lack of defined career paths and clear promotion 'triggers' makes techs feel 'stuck' in dead-end situations, and we tend to lose good people who find more transparent advancement opportunities elsewhere."
I've come to figure out thats just about every job everywhere.
Start your own business. Thats the only way anyone ever truly gets ahead.
I'm starting several right now. One is a software support company, just mostly fixing home internet connections and cleaning crapware. You may think big deal, but its 160$ for about 3 hours. Not too bad, and just word of mouth gives us as much business as we care to take on.
Also I've made some good friends in Europe and the middle east and we are starting some import/export companies. Niche markets to be sure, but who knows where that might lead...
Sure beats the cube farm.
Except in this guy's case the CIO is setting up a task force to address these issues. It sounds to me like at least one business "gets it" and is attempting to keep their employees happy.
Advancement doesn't really have to be attached in work -- it can be outside of work. I started my position as a systems administrator, and was promoted within a year to systems administrator II. The change in title was arbitrary, as I was doing the same work, however I had a few bonuses that were department specific. The biggest bonus for me, was a bigger and more flexible training budget for me. That means if I wanted to learn something and it was IT related (not job related), I had a budget I could use to do what I wanted. So we are a Windows only shop... I have chosen to learn Linux even though it has no bearing on my job.
:)
The rationale behind this is pretty simple -- a person gets complacent, and especially in IT, because they feel they are going to be outdated, or they aren't performing duties that will get them noticed in a future job. While your employer's job is to keep you working at THEIR company, they can't remove the possibility of you working somewhere else -- and the career 'path' at a company has to take this into consideration else there will be a lot of turnover in your IT department. Web programmers that are doing one thing, constantly and not being able to use and learn new technologies (because if it ain't broke, don't fix it) they won't feel the need to stay at that company, even though they are stellar at their jobs.
Bonuses are good too. Stock options, Christmas bonuses, paid holidays, and a big one that's often overlooked -- gym memberships -- are all very important. Little expenditures can reap huge rewards for an IT department because it keeps employees happy. As IT personnell, I have personally found working in environments that are laid back (let me wear a backwards hat, t shirt and shorts to work!) are the best. With hours being spent in front of the computer, they should be comfortable, and sitting in the best chairs, have the best keyboards and mice, nice monitors, etc. It's something that other departments SHOULD envy because let's face it -- if your company is relying on them to make the money, then your company is going to want to make them feel wanted. It works much the same for sales people in ANY field -- do your job well and you get more perks than you can imagine.
So if your company can offer title changes, personal training budgets, maybe some catered food once in a while, free tickets to see some ballteam playing, the best equipment, ergonomic chairs, etc... these small expenditures will go a long way to keeping the staff you have happy and working hard for YOU and not somebody else.
I should mention one piece of advice I learned from a friend that is a manager, and that is exceptional in his field and his employees love him. What he said is something like this:
"Your job as a manager for your employees is to assign them the work to do, see they do it satisfactorily, take the blame FOR them if they fuck up, and then tell them to stop fucking up in PRIVATE. And when time comes, you fight tooth and nail to get every penny you can out of the higher ups to make sure they get the best raises they can get."
There is no faster way to lose employees when if they make a single screwup, the world comes crashing down on them, believe me they are going to look to leave fast. It makes me regret leaving MY last job, because it's the situation I'm in right now. So on a side note... if anybody's looking for a Windows SysAdmin....
Good luck to you.
The price is always right if someone else is paying.
It's been my experience that this type of thing is simply a talking point. By organizing a committee/task force/other_buzzword, it gives the impression something is happening since all these wonderous ideas will get floated around a nice stack of papers in the form a report will end up on someone's desk and floating around by email. Unfortunately, 1/5 of the people who should read it won't because they have too many other things to be working on and of those 1/5 who do it will be very unlikely that someone in that bunch will do something or has the power to do something. All the while your CIO/high level manager can tell all other high level managers "We have a task force charged with reporting to us $XYZ analysis. Aren't I doing a good job".
If this were a high priority to your CIO, he/she would interview some key folks, including a few of you developer/admin types and then take action immediately instead of forming some bureaucratic committee who generates a report that gets debated on by management for months.
My 2cents at least. Sorry if I sound negative, but I just find committees to be an utter waste of everyone's time and really just a facade for the person who calls for it.
I know you are looking for solutions, but the reality is that you are now experienceing the real world of IT. Many companies are simply not nor never will be structured by-the-book, and things like "defined career paths", "structured promotion 'triggers'" and the like are often more pipe dreams and corporate-speak than reality.
First and foremost, thicken your skin and be prepared for either no change or having to move elsewhere to get a change. While your IT organization may improve (and I certainly hope it does) it also may not. By all means, do what you can to help to improve things (which you are obviously doing in this article.) Just don't get blindsided by something that may not change, and don't be blinded by theoretical corporate structures that often don't and won't exist in many organizations.
-Jim
GmailTips.com
My mom always said, "Jim, you're 1 in a million." Given the current population, there are 7000 of me. God help us all!
From what I've seen, stocking free M&Ms goes a long way to job satisfaction.
"God fights on the side with the best artillery." - Napoleon, Marshal of France - speaking truth to power
In what way am I friggin' trolling here???
I've worked in the industry for 10+ years, and *I've* never seen what the poster was asking for.
Lost at C:>. Found at C.
Read the book "Winning" by Jack Welch.
Do you mean "collecting" by writing "bringing in" referring to 3/4 revenue?
From a business perspective, if someone is doing a job very well, why on Earth would you want to promote them out of that position?
Promoting talent should be in the form of having first-dibs on projects and a healthy bonus package, unless the person's skills can be adequately used in another position and a suitable replacement has been found.
My $0.02...
You sound like a nice enough guy and sincere. I suggest you carefully read the entire dilbert archive and think hard about whether this is a good career move.
Seriously, ITIL is a great framework for not only organizing IT in general, as well as configuration management and release cycles, but it also can help provide a framework for inter-department transitions which provide variety in jobs, and payscales. Lateral moves can become a little less lateral and moving up is not as hard as it would be in a normal environment.
It seems to be working here, its just getting Execs and the rest of the business to buy in.
This question brings up the issue of managing one's career in IT versus just "going with the flow". It is true that good, talented IT workers will feel demoralized and demotivated when they perceive no upward mobility within an organization. It is also true, from an organizational view, that hiring out of short-term, knee-jerk reactions without a good, hard view on long-term goals will eventually cripple a company to a point where noone wants to work there anymore.
But there must be some initiative on the part of the IT worker to manage and plan his/her own career. If you feel like that the company/organization has no vision on why they should retain and give value to your position and function, you need to speak up and let them know that you bring not only short-term bandaid solutions, but long-term values to the organization. If they are not willing to listen and go to bat for you, you can either (a) create value within the context of the position, or (b) move on to another employer.
I am currently working at a higher-ed institution where there are some very good people on my team to whom I am informally a mentor. As much as I speak up for them to get training or experience to enhance their career, they have also come up to me on their own to indicate a willingness to expand their training and knowledge. It does take two to tango.
With attitudes like this, it's no wonder business is down. Remember: winners never quit and quitters never win.
Now get back to work.
I think what he was getting at is that the CIO's main job is to provide "vision" to the company. Any "C" level worth their salt should already know what the department should look like. Pulling together a "task force" to address the issue is in my experience:
1) a smokescreen to make you believe they care and make you feel "empowered" so you do more work or not quit
2) The CIO is an idiot and looking for "vision" from subordinates
3) a "shiney thing" to distract you from something unpleasant on the horizon.
"C" levels set the tone for the organization, and there is very little that the guys/gals in the trenches can do to fix poor management. Keep your parachute handy at all times, and realize there is no such thing as a 20yr job anymore.
Pessimists.net - as if life wasn't depressing enough.
make sure you keep the jackscrews lubed!
Always sound advice.
http://publicvoidlife.blogspot.com
... immediate problem of defining career advancement paths ...
Quit representing yourselves as part of an IT dept. Quit thinking of yourselves as part of an IT dept. Start representing and thinking of yourselves as part of a Regional Airline.
The management above you, who fear and distrust IT due to their technical ignorance, smell the us vs. them that you put out (duh, of course you smell it from them too, the difference is that their smell is caused through ignorance and fear, yours is caused by disdain and a sense of geekish superiority {okay, _maybe_ your IT dept. doesn't do that, but 95% do.) You can choose to become business aware and conversant easier than they can become technically savvy and conversant.
And surprise, surprise, surprise! Therein lies career pathing. Business and technical savvy married in one person. Move up because you're trusted, not feared. Sure, some, maybe many will want to never leave the warm fuzzies of the technical garden they have planted and nurtured. But those paths just go in circles and curly-Qs.
They've got the money. Either get your own, start a revolution, or get them to WANT to give you more of theirs (cause it'll make more for them.)
P.S. 75% of the revenue may come THROUGH the IT dept. But not FROM the IT dept. That's a clear example of not thinking like part of the Business. Sorry.
Has anyone held exit interviews with the people leaving to see exactly WHY they are leaving? Or are you just assuming it's because there isn't room for advancement?
You might be harming your search by focussing on what you think the issue is. Maybe the work that they're doing just isn't that enjoyable. Maybe you're overstaffed and they feel underworked, or maybe you're understaffed and they feel overworked. Maybe the type of work they are being asked to do is just generally not that interesting. Maybe they don't feel like they have any say on how things progress, and want to be more involved.
I'd start by really looking into the issue a little deeper. I've had plenty of jobs with tons of room for advancement, but the work was just plain boring. Then I've had jobs with little room for advancement, but the work is enjoyable.
Finally, don't just start creating middle management positions. My present company did that a few years ago. During a downturn, guess who was first to go? All the middle managers. And the positions haven't come back. Why? It was a bad freakin' idea in the first place.
Nothing says 'I Love You' like cash.
Two Words: Lean Thinking. Nothing else I've seen has been a better predictor or able to deliver what techs want than to adopt what the Japanese already know: North American business is wasteful. Techs hate waste, stupidity, bad software, ignorance...so much of what business is about is not delivering a quality product but delivering the *perception* of a quality product. Translation: sales & marketing.
Lean Thinking is simply the current state of Edward Deming's work on quality, which is seen most evidently in Toyota's work. Taichi Ono, who pioneered alot of Deming's theory into practical application, revolutionized the Japanese auto industry from makers of cheap crap to the best quality vehicles in the industry. The IT parallel to manufacturing is the Agile Software development movement, which has lately been buzzing with the latest sweetheart of the tech world Ruby on Rails.
There's no secret anymore. There *is* a better way to do IT and business by ruthlessly eliminating waste and perfecting the systems that deliver products and services.
Ruby on Rails Screencast
"You, as an employee, owe the company little other than doing the work expected of you."
And when addressing this issue IS the work expected of you, should you respond with "that's not my problem"?
--
Flamefest!
Adherence to the truth is a form of disloyalty.
make sure you keep the jackscrews lubed!
I'm lubing my jackscrew right now...mmmmmmmmm
It's a human-nature thing. This problem has been around forever. It's the basic tension between:
(1) the company needs a particular job doing
(2) the worker only wants to do it for a while, then he wants to do something else (better, more senior, more interesting, whatever).
Hire me.
Speaking for state government, they noticed an extreme problem with hiring talent in the 1990's. No decent Webmaster would take a job as an IT 1, 2 or 3 due to the pay scales. So HR looked the other way and hired folks on as an IT 4...a position that is _classified_ as having staff to manage. Now we've got an IT department with 4 or 5 talented IT 4 folks, and a thick glass ceiling to advancement. You can't get _another_ IT 4 position because you don't manage, and you can't get an IT 5 position...because you don't manage.
The retirement plan is cushy (80% of your top three year salary average), and working here isn't TOO bad, but I'm not able to go anywhere else in state...and those well paying jobs OUTSIDE the state aren't exactly as plentiful as they were.
So, do you stay at 80k for the rest of your career (18-20 years), or do you jump for the brass ring for a 100k a year job and lose 20k in benefits...and lose that job in a year?
"Draco dormiens nunquam titillandus."
Really, carrier paths sucks big time. What you need to is give up from titles and putting people in ordering people in organizational hierarchy. You may ask why! Well, things and needs change in organization leading people going up and down in organizational ladder, the problem becomes when you give somebody title like "lead software services manager", they just wont accept willingly modding them down.
That's why you must first give up from most of the titles and instead use following: junior engineer, engineer and senior engineer. You also need to change to project organization where you can easily put the most able body to do the job. In this way, people don't get offended when they are changed to do different job, and also when discussing about work related things, people can't just say "hey! I'm the lead developer I know these things", instead they have to rationalize and try to communicate to others with out authority given by title.
Oh, and last thing, you make your employees sign a Non Disclosure Agreement concerning their pay, or just talk all to them in this way "you know you are one the best people around here, and I would be glad that if you didn't discuss about your pay".
Survey research tool for commercial and scientific use
Sounds like a serious problem! Staff turnover can cripple an organization due to all the tacit knowledge that is lost. This is a problem that is often unexpectedly experienced when an organization outsources work as well. No matter how much documentation you create, it can never replace the knowledge stored inside people's heads and _habits_. Finding a way to retain people is critical.
This sort of organizational change has simple solutions, but they all take a long time to do effectively. The organic nature of the organization's growth means that an organic approach to change is required. If change is imposed or mandated from above, then people are going to be very resistant to it regardless of the change. There are some very basic principles and practices that can be used to manage this sort of change.
At it's root, this is organizational culture change. The way that people are compensated and rewarded, their sphere of responsibility and influence, the methods of making decisions, the expectations of the business side of the organization, and the basic beliefs about what constitutes fulfilling work are all interrelated. Any organizational change plan has to account for all this.
From what little you have told us, the organic growth of the company sounds like it is embedded in the culture. Don't fight that, you'll lose. Instead, use the organic growth to change the culture organically. Some specific techniques: use small frequent adjustments to gradually steer towards a solution rather than a few large adjustments that might shock the organization, also as mentioned elsewhere, get people involved in coming up with solutions... and then _experiment_ with them.
Most organizations attempting to do this require outside help. This is due to the difficulty of being objective about the corporate culture that you are embedded within. This outside help does not need to be full time, but it does need to be long-term.
FWIW, I have some experience with this. My expertise is in organizational adoption of agile methods both for software development and management. Agile methods provide a simple framework of disciplines and practices that can be used to radically change the effectiveness of an organization. However, despite their simplicity, agile methods are difficult to implement. They require substantial corporate cultural change. I have several years experience as a coach in this field and I would be interested in helping you out. Feel free to contact me at mishkin at berteigconsulting dot com.
Helping with organizational effectiveness is our job.
Blue collar = Organized Labor
White collar = Disorganized Labor
But you have to remember that unions are like any other democratic institution. They're only as good as the amount of participation their members put into it. Most people are not eternally vigilant. You can see how that ends up with the existing state of most unions and our democratically elected government officials.
Abstinence is a government conspiracy. www.SafeSexZone.co
Comment removed based on user account deletion
... lots of things are helpful. Here's 12...
1) Fair pay and good raises.
2) Certification / Education re-imbursement/paid by company.
3) Bonuses based on company's profits (Quarterly or Half).
4) Work from home for jobs where it's appropriate as long as they are meeting goals.
5) Listen to them
6) A small gym and recreation area is nice... computer work is mental, sometimes helps to be physical to work off stress.
7) Free Food Friday (God, I miss this!) (Different restraunt each week...)
8) Tie any holidays possible to "long weekends" or "multiple days off" so employees can get good R&R and enjoy home life.
9) No NDA. NDAs just pisses people off and is largely unenforceable against MOST employees.
10) Good Severance Package.
11) Good Medical/Dental/Vision.
12) Talk to individual employees. Find out what is important to them.
Those are all things I've seen done to good effect that improve moral and make the employees more likely to stay.
Basically in our society today, techs are finding out the hard way that most companies don't value you, they don't care one bit... no matter what you put into your work they're gonna screw you first chance. If the company tries to show it DOES care and provides for the employees you would be surprised how far the employees will go for you. I got layoff notice at one company I worked for 3 months in advance of the layoff, I got 2 months worth of pay as severance, and I busted my ass the last 3 months I was there for them because they weren't just trying to do me from behind at the last minute trying to milk all they could. They gave me a fair shake so I gave them the same in return... even though I knew I wouldn't be there in a couple months.
Treat your employees as a valued asset and they'll do your company right. Sure you'll get some duds, but for the most part the good ones will return any ammount you invest into them in effort many times over if they feel the company is doing its best for them.
But hey what do I know, I've just been through 3 buyouts, 2 department closures, 3 company closings... since 1997. You do your best for the ones who do their best for you, you do the minimum possible and jump ship asap on the ones who treat you like a disposable commodity.
Shadus
I don't understand your comment. Any C level that is not utilizing the talents of the staff reporting to them is an idiot. Idiot CIOs are the ones that blindly follow the "I've done this for 20 years" path.
I rarely read replies, it's my opinion and if you thought about your opinion a little more, I'm OK with that.
Have you considered stock options? That seemed to keep people around for a while...
If a baby duck is a "duckling," why would anyone want to eat "dumplings?"
I am in my last few weeks at an IT company. They have been going downhill for a while, and there are no incentives to do any work. Not money ($0 raise for all yet another yeat, yay) nor any "fun" doing work. Really outdated management that just count manhours of work done, not looking for quality or reusable skills. We are basically doing sales, making appointments, going out to customers, working with software that even the developers don't know how to get working, having to reimburse invoices because S/W sucks so bad, employee turnover will probably end up at 25% this year.
I was planning to talk to my bosses about my motivation, but I realized they don't give a shit. They hire new people and tell them they will make tons of money in a year or two. So everybody accept the shitty starting salary until they realize they are screwed.
So, what do I want? A manager who doesn't spend all day in his office doing Excel sheets and never talk to us. Some understanding that I want fun challenges, not this assembly line rubbish work. A few external courses, perhaps they could bring it up with me instead of me always having to ask - and get a refusal. The opportunity to have meetings during office hours and brainstorm suggestions for more effective work without having to estimate earnings and create a project to get approval. Cooperation with other departments without us invoicing each other. And money? Sure, money's nice, but there is more in life.
And I don't want pizza and paintball or go-carting as a substitute for doing real work. I can install and configure servers or whatever with my colleagues and have a great time with lots of fun.
I want to have fun and always learn more! And possibly take certifications, because together with real life experience colleagues and future employees can tell that you know your stuff.
What is the sound of one hand clapping?
cat
Money is not a proper motivational tool, it can only be used successfully to keep people neutral about an organization. Giving people more money will not make them more loyal to the organization or motivate them in any way. The reverse, however, is also true. If you do no offer suitable compensation to employees, they will become less happy and less motivated.
Think about everytime you've received a raise -- how long did you stay motivated with your new salary? A month, maybe? It doesn't last very long. Soon, you will get accustomed to your new level and the cycle will start all over again -- you'll want even more money. There is not enough money in the world to support this cycle.
Organizations need to find other ways of motivating their employees while still maintaining fair salary compensation. Instead of offering straight-up raises, perhaps offer bonuses for delivering on time or delivering with high quality. Allow employees flex time for completing projects on time.
The basic formula for this is:
Clear description of rewards + Clear description of the conditions necessary to achieve the rewards + implement stated rewards effectively and in a timely fashion = employee more likely to be motivated.
Summary: Money is not a motivator. It just keeps people neutral.
Just offer them Free Sodas and Pizza and they are yours for life.
RTFM? FTFM!!
Ah yes!! The company who gave us these jewels of knowledge.
http://news.com.com/2008-1082-997868.html
"By standardizing on one operating system and using other Microsoft software, the JetBlue CIO says he cut the company's technical staff by 50 percent." - sounds like a dynamic and exciting place to work in IT
"When I joined the company in January 2000 and from my inception as VP and CIO in April 2000, I standardized on the Windows platform. I chose to do that because I felt from the server platform all the way out to the desktop and back that to have one type of operating system and to be able to train one type of technician" - pure genius!
"We don't have any Unix; we don't have an AS/400; we don't have any mainframes--we don't have anything outside of Windows." - yeah... we get it from the above already.
Sounds like a blast to work there...I bet their IT people can wait to get to work, heck they probably have to push them out the building at night and lock the doors so they can't come back in and start working again until the morning.
-- Given enough time and money, Microsoft will eventualy invent UNIX.
Most IT organizations make it too difficult for the minions to see any direct correlation between individual performance and pay/promotions. Collective 'incentive plans' that dole out bonuses to entire organizations based on the performance of the organization as a whole generally lead to little incentive for individuals to perform better ("Why should I bust my rear-end, when I'm gonna get the same rotten 3% raise that the guy next to me who does nothing but read /. all day").
Is that what you tell your prospective employees during their interviews? Methinks your success in business will be severely limited if that is the case. So, who are you lying to, us or your employees? Hmm?
Speaking first hand, from a company in a similar situation as the OP, make sure you speak to the IT managers as well. Each manager may have overlapping responsibilities, which any restructuring will expose.
I have seen attempts at restructuring completely bog down after some overlap was cleared up, because some of the managers involved became more interested in fighting for their authority than in improving the company procedures.
Make sure you have a clear mandate from above, which can be used to enforce any policy or responsibility changes you implement, managerial and staff buyoff on the changes to be implemented, and a clear plan for restructuring, or you'll end up in a worst place than you are now.
ericbardes@gmail.com
Thanks, Eric
This is a boring sig
The NHL lost an entire season due to a LOCKOUT. Most of the owners (presumably) are millionaires. And you are right, the players were pushed into it - by the owners who locked them out.
I'm the decider.
fbg111 if you're reading through these responses and feeling discouraged, please keep your chin up. I've noticed that many (not just in IT) resist organization and planning. However as an IT professional with 10+ years of experience in the field (and I'm still in the trenches mind you) I believe that IT is like any other department within a company and can leverage planning & organization in order to operate smarter and be more effective. (BWT... This is the sort of thing that has to be embraced from the top down & in the culture. Tactical execs / managers & workers will never see a need for planning anywhere and will quickly dispatch the planners.)
... promotion 'triggers' makes techs feel 'stuck' in dead-end situations,
There's always going to be people that say project management and IT are like oil & water. Here are some random reasons why I think this is:
#1 - BAD MANAGERS: There are plenty of crappy middle (and higher) managers out there using plans, policies and procedures as an excuse for people skills - if one has only been subjected to poor planning & organization, of course they will avoid it! Respect cannot be gained with a piece of paper, sorry.
#2 - DOERS: Many talented technical folks are "DOERS" and despise anyone recording, let alone dictating their hours, work or behavior. I think more managers need to respect these people and manage them accordingly. It's ok to put plans and policies in place, but don't expect everyone to salute. Let them come to you. Good managers keep everyone believing they are being treated equally, but always treat everyone individually according to their need (within reason people... always remember common sense!)
#3 - Disbelievers and Cynicals - See the posts above saying "run away" and "that's a pipe dream on paper" ? Let them run. If there is just cause, stay and fight. You'll learn more fighting than running.
#4 - Upper Management - If a company is built to flip, or run by DOERS then forget planning. For example, do the top brass of your company share the same views as your new CIO? If not then expect the plan to fail. It simply won't be embraced, and the nay Sayers are right in this case. However if the new CIO has some power and can sell organizational packages to upper management, then you will be part of positive change. Otherwise you'll all still be floating around in limbo, and that might be how the president likes it.
Ok that's the end of my brain dump. I'm a hybrid planner & doer. I can do with the best & plan with the rest. I believe that small companies should not plan, but most large companies must to be competitive. It sounds like your company is at a cross-roads. My most important advice to you: BE PATIENT.. wait, watch & learn. Don't stick you head out far enough to be cut off, but don't stick it in the mud either. Observe, listen, decide in a direction and move that way, then reassess often.
Good luck!
Here's a sure-fire way to see if you're talking to a fire-fighter or
Ever listen to Dale Carnegie or Franklin Covey? You can't be efficient with people. You just can't. Doesn't work. Sorry. People aren't robots.
But enough ranting about the status quo! Let's be positive. Let's participate in change instead of resist it... Let's talk about how companies get "good to great" and so on.
>fbg111 asks: "I've recently joined a company, a regional airline, with an IT department that has grown organically (ie in response to immediate, rapid-growth-driven need, rather than according to any organizational plan).
Ok. This sounds typical, and you're having growing pains now. As the company continues to grow & evolve the culture will too.
>In the past five years the company has come to rely on IT... 3/4's of its revenue.
This sounds naive. Let's
lack of defined career paths and
lose good people who find more transparent advancement opportunities elsewhere.
joined the new CIO's task force for putting together a plan that addresses the immediate problem of defining career advancement paths and payscales
For 4 years I worked for a public school system. It was the first job out of college. I was in charge of the support, maintenance and planning of the IT infrastructure. It was certainly a fun job for the first couple years. The pay check was nice. But after the first 2 years or so I realized that for one, Unions suck, specially those made up of a total of 8 people in an environment of 1600 employees. And 2, no one gave a damn what time I came in or what time I left or how long it took me to fix something. Not too mention you hardly ever got a thankyou from anyone for busting your butt and working long hours to bring up the school labs and network for the first day of school. Monetary compensation?? What the hell was that? So anyway after about 3 years I started looking for new opportunities. Finally 4.5 years later I get an offer from a local consulting group. I liked what they had to say. I liked the idea of getting trained on new technologies. I liked the bonus idea. I like the fact that everytime I visit my clients they are so happy to see me and always thank me for taking care of them. The travel sucks, but hey the company compensates me nicely for that. The benefits are exactly what I was getting in the public school job, but that was part of the reason their budgets sucked so badly.
In any case why you see the huge increase in outsourcing is because the big companies do not know how to treat their employees. IT especially, with the way the world works now, IT is the life blood of most major and minor companies. You commmunication, marketing, finances, all work through the equipment and infrastructure installed, configured and maintained by IT professionals. Treat them bad and they will find new work. Those consulting companies are on the hunt for talented indviduals. Maybe someday the big businesses will realize this. Until then, I will keep handing my cards out to get more business for my company.
As for the topic at hand, if you really want to change things then you need to show the higher ups numbers! They need to see the cost savings and reorganizing a department. Good luck!!
Dewser - all around techy "In the immortal words of Socrates - 'I drank what?'"
I have the same sort of skepticism at this. Who knows, maybe this will work, but a lot of the problem with these things tend to be the Dilbertian business tactics and managerial strategies, and a "task force" seems in line with the sort of attitudes and actions that cause these problems.
How about treating your IT people like people? Talk to them. Do something nice now and then. Appreciate the work they do, and show your appreciation. And no, I don't mean come up with a business strategy for fake-showing your appreciation. Don't get "thank you" cards that say, "We appreciate you".
Give them raises when they deserve it. Show some loyalty to employees who've done a good job. Give them extra perks when you can. Let them cut loose every now and then. Trust their judgement sometimes. Sometimes, it's as easy as saying, "Ok, because you say so, we'll do it that way." or "Good job."
The problem is, management (in most places) don't see their employees as people, they see them as tools. They're numbers on a spreadsheet. They *want* to view their employees as resources to be exploited as far as possible, with the greatest return/cost ratio, because that's their understanding of "good business". It's usually pretty transparent.
"Inspiring employee loyalty" is just another tactic they've studied while getting their MBAs, but very often, employees know it's just a tactic, and the condescending manipulation just goes that much farther towards thwarting any sense of employee loyalty. As long as employers are just looking for a better deal, with no loyalty to their employees, they shouldn't be surprised that employees are just looking for a better deal, with no loyalty to their employers.
If people want to leave, let 'em leave! If they won't leave, but you want them to, encourage them. If the company lets the good people leave, the company will fail. That's evolution. The saddest part of this is people who stay just because they're afraid to move on.
What I see here (and what has not been said of the several screens I've looked at so far) is a country of whiners who seem to feel that a company is RESPONSIBLE for their mental and physical well being and if a company does not respond to every whim that employees can dream up, then they 'don't care!' Workers want a one-sided socialism. Company must love you, take care of you, buy your medical insurance for you, present you with free food, goodies of all sorts, lots of off time, and keep you around forever, and in return you get to quit with two week's notice.
Now we here about the poor depressed workers who are sad because they don't have a well-defined 'career path.' For God sakes, people! Make one up for yourself!
How about a moderation of -1 pedantic.
I've recently joined a company, a regional airline, [... ] In the past five years the company has come to rely on IT, specifically the web team, for about 3/4's of its revenue.
IT has been a critical part of businesses for 25+ years. This is nothing new or different.
Your company also relies on pilots, accountants, mechanics, lawyers, managers, clerks, and lots of others for 100% of it's revenue. And I'm sure that your "web team" is 100% dependent on system administrators, back-end developers, backup operators, and network admins. If not, your company is screwed.
Just because your group constructs the on-line face of your airline doesn't mean that you're the most critical part of the operation. Other parts are just as critical, if not more so.
Who am I? I am responsible for the web face of my very well known and respected employer. My employer relies on my group - if we screw up, millions can easily be lost in a moment. But other employees are WAY more important than me. I'm in IT, and that's the way it works.
First step is to distinguish between function and personnel. Everyone always wants to get paid more and the vast majority wouldn't mind a more senior job. First off decide with the CIO what structure you want in place and what functions you want present. Then fill it with bodies. Function = bodies. Preffered bodies does NOT = function. Sounds simple but is often ignored to the detriment of business. Once the structure is envisaged, make sure that you communicate the structure as you see it. To the workforce state the obvious - that the structure of all businesses is pyramidical in terms of seniority. There are loads of "doers" at the base of the pyramid and then it narrows sharply to supervisors, managers, senior managers and the ultimate boss. So, tritely, first step is to formally take on board that advancement and promotion is only for the best and into a narrowing structure. You decide the positions first then fill them with the right people. You do not f$!k around the structure because of individuals. Learn this lesson. Step two is to create a promotion / advancement statement that i) explains the discriminating nature of promotion from the more common ranks and ii) clearly establishes the criteria for performance that will merit promotion. Create an annual evaluation process that encompasses a "360" senior / peer / junior anonymous evaluation process. Employee nominates up to 10 people from a mix of seniorities and their boss moderates it to weed out friends / include vital constituents. All evaluatees submit up to 3 strengths for the reviewee and up to 3 development points in text format on an anonymous basis to the boss. Boss synthesises the nearly-objective feedback and gives it to the evaluatee in a one on one session. We do this in our company. I cannot tell you just how effective it is in helping people develop careers and particularly catching out and preventing the "little hitlers" / "chicken shit" personnel you get at most places. This is a GENIUS process in terms of effect even tho it takes a fair bit of time. Next commit to extraordinary training budgets and interesting courses. You want to make your place interesting and stimulating. Make it so! Give people a reason to say "the place that I work at rocks because....." Lastly reward managers for good personnel handling skills. Detrimentally impact their remuneration if they are poor managers (see the feedback suggestion). Drive people to be good at developing your human capital and make it a key and known part of their remuneration. It's amazing what people will do once given the carrot and stick.....
It may sound like a cynical approach, but I think the idea of "obligation" to an employer beyond the terms of your agreement is really putting the individual at an ethical disadvantage. Businesses aren't charities, and you don't owe them anything for free. And they won't have an ethical dilemma when they need to lay you off or offshore your job. It's just business, and what's sauce for the goose is sauce for the gander, too. Think about it: if a business doesn't behave this way in our current business climate, they can be accused of failing their obligation to shareholders. It's no different for you as an individual.
I am not a crackpot.
The NHL was on strike?
Thats an absurdly narrow minded view, and ignores the onerous demands the players were putting on the owners. It even further ignores the fact that the league, and most of the individual teams, were losing money due to these demands.
The real reason it was termed a lockout and not a strike is that the owners moved first in order to set the terms of the debate. The players union was set to strike, the owners just scheduled their press conference first.
Coke and whores Fridays.
We tried giving two hookers and an 8 ball to all our IT guys and it really helped.
You aren't fooling me with this BULLSHIT.
Defining IT "career paths" is rapidly becoming an excuse to superqualify employees.
Superqualification is where you take a current position (or create a new similar one) and load it up with added qualifications (the most obvious one being "a college degree").
Superqualification is being used to push down wages and establish an IT elite. The surviving elite end up working monstrous hours and (eventually) training their own overseas or H1B/L1 replacements.
There's nothing wrong with introducing a little formality into a "mass of skilled employees" as happens to every business as it grows in size. But I strongly doubt that THAT is what's uppermost in your CIO's mind. What's likely to be going through his mind is what he heard on the golf course, or read in "CIOs Are Gods" magazine, or that he's noticed IT workers are in a crunch and he's damned determined to push down the wages of his current workforce one way or another.
[You have a stable society when some nut guns down a schoolyard and the law doesn't change.]
Time is the only thing any of us have ... to be able to spend the majority of your time doing what you choose is a key to happiness.
When I put in long hours for work, the best way that work can say "thank you" is to give me comp time. And I mean that for every one hour of overtime I work, I get one hour off.
It also means that management supports my ability to take that time off when I damn well please.
In a profession that eats up personal lives like Homer Simpson binges on Krispy Kreme, comp time is a powerful benefit. My opinion is that companies do not use comp time as an incentive because it forces management to actually come up with well-thought-out project plans, build balanced teams where multiple people can cover for each other, and create rational schedules that don't demand late-night heroics to meet.
And for everyone who snorted in disbelief that "modern" management would ever consider such a radical policy: I have had this benefit in the past, and I have it now. It is worth more to me than any bonus or stock option I've ever receieved.
If construction was anything like programming, an incorrectly fitted lock would bring down the entire building...
ALL industries that are primarily concerned with burning tons of fuel are being effected negatively recently. Truckers, airlines, power plants, agricultural, etc. I know on the big farm where I work this winters projected cost of propane, because of the massive price increases lately, will put us into the red, actually cost money, zilch net profits. You can't double the cost of doing business in a relatively short time span and not expect it to ripple down. ALL domestic industries are vulnerable, you'll just see the drastic effects at shops like that first, so don't worry, your turn will come, too. You are GOING to see the cost of most everything just climb though the roof soon. Did you check this last months stats on consumer prices? HA! Double ha!
It doesn't have as much to do with unions as you think, although that is certainly part of it, unions exist because management has ALWAYS been "unionized" in a sense since the first two companies did the same work, they just call it something else, industrial working groups, etc. You think those fatcats don't get together and collude,a litle sub rosa understandngs worked out at the golf courses, etc??
The extreme discount airlines are only showing meager profits because they buy old used airplanes so they have slightly lower costs, all the first tier airlines are hurting and the second tier will be right behind them shortly, unless people suck up to a doubling of ticket prices soon.
It is merely another way of having a professional life. It is not always a better/easier/more flexible/more remunerating/enjoyable/enriching in anway experience. It can make or break you just like every other mode of living. The feeling of being in command of your destiny is almost entirely an illusion as much as it is an illusion that you are not in fact in command of your destiny working for any entity. Many things people want to do simply cannot be done as an entrepreneur, so the litany is pointless. I mean, honestly, if the thing you really love doing is genetic engineering or brain surgery, you're probably not going to have a good go of it starting in your garage.
Every guru has their own opinion on how to do this. A good source to get an overview of current ideas on the subject is to search the archives of CIO magizine (www.cio.com) If your committee is going to last for a while you might even want to subscribe. It's free in exchange for informational soul.
Here are some common reasons for techies to leave a company:
If you're looking for morale metrics, check out the average hours worked per employee per week. Also make sure it's not the same employees working all the overtime. Also, see how competitive your compensation is.
Obviously you should be asking the folks who are leaving what made them decide to leave. That's the best place to start.
"Avoid employing unlucky people - throw half of the pile of CVs in the bin without reading them." -- David Brent
The primary difference between a lockout and a strike is who the work stoppage favors more. In the case of the NHL, the league was losing less money due to the missed season then they would have if the season went ahead with pay scales at the status quo.
One suggestion that I don't hear often enough is "lots of vacation time". Studies have been done showing that, in creative and intellectual roles, every hour worked past the first 7 or 8 is less productive. I believe the same applies on a larger scale. Employees coming back from a week off may take a day to get up to speed but, when they do, they are more productive and reliable for a month or more. Plus you get the benefit of the "not work" work they do on their vacation. Many of my best designs come when I'm loafing around the house or when I see something that inspires me. In those cases, when I do get back to the office, I can spank out a design in a few hours that would take me a week otherwise (and probably lack the key inspiration).
I would be interested to hear if any companies have really explored this. I'd also be interested in hearing from those companies. While my employer is great and my job is really cool, I don't live to work.
As I said to my boss once:
"I don't want 10% more money...I want 10% less hours."
What's your solution, if you're on a task force meant to help improve IT organization. Are you recommending that Cliff walks into the CIO's office and say, "There's nothing we can do."?
Seriously, what would you do in this position? Just give up? Is that how we solve problems now days?
It's not a solution to the problem, it's just a different problem all together. That's the problem.
Both self-employment and employment--I've done ten years of each, in that order--can be as much the means to fulfillment and joy as they can be to misery and despair.
Regardless, whenever the topic of organizational complexities and politics comes up, a chorus of people start chiming in like speakers at an MLM opportunity meeting that being-your-own-boss is the only way to happiness and enlightenment. Well, that's all well and good and good luck with your endeavors, but, it just isn't an answer to the original question. Almost all businesses require employees, so it simply isn't helpful to say "screw that noise, just go into business for yourself!"
Well, uhm, that's not much advice to give your [future] managers/partners/employees, is it?
Firstly, is the HR department involved in this? Why is the CIO addressing a Human Resourcing issue? Any properly trained HR person can show you how to manage this.
I work for a very similar company, An airline that makes 90% of its revenue via the web servers I administer, on the web binaries I build and harden.
All I can say is if you want to be treated like a professional, you are in the wrong industry.
It is not an IT company, it is not about IT and if you screw up they will just outsource you. If you were an engineer or biscuit chucker (cabin crew) you would be seen as a valuable asset. Our CEO never walks down to the IT department and says you guys are doing a good job, but he will address the pilots personally when they join and address any niggling issue the cabin crew feel is important, personally.
Which sucks considering the IT department has to work extremly hard to bridge the technology gap left by the airline industry professionals that see IT as an expense, and yet can't respect the effort put in to making IT actually work for them. And particularly with such a young company with young executives that have never experienced life without email and internet, and rely on computer programs 100% to do their jobs.
And thats what happens when you buy the cheapest software and pay 10-20% less salary, you get someone that relies on the IT department for EVERYTHING.
Give up and get a job for an IT company that will treat you like a professional. You will thank yourself, and probably earn more, enough to pay for your own airfares.
In relation to career development and promotion, everybody cant be promoted, I find a lot of younger staff expect to move ahead like they deserve it. I hate to break this to people but your well being is not your employers responsiblity. Especially when you are a professional. If you do deserve to move upwards, I'm sure you'll be able to get a better position somewhere else. What if your team of 8 has 8 excellent people that all deserve a promotion? You can't promote all 8, its not a win-win situation.
But you do deserve regular performance reviews and renumeration, from someone with experence and in a position to reward you. Any HR department can tell you how to do this.
Move on. One day I might even take my own advice.
The downside is that likely the employees aren't sure about what they want either (so they Ask Slashdot, a questionable move), and are likely to be divided.
My other car is a Popemobile
The more you work the less you get paid!
We start out a base salary and a bonus.
the bonus is based upon our salary and billing rate.
The funny thing is that the more you work the less per hour you make.
The formula works to about 200 hours a month. After about 220 hours a month and you start to make less and less each hour. At about 500 hours in a month it works out that you are earning about half per hour as if you work the typical 40 hours a week.
This just encourages you to work about 200 hours month and not much more.
(Shrugs)
Using staff talents to maximum effect is what sucessful C levels do - I'm totally in agreement with you there. However, the "C's" need a course by which to steer their respective departments by. Committees and consensus can only get you so far because they only provide a solution to a problem, not a path to follow. The "Vision" quality in a leader is the most rare thing, but spectacular to work under.
Pessimists.net - as if life wasn't depressing enough.
If this is really the case, he should be smart enough to step aside. Too many managers rise beyond their competence. You are spot on about employees not knowing what they want. What they really want. A good "C" level will.
Pessimists.net - as if life wasn't depressing enough.
I guess I hate the 'vision' word. To often it seems to be a fancy name to 'ra-ra' the team so it can blindly follow the C*O. I prefer a CIO who says he is going to do something AND gets it done, someone who is reliable and predictable (for the most part.) If that meets your definition of vision, then I agree with you.
... neat website, at least the first page.
BTW
I rarely read replies, it's my opinion and if you thought about your opinion a little more, I'm OK with that.
amazing insight and humour all in one
Bingo!
The bottom line is you, as an individual, fend for yourself first and foremost. If IT is messed up, management doesn't seem to care, or know how to do their job(s) that's not something you can fix. Decide what you want and need, weigh those criteria against what you experience in your job and management. If it's bad, it's unlikely to improve (much).
/. for similar articles before posting this, and didn't find any.
Thanks for responding, I submitted this article, and I see I may need to clarify things a bit. First, I'm not complaining, I'm happy to be here, it's a great opportunity. This airline has the potential to become a regional JetBlue or Southwest in some respects, though not as big, and there's a lot of energy here. Five years ago, the marketing director and his IT counterpart made a brilliant move in the midst of bankruptcy, and moved all sales primarily to the company's website. It was a huge gamble that people would buy cheaper tickets from the airline's website than from the GDS's (Orbitz, Expedia, Travelocity), but it paid off in spades and the company is insanely profitable for the first time its 75 year history, even with the crazy oil prices.
Now everyone in the company recognizes the value of essentially turning the airline into an internet and electronic direct sales company, and the tiny little IT department that started it all has been ramped up quickly to support these endeavors. But during this process it was being led until recently by IT people who knew technology but not really the business organization side that we all take for granted in larger, more established companies.
I don't blame the management for any shortcomings, they did a phenomenal job with what they had, and now they've hired a rockstar CIO (prior CIO of two major global banks) and HR director, a few months ago to solve the organizational issues. That's what I"m helping with right now, and I'm happy to do it.
Most companies aren't interested in grooming, triggers, etc., they're interested in their bottom line.
The CIO of this one is, it's his initiative.
That you've been "tasked"
I haven't been "tasked", I said "I recently joined the new CIO's task force". Voluntarily.
But a company that doesn't "get it" isn't going to "get it" by organizing some CIO appointed task force.
The company 'gets it', they're just seeking advice on how to implement it.
Aside: Heads up, since you've joined an airline... make sure you keep the jackscrews lubed!)
lol, thanks for the advice, will do.
PS - is this really a dupe? I searched
Flying is easy, just throw yourself at the ground and miss. -Douglas Adams
Does your company build the airplanes that you fly? Then why try to maintain a staff of application developer/designers? Better to maintain a smaller staff of business analyst expertise and properly manage outsourcing than trying to attract and hold good developers. You will never be able to keep a good developer, but you can contract them.
The problem is that no one knows how to really quantify employee turnover. Ask any IT department what its like when a key team member leaves. Its hell. Most of the time, nothing is documented, so all of that knowledge that lies in his/her head goes out the door with them. Sure, you struggle, you get by, and eventually you get caught up, but the opportunity cost and lost productivity dollars are staggering. Key player exodus can set projects back by weeks, months, even years.
body massage!
Post on slashdot so that your competitors can raid your
best and brightest.
It'll be painful at first, but eventually, your boss will
figure out where he went wrong.
> Think about everytime you've received a raise -- how long did
> you stay motivated with your new salary? A month, maybe? It
> doesn't last very long. Soon, you will get accustomed to your
> new level and the cycle will start all over again -- you'll
> want even more money. There is not enough money in the world to
> support this cycle.
You certainly can't keep everyone. But if you're paying below industry average, employees can go almost anywhere and improve their paycheck.
If you're paying the industry average or slightly more, money-motivated employees have many fewer places to jump to.
1. Bring the network down as often as possible to let everyone know how hard you are working to keep it working reliably.
2. Make vital shared files and folders as inaccessible as possible to let everyone know how hard you are trying to maintain security.
3. Slow down and choke up all computers as much as possible with virus software, and neato-kewl administrator utilities that run in the background and turn on whenever you're busy doing something related to work.
4. Upgrade to the latest, greatest version of a well known Office suite, zapping all old configurations and installing only the bits that you don't want or need, excluding the help file that explains where you find all the old features. Upgrade the O.S. as frequently as possible so that it becomes impossible to use legacy software.
5. Take away any administrator-like rights to your own machine so that you have to wait three days before the computer guy gets around to fixing your 30 second problem.
6. Come up with strict policies on the usage of unapproved sofware so that you'll have no other choice but to do your work on a certain well known Office suite.
I appareciate the US unions for one simple reason:
If they had not provided a counter balance to our lassie-faire corporations running amock, I think we would've turned communist.
Our best economic growth and even a revolution, an indisutrial revolution, which transformed the US and the world came about becasue of the very libertarian and lassie-faire attitude the government held of the free market. Unfortunately the working conditions were not very good and tended to cause a populist uprising. Fortunately they formed unions and didn't overthrow the government - or vote red.
But I do agree, a lot of the unions have largely outlived their usefulness in the present day. But I would've rather had them the the commies. At least there is still a relatively free market,
Libertas in infinitum
Right, but ...
Wrong. You pinpointed the problem, but that can't be the solution.
I work in a tech firm that faces a similar problem to the OP's. I suspect most if not all tech firms face the same problem. What is is the career track for folks on the technical side? On the management side, it's very clear cut: as you move upwards in your career, you progress through manager, director, VP, SVP and maybe even President. At every point, you assume greater responsibility over more parts of the business.
What's the track for developers, engineers, sysadmins, DBAs, etc.? How do folks from those areas of the business acquire as much influence as those in the managerial track? Should they acquire that much influence?
It's a big question, and "give 'em a raise" is not the right answer. By the time folks get to the level of principal/architect/guru/what-have-you, they aren't going to be satisfied with another 5%. They want influence, and they want considerable autonomy. How do you give them that without pressing them into management?
if you could... go ahead and get that... for me... that would be great. Ok? Oh, and here's another copy of that memo.
The Admin and the Engineer
Read the book "Peopleware".
The problem your company has run up against is very common. The solution lies in a discipline called "Human Capital Planning" Treat human beings as an asset like a computer - inventory them, come up with capacity needs projections, compare current inventory to future needs, then plan for- 1) Procuring (recruiting) to fill the gaps 2) Maintenance (retraining) of existing resources and 3) Archiving (knowledge management) to capture their on-the-job skills It is a manageable problem. Even if anarchist cowboy nerds don't like the idea of being managed.
"Sic Semper Path of Least Resistance"
All these talks about career paths are nice, but won't help in the short run. If the IT department is growing, there must be vacancies to be filled. These are great opportunities to show that you mean business in terms of keeping your existing staff. You start advertizing these vacancies internally first, with clear indication of what knowledge, skill, experience you are looking for, the kind of work these positions will get into, the responsibility and authorities these people will have. Explain the hiring process, clearly. Tell them the salary range and benefits. Encourage people to apply. After you get the applications, talk to the ones you decide not to interview, and tell them why they were not selected. Also tell them what kind of jobs they are qualify for, or, what do they have to do to get a better job. After the interviews, talk to people failed the interviews, and tell them why. Be honest. If they stink, say they stink, and where. If you don't find any one suitable internally, have an open meeting with all staff, and tell them what you were looking for and not get. The easiest way to tell your current staff that they are not valued is by paratrooping someone from outside, and not let them know why they have been by-passed. After a few round of this, you can start thinking about career paths.
Big
Have a nice day!
Expanding a vast wasteland since 1996.
Truth is, the desire for personal advancement is a sickness.
Just think logically for a second. Imagine if everyone on the planet was justified in desiring advancement and actually got their wish? Well gee, then all the old people would be CEOs and Presidents and Popes, and all the young people would be supporting this immensely top-heavy upside down pyramid. Would this be a healthy society? Personally, I don't think so.
Just look around and pay attention: what kind of person is advancing? Are they moral or immoral? Are they compassionate and selfless, always immediately giving away the fruits of their labor, or the one who is always looking out for the NUMERO UNO, who, at best, make a gesture of giving, while their core practice from 9 to 5 is to cheat, steal, and to spread misinformation about the real situation to all the people around them?
Frankly, I don't see a single person, NO, HONEST, who is "deserves" advancement.
Now, don't get me wrong! I am not against advancement in and of itself. Just try to see that advancement is not a right. There is no way to deserve it. Advancement is something that egoistic people do, by fighting for it, either openly or covertly behind the scenes, but still fighting, still forming hostile intent toward others.
The very meaning of the word "advancement" discloses the truth. How do we recognize someone who has "advanced"? We recognize them as being advanced in relation to others, less advanced. Without this distinction, the word "advancement" has no meaning. So desire for advancement is really a hostile desire, because essentially you desire to be above others. Saying that "a person desires others to be seen as being below oneself" is just a different way to describe the very same dynamic. This is not the same as desiring to benefit the community and oneself and being spontaneously promoted by the community without actively seeking it out. A person who has been promoted by the community does not attach much sentimental weight to it, and sees it as a service to perform, rather then spoils of "hard work" to enjoy. And should the community want another person to supercede such community-promoted individual, such individual gladly gives up their top spot, because all along they had no hostile motivation to make others seem as below themselves.
"Hard work" doesn't mean good work or moral work. Many people work hard at self-promotion and getting others to buy into their ponzy schemes. Some of them work 70 hour weeks and make big risks, and extract big rewards. That doesn't mean it's good. That doesn't mean it's right. That doesn't mean it leads to a good life.
Companies are fading their IT systems and therefore risking their business future:
- Continuing the 1980s 'management treadmill' method whereby executives through their actions and decisions demonstrate that they anticipate a 3-4 year tenure at any position and therefore, can operate without fear that their long term business decisions will come back to them as long term career jeapordizing failures- Communicating through their actions and treatment of US based IT workers that IT is a bad career choice, therefore reducing the number of college graduates, and therefore reducing their labor supply
- Forcing existing qualified workers out of the field via layoffs and offshoring
- Replacing knowledgable workers with much lower productivity offshore workers and expecting no discernable loss in business productivity
The end result, less IT workers, business unfriendly imported/offshored workers and a downward spiral in business productivity due to sick IT systems.
IANAMBIASTB1 (I Am Not An MBA But I Am Studying To Be One)
I've recently joined the new CIO's task force for putting together a plan that addresses the immediate problem of defining career advancement paths and payscales."
First of all, if there is enough time to put together a task-force that will produce a plan but not actually do anything about fixing the problem, then I think you can see the chosen solution to the "immediate" problem. Namely, "yes, we are doing something about it.. look at all the meetings we are having". Its a first step (the classic acknowledge the problem) but drop your expectations in terms of actually resolving the problem.
Creating defined and achievable goals with defined rewards will cost the company money in increased remuneration. With good management, some strategic planning would be done that should show that the cost of increased remuneration will be more than offset by increased productivity due to happier little serfs and a decreased necessity for finding and training staff. There is nothing in your description to suggest that "good management" is a feature of this company.
The concept of a "career path" is a bit of an anacronism. It traditionally ties into the public service or traditional heirachical organisations where one could progress from office junior to clerk to senior clerk to junior manager to senior manager. In modern flat or modularised business structures, this doesn't really exist. IT especially so, as a highly trained technical specialist may earn more than a non-technical manager, and wouldn't regard a management position as a promotion anyway.
Let me just note that not everybody wants a challenging job, or to learn something new. Some people like to learn one set of skills and apply them for the rest of their lives. Believe it or not, such people do exist in IT, and if you've got these on the staff of an IT section that simply does the same thing day after day, then you don't have a problem. Its everybody else who you are worried about.
The concept of a "dead-end job" however, depends on what the company actually has its web people doing. If all they are doing is programming the ecommerce site in ASP day-in, day-out, yeah - they are going to get bored. Who wouldn't? Where's the challenge? You need to identify what in the broader company goals will entail novel (and hopefully interesting) IT projects. This is what the CIO should be doing anyway. If there are no interesting IT projects, you aren't going to keep good people. Taking a stab in the dark, i'd guess that there isn't a lot going on in an airline that is going to keep somebody who likes to be challenged interested in the job.
So, the company needs to accept a level of churn, and senior IT people move to other companies for different experiences. This means streamlining the recruiting and training processes to ensure a constant influx of new blood and avoid the exodus of knowledge. (Skills can be hired, knowledge and experience are much much more valuable).
In general, pay won't keep most IT people in a crap job, so increase the stuff that we see as rewards - I call these "The three T's": Training, Toys and Travel. Training means our employees are more valuable to us, but also valuable to others. But happy employees may need a $10k to $20k increase before being tempted away from a "fun" job.
Finally, the goals need to be divided into a hierachy. The group needs to be rewarded, but as does the individual for their own achievements outside what they put into the group.
Norman Cook's Ode to Sl
No, he's saying that once the fire is out the firemen should stop spraying water on the building. If you let them go on spraying water year after year on every building that ever caught fire (and some that could have caught on fire) your problems could be almost as bad as the fires themselves.
You could wind up in an economy where it is worth taking a 40% loss in quality in order to manufacture overseas and get lower labor costs. You could wind up unions contributing to the health of your company like they are with General Motors and Delta Airlines.
I believe in treating labor fairly, but some unions think the company exists only to take care of members.
Well, currently I'm working in an operations position that they've farmed out to "contract" agencies. No raises, you pay for your benifits (Vacation, medical, sick leave, etc), no chance for promotion.
It's like Office Space. You only work hard enough not to get fired. Those with any ambition are out interviewing for new jobs.
Democrats or Republicans. They are both taking us to the same place and they are not afraid of us anymore.
I work for Target Technology Services, the I.T. group of Target Corporation (i.e. Target Stores). We have all of the things asked about in the article. You can see an overview here. Basically, Target believes in career advancement; one of the (many) evaluation criteria for both team members and managers is career planning.
Hello fbg111
Thanks for your clarifications, and for not taking too personally my comments. I'm not surprised at your further comments and hope the best for your future. I'm always pleased for those who navigate the business waters smoothly and gain satisfaction and find success in their careers.
To further clarify my comments, I did generalize but did not intend to stipulate by post your situation was a bad one.
My experiences in the last two years leave me seeing the business landscape through a different prism than before I was laid off after 21 years of what I thought would be a complete career. I've posted many times about my "plight" (though I do not ask for sympathy, I am sorting through and working out my issues in my professional life and expect to eventually be fully on my feet again).
I too worked closely with top level managers and received many choice assignments and was recognized and rewarded handsomely for my work. But around the dotcom bust, our company merged with another, on paper that is.
In reality that other company (much smaller than ours, btw) took control and with the help of a CEO who is now dogged by the legal system, we spiraled into the whirlpool that was the bust. Our stock dropped from over fifty dollars a share to less than two dollars a share. On paper (all of it mature) I lost over $500,000 -- a big hit to my retirement and savings plan.
Our crooked (alleged) CEO was forced out, but walked away with $500,000,000! A bitter pill to swallow, but I resolved to continue and finish my career there and to contribute to my best ability (while somewhat non-traditional, still good stuff based on my reviews, salary, bonuses and stock options).
Eighteen months ago my manager took me into the conference room and told me what I had figured out walking to the room (there had been rumors). Twenty percent of IT gone in one cut. No press releases.
And, I was treated like a criminal. By the time I got to my desk to pick up my personal belongings my login had disappeared and my badge access was disabled. I couldn't immediately go home because I was a bus commuter and there were only three buses in the morning and three in the evening so I had from 9a.m. til 4p.m. to kill before I could head home (I guess they could've hired me a cab, but I'm not even sure there were cabs that would take me the sixty miles to my house).
My manager had someone "watch" me the rest of the day and dropped in a couple times an hour to make sure I wasn't doing anything "wrong" (not to see how I was doing).
Upon departure, while I was supposed to have contact and e-mail for sixty days, because of an IT DNS configuration problem (how ironic is that?) I could not send or receive e-mail for the first forty of those sixty days.
No list of laid off employees was distributed, I could not find out from those still there who was laid off, they did not know themselves.
And while I was "encouraged" to find another position within the company during those sixty days what I wasn't told was the company had put a zero-tolerance hiring freeze in place for that time. This, while I was networking (I still had the phone!) with other directors and managers who were more than pleased when I asked to join their groups... but the replies and pseudo-promises of positions faded with the more and more silent phone each day.
And when I started applying for jobs, I discovered my hierarchy of management had been laid off too (except for my direct manager) and they were the ones who knew most my work and accomplishments. I had no way to find where they'd gone, an entire portfolio of references vanished in the ether.
So now you can at least see the prism through which I now see the business world... I hope you never have to look through it.
I worked for a company that eventually really didn't "get it".
I hope the best for you and your company and hope your company "gets it" now, and in the future.
Best regards (and sorry for rambling)
p.s. Thanks for the jackscrew assurances.... you're a good man. :-)
You're looking at mainly a business problem - management and organisational structures, with matching payscales etc.
;-) they'll need bright, sparky people but they're of a different class and need a different management style than 'average' workers. There is no better or worse here, just different demands, in most companies you need a good mix to keep it lively.
Rather than giving you a pre-cooked receipe (for there isn't one) I would suggest you first find out what the company wants to do with IT.
If they want to innovate (the non-MS way
You must accept that you will always have some attrition, but ther simplest way to keep that low is still to treat your people right. Above a certain level money is NOT a critical factor for people deciding to move companies, it is only a further contributing factor once they've taken that decision. And don't delude yourself, someone who's made that decision has mentally already left.
The best tip I can give you is to get a book called "The enthusiastic employee" published by Wharton School Publishing. ISBN 0-13-142330-4. It's well researched and quite accessible. However, rule one with any book or approach: treat it as a guide, not as an absolute.
Bottom lines:
1) bad management attitude to staff accounts for a lot of attrition.
2) attrition is a huge business cost, depending on the place in the value chain it can take as much as 150% of an employees' annual salary to replace them if they walk. That's hard $$ you're wasting if you get it wrong - keep that in mind if you encounter Mr Beancounter. It's also the strongest argument to remove clueless management with - they cost money.
3) your business needs to generate enough profit to afford staff. Keep a good eye on how many staff you need - sometimes being more intelligent with platform architecture means you can do more with the same people.
4) for a normal human being, laying off people is the hardest thing to do (not to mention for the person in question). Try to avoid that by clarity about culture and needs. As for mass layoff, here's simple logic: the ones you'd like to keep are the first to leave (as they have market value).
Good luck. Managing technical staff is good fun (especially if you're technical yourself) as long as you keep the reigns firmly in hand. If need be, learn about leadership.
Insert
Absolutely not true. That is not the primary difference between a lockout and a strike, especially in the context that the parent poster used to denounce unions.
I'm the decider.
The players and owners had a contract. The individual owners chose to overpay the players, and then, due to ignorant, talentless leadership by Gary Bettman, they lost their asses.
I'm the decider.
If it weren't an airline, I'd swear you were talking about my company. In fact, its quite erie. If you want my advice, I would take some extra training, update your resume and hit the trail because you have hit a dead end and it's not going to change.
... how would you address a problem without appointing some resources (yes, a commitee, people do not work for free you know, even if it is to improve their working conditions...) to analyze and propose solutions?
/.ers believe that solutions will come from heaven given by the holly spirit or something like that.
Some
No, you have to address a problem, the holly spirit and any other magical forces will not solve your organizational problems. You have to assign people to solve it and that group of people has to have a name in order to quickly identify all the infdividuals involved, either team, commitee, task force, or the friends of Sherlock, that is immaterial.
IANAL but write like a drunk one.
In place of getting help from as many people as possible, delegating responsibility to solve a problem, the CIO should go around himself interviewing people. Give me a fucking brake.
I honestly wonder some times how some guys come with such impractical and bizarre ideas like this with a straight face and can go to sleep without feeling any shame.
I will try to rescue a point form the diatribe in the parent post, for something to be implemented it has to become part of the tasks reviewed regularly when appraisal time comes. If middle managers have been tasked with defining clear carrier paths for employees and they have not done it then their cooki point should be decreased. Another part of the feedback is to ask employees if they see and understand the carrer paths available in the firm.
THese tasks (or any other discovered as possible solutions to a problem) should become documented responsibilites at the different levels of the organization.
I know you guys don't like this kind of language, and many of you hate this stab in your fucking artistic pretensions, but the only way to address problems is to put people to work in the solution, document it, implement it, and review that the solution is working regularly, in a manner that can be enforced (read bonuses, promotions).
IANAL but write like a drunk one.
Organizations don't change.
People don't change.
They are all set in stone, so once you have figure them all out, you need to do nothing, because problems will never arise again. Ever.
I want either a ticket to the planet where you live or the phone number of your doctor or drug dealer.
IANAL but write like a drunk one.
So you have a mess in your hands (wahtever the reason) and you have to fix it.
/.ers read Dilbert like if it was the Bible.
If you trust only your common sense, allow me to say, you are an idiot.
I know of a case when the company began to do some of the things you mentions: signed cards for work well done, small presents, free drinks.
EMployees began to complain that this was all in order to avoid salary raises.
Salary rises came, and everybody was complaining about how little it was, or how tthey were more diserving than others for it.
Common sense fixed nothing. What helped was to form a commitee, ask opinions of what would be nice recognitions to receive, and to set clear policies about promotions and salary raises.
Having a committee helped enourmously to improve the situation.
Many
IANAL but write like a drunk one.
Yes, there is certainly a share of blame for everyone involved, however to call the lockout a device purely of the creation of the owners, and to act as if the players weren't going to strike is absurd. The owners shouldn't have caved in the 90s, but instead gotten their salary cap then. If that had happened this lockout never would've been necessary, and everybody would be better off.