Is A Bad Attitude Damaging The IT Profession?
dtienes writes "Why does IT get a free pass to insult users? Slamming customers isn't acceptable in any other profession; doctors don't call their patients "meatbags" — at least, not publicly. But IT professionals think nothing of wearing their scorn on their sleeves (or at least their chests — just check out ThinkGeek). There's more at stake here than just a few hard feelings. IT may be seriously damaging the credibility of the profession. See the essay I'm An Idiot (And Other Lessons From The IT Department) for a former IT professional turned user's take on insults, attitudes and ethics.
(Full disclosure: The submitter is also the author.)"
Nothing for you to see here, please move along
See, it's attitudes like that....
The real litigious bastards...
Insulting the "client" isn't constrained to the IT market, it may be more visible to /.ers, but seemingly many
"professionals" think an attributes of being a professional
include being an unmitigated asswipe to those less knowledgeable.
My personal experience with over 25 years now in IT is that many times the asswipe-ness of an IT professional is inversely proportional to what they know and how well they know it. While I've known some brilliant IT staff who were grumpy, most of the anointed geniuses-with-attitude were self anointed, and less than geniuses (doesn't mean they didn't know anything, just that the attitude was a convenient and easy facade to hide behind).
The insulting IT staff were the ones I avoided -- mostly their expertise, as it were, was a diminished return in being held hostage by "their schedule", and their attitude. I'd much rather find assistance with a less competent person who is self aware and interested in helping find a solution if they don't know it themselves.
Admittedly there is a consumer demographic cowed by the angry IT support, and they probably accept and suffer more insult than they deserve. But, in the long run, I think any IT staff member who glories in his or her rancor and animus with the client grossly underestimates the long term impact on their reputation and career. If you think customers don't talk... and consider alternatives when they present, think again. (I long since have avoided Circuit City for not only rude treatment and condescension, but that kind of treatment coupled with virtual incompetence on that for which they condescended..., literally thousands of my dollars have gone elsewhere solely on "rude behavior" by "professionals".)
It pays to be nice.
(And, regardless of the sans-clue clientèle's, there are rarely circumstances that warrant abuse of the customer.... )
Of course it is. And companies are starting to get wise to the fact that things could be better - when applying for jobs after college, not one but two of the interviews I had were filling spots of IT admins who'd been fired for this kinda crap. And the interviews were all questions like "What do you think of users who know absolutely nothing about computers?"
ACs are modded -6. I don't read you, I don't mod you, I don't see you. Don't like it? Don't be a coward.
GROLIES: Guardian[1] Reader Of Low Intelligence in Ethnic Skirt
LOBNH: Lights On But Nobody Home
CNS-QNS: Central Nervous System - Quantity Not Sufficient
[1] UK left wing newspaper
Sure, our profession and hte durrounding culture allows for the type of user tratement the author describes.
But don't think for a minute that IT folks don't need ethics. We often get to see data first hand that lawyers need subpoenas to obtain.
One can laugh at their user's technical abilities all they want, but the minute you talk about their data or the inside of their business, the IT career is over. As is the option for any other meaningful career.
Huh?
One thing IT professionals should always keep in mind is that someone may be ignorant without being stupid. I've seen too often people make this confusion. Also one should never confuse "obvious" with "usual". Just because we are used to doing things in a certain way it doesn't mean newbies should be able to guess how to do it by themselves.
What, all doctors aren't like House?
People think Microsoft is the answer. Microsoft is just the question, "No" is the answer.
IT can be a fairly arrogant profession, but I think this is a more common occurrence in technical fields than we might originally guess. The big driver, from what I've seen and heard, is the visibility of IT, and its importance to everyday life. The fact that many people are so perilously inept at operating and managing an increasingly core life staple prompts much of the snobby behavior.
Perhaps rampant irresponsibility is not quite as visible or dominant in other fields. For instance, imagine if a shocking percentage of the population drove their cars without any thought to changing their oil, airing their tires, or even filling their tank with gas. We would probably have a community of technicians and knowledgeable people ridiculing and advising these irresponsible "users."
IT has been an odd case, as normally the expense of adopting a new, non-user-friendly technology is prohibitive for people not prepared to maintain and operate the equipment. But, the drastic adoption and commoditization of IT has led this to be out of balance, with people trying to treat everything as a black box when at least comprehending the nuts and bolts is still essential for responsible use.
Customers also insult staffmembers or for that matter, anyone in the proximity, without restraint, for issues that are not directly their fault.
Insulting is the problem, not IT, nor the user.
--------
* Sigh *
Two of the three people I've ever had to fire in my 25-year carreer
were BOFHs. They were both replaced with talented, socially well-balanced
guys who treated users like customers and actually enjoyed finding
solutions to problems that were right both for the user and for the IT department.
I don't think it's the bad attitude of some IT people that's doing the damage,
it's management toleration of that attitude. Plenty of good people out there
if you go looking.
I'm more than familiar with some perceived stereotypical behavior in some IT people. Some of my least favorite attitudes are those displayed when the "IT Pro" is protecting his ignorance. Gone are the days, I think, when IT people were looked upon as techno-god figures... and feared as such.
I'm an IT manager and I'm all about helping business work better through IT. Some of my favorite endorsements are along the lines of "you don't make me feel stupid." What would be the point in that? I don't do what they do... which is most often making money for the company. In my job, I spend the company's money, so I do my best to make sure they feel they are getting their money's worth.
But back to the topic of jackasses: I hate people who hide their ignorance and attempt to put up some sort of "I won't share what I know" front as if he were the exclusive container of knowledge. Further, I hate it when people attempt to "secure their jobs" through obfuscation and indirection of information. In my opinion, the latter complaint amounts to malpractice. And I have a close friend who is presently suffering the worst of all scenarios -- the knows less than nothing boss who got where he is because he lies on his resume. (This moron thinks that if you block port 80 on the firewall that users will not be able to surf the web!!)
I see these offenders as a dying breed, fortunately... but they aren't dying fast enough.
Doctors have always insulted their patients in their notes .
More detailed list here .
The only difference between the average emergency room doctor's attitude to some of their patients and the cliched sysadmin's hatred of 'lusers' is the fact that doctors wear shirts and ties.
It has become appallingly obvious that our technology has exceeded our humanity. --Albert Einstein
I heard a saying one time. I don't know the origins:
"Accounts departments love IT Departments. For before there was IT, everyone hated Accounts. But now everyone hates the IT Dept."
This seems to hold some truth from my experience.
In post Patriot Act America, the library books scan you.
Certainly IT isn't the only customer focussed industry where this happens, it's an extremely naive viewpoint to suggest that is the case. I can think of countless call centres for things such as gas, phones and so forth where I've been treated by people with abysmal attitudes.
As to why it happens at all, I think the reasons are rather varied.
You have people who are forced into using IT because everyone needs to use it for their job nowadays, only some people don't want to so they purposely make moan and make out the situation is worse than it is just to satisfy their own technophobic paranoia - people like this are extremely frustrating to work with.
Then there are people who treat IT workers as their own personal slaves, requests such as "change my printer cartridge too" - things that frankly, even a monkey could be trained to do, this type of thing is completely demoralising. If you had a mechanic out to look at your car, what do you think their reaction would be if you turned round and say "Oh go and fill it up with gas for me too".
There's the people who simply ask too much, most IT departments are staffed okay for looking after the business but there are those that seem to feel that the IT staff should deal with the home too. We've currently got a situation where we're staffed fine to run a secure, locked down network but our company has decided to push homeworking - this means people are wanting to setup home broadband on their laptop, this leaves us with a choice between having to visit each and every persons home - where two technicians have to do the visit, because one person can't go because of the danger of some pathetic low-life claiming the technician tried to rape them, steal from their house or whatever or alternatively we can remove the security settings so that the users can setup their home broadband on their laptops themselves. Again, this is a hopeless scenario because we then have to spend day in day out clearing spyware, viruses, finding space on their laptop for their work after their kids have installed Quake 8 or whatever on it.
There's plenty more reasons, but it seems more generally that IT has an identity crisis - users aren't entirely sure what we actually do, where the line is drawn as to what a user issue is and what an IT worker issue is. Do we fix printers? probably, do we fix photocopiers? probably not, what if we have a multi-function printer/photocopier? What about telephones, if it's VOIP we most likely deal with it, but if it's a typical old fashioned Nortel or whatever system then there's likely a phone technician to deal with it. Now, I'm personally willing to have a go at fixing anything if there's a real need, but I don't like whiping the asses of lazy people who can't be bothered to change a printer cartridge and secondly, I simply don't have time to do absolutely everything. The issue is lack of well defines roles for most IT people and also hence lack of definition for users as to what they should and shouldn't expect from their IT department.
"Users are stupid and that needs to be the starting point for software developers." I read their trade magazines: "No matter how hard we pray...every network is at one time or other exposed to the ultimate technology risk: users."
... no, it makes the 'aaah' sound, see now? Good, have a cookie."
People working in offices should have a modicum of training with a computer. If a person had terrible spelling in the oldendays (before spellcheck was prevalent), they would probably be fired. IT people like myself (at my old job) having to go around and teach the most basic of tasks to people who should know a thing or two is extremely frustrating.
In the modern business world, being computer illiterate is like not knowing how to read. Imagine 'grammar' techs going around saying "now what does sound the 'A' make?
Some things I don't mind doing, like when windows bugs out and the printer gets deselected, I'll happily mutter "you know, windows should be a little robust, this kind of thing shouldn't happen, we should switch to macs" while I'm fixing the box and me and the user can find some common ground to grouse about. Other things, like how to change the margins in a Word document (which people forget sometimes twice a day) really pushed the limits of my patience.
The same goes for software development. I developed my own CMS recently. 99% of it was just tweaking the interface to make it more and more usable--not having too many options on a single page so as to not confuse people--that sort of thing. UI is a huge pain to deal with. I ended up just having layers of complexity so I could bring the learning curve to zero. Writing the 'help' pages was so tedious and interminable I nearly gave up after I wrote in "Enter domain here, click here for more information on domains." Is it so much to ask that a person running their own website who uses my CMS should know what a domain is? After working technical support for so long, I realize that yes, yes it is. The only hope you have in UI development is to dump as much user-friendliness in there as possible and pray that they can figure the rest out on their own.
This example pretty much says it all: I got an e-mail from a person using my CMS which read something like, "How do I get this thing started? I double clicked on the 'index.php' and it just opened a notepad with a whole bunch of gibberish [...] "
It's not always the IT guy's fault he's pissed off.
Latewire
I noticed this a lot at my job on a help desk. Re-route the ticket to the IT department responsible for the problem and the customer doesn't get a response for days, weeks, months, and, on a few occasions, years. The Help Desk gets the blame from the customer when this happens. A lot of the backend IT people have no customer relationship skills whatsoever because they're not required to deal with people outside of their department and there's always something more important going on (at one company, it was Diablo 2).
Comparing IT with medicine isn't a good comparison. You didn't buy your life from a doctor.
As for why IT staff don't always respect their customers, try working in support. Customers threaten you, provide you with no information, blame you for everything.
Futures traders are notorious for being assholes to get what they want. Bankers have a reputation, occasionally well earned, of looking down on their customers. Professional athletes don't care about their image. In most of the above professions, if you're not rewarded for this behavior indirectly (by not being criticized as "soft" and therefore getting paid more), acting like an ass doesn't get you fired. As for burger flippers, flight attendants and Disney employees; tough luck. Acting like an ass gets you fired, immediately. As to where IT fits, it depends entirely on the existing culture of your organization. If everyone acts like an ass, you'll probably do fine acting like an ass. But choosing not to is generally better no matter what.
-Rob
Biblical fiscal responsibility
Too many users are proud of their ignorance of technology. You don't see patients being proud of their ignorance what's going on with their body. So doctors feel venerated and act as such. Even plumbers know that their work is appreciated. Since technology works best when it works invisibly, IP workers are often met with the attitude of "what the f**k is wrong with you guys... oh, never mind... don't want to know.. just fix the damn thing". So they get trained to treat users as willful ignoramuses. That's just the nature of environment in which they work. I think it used to be better when computers had to be maintained MORE often. Their maintenance was seen as a noraml think and those who performed were seen as saving the day. So there was mutual respect.
Any guest worker system is indistinguishable from indentured servitude.
It's generally thought to be part of the reason why so few female schools students do not apply to study computer science at university ("why would I want to spend my career working in a culture like that?").
More recently I've noticed a worrying trend -- a lack of social skills has become an expected trait for programmers by a few employers (whereas most employers value social and communication skills very highly). I have recently seen job adverts in the UK that have included lines such as "the sort of person we are looking for is a geek. You probably prefer to relate to computers and have very few friends". If even a few employers are actively reinforcing the all-too-common stereotype, then that cannot be healthy for the industry.
I don't know about the rest of them, but my job description doesn't actually include hand-holding someone through computer use.
I just do that because I want my coworkers to get their jobs done well, so I do it, and I don't mind - especially if they learn something (I've got a teacher inclination). My ability with computers stems from the fact that I try to learn as much as I can about everything that I can. That's part of it.
The reason I get upset is the implicit lack of respect. Knowing how to use a computer is like learning how to drive: it's an expected part of society. You don't ask your mechanic how to drive, but people are regularly asking IT people how to use their computers. Asking the mechanic to do something like that would be disrespectful - he's not responsible for your ability to drive. It doesn't take a tradesman with a vast knowledge in his field to do it. Most five year olds can grasp basic computer operation.
If you work in a job where people didn't treat what you do with respect, how would you feel about them? It takes more patience than many people have, and they can't keep their frustrations to themselves.
Of course, if your actual job is teaching people how to use computers I could understand that you might feel differently about it, but I don't think that condition applies to most IT people.
Most jobs are to do one of these things:
1) Make computers do something they haven't done before.
2) Make computers do something that they used to do but don't do anymore.
3) Figure out the cause of condition #2.
Only a very small number of IT professionals are actually responsible for showing the users how to use their own computers, but this comes up a lot in the other jobs, and makes some of us a little testy.
Mod me down and I will become more powerful than you can possibly imagine!
Comment removed based on user account deletion
This is the biggest bunch of nonsense that I've heard in a long time. Virtually every time I try to get help from my helpdesk on anything beyond pulling a cable or rebooting a server, I'm told that they can't help me, even when what I'm trying to do is required by policies that the IT people have put into place in the first place. My favorite reason for not helping is that I don't have a "supported configuration", even though I'm running name-brand hardware and software. My feeling about my IT people is that they're really great at running the network and server farms, but beyond that they don't care about their customers. The last problem I had I pushed up the management chain (outside the vendor that we hire to do the work) and was told that I was being "unprofessional" in my communications because I was pushing a customer-centric point of view. That being the case, why should our IT people get paid more when their contributions to the company are limited (or in this case, negative)? I'd be happy to support higher level of pay for them if they'd be willing to help tackle some of the real problems that their users are having.
If you don't want crime to pay, let the government run it.
The IT professionals I've come across that are rude are simply lacking in social skills and are shocked when they are told later that they are being rude or arrogant. It's down to the prevalence of Asperger's (or towards that part of the spectrum of autism). It's a natural condition. The thing is that too many companies allow geeks with no social abilities to interface to customers (directly in the case of tech support, indirectly in the case of writing UIs). It's time that the management of companies recognized the situation and had professional customer-facing technical support that came with a smile and empathy, and had professional interaction designers that realize "Error: Keyboard not connected; press F1 to continue" is not an acceptable thing to say to people.
Let's look at this from a different perspective, okay?
What would a shop owner expect as an answer from a mechanic applicant?
Owner: "What do you think of customers who know absolutely nothing about cars?"
Mechanic: "I think they'll probably cause a lot of damage to their vehicles which means we'll make a lot of money doing the repairs."
How about a dentist?
Owner: "What do you think of customers who know absolutely nothing about tooth care?"
Mechanic: "I think they'll probably cause a lot of damage to their teeth which means we'll make a lot of money doing the repairs. Do we have literature I can recommend to them?"
See? The difference is whether the USER is paying for their ignorance or the COMPANY is paying.
In the case of tech support, in most cases (unless you're a contractor/consultant) it is the company that is paying the price. It's easy to be VERY nice when you're looking at a disaster that you'll be paid a couple of thousand dollars to fix.
It's completely different when you're looking at a disaster that will require you to work 60+ hours this week
Mechanic: "Honey, I'll be home really late but I'm making at butt-load of money! We'll party this weekend."
IT Tech: "Honey, I'll be home really late. I know. No, there's nothing I can do. Yes, I know. I know."
The article seems to be equating IT with software engineering - especially when he linked "it's debatable whether IT qualifies as a profession" to a page on the professional status of software engineering.
Where I work most of our software engineers aren't in the IT department, and there are certainly a lot of IT people who don't routinely call their customers idiots, lusers, or clueless.
However, I am a UNIX sysadmin and freely admit that I willfully piss off my "customers". Yes, it's true. I deny requests that are against policies and procedures established by the business. The sad thing is that the customer is 99% of the time fully aware of the policy and are merely trying to circumvent it, often by trying the different sysadmins, especially the newer ones who are still learning.
Most often reason for me to deny a request? Failure to follow change control procedures and obtain the appropriate approvals from all stakeholders before requesting the change. Change control procedures aren't just put into place by IT - they are demanded by the business and for some systems are required by regulations. The second most often reason is that the request violates security policy or procedure.
Yet, when I deny such a request because proper procedure hasn't been followed, I get to hear about how "IT gets in the way and we could do this so much (better|faster|easier) by ourselves."
I also do evil things that inconvenience users such as requiring them to change their passwords four times a year. I personally make their life rough by setting the system to lock their account after three unsuccessful logins - and I do it on purpose. I make it so hard for the developers by not giving them accounts on the production systems, and I interfere with the ability of the QA teams to do their jobs by not giving them access to unscrubbed logs containing containing the personally identifiable information of real people using our online services.
Believe me, I've heard about what a jerk admin I am.
"Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms, and Explosives" should be a convenience store, not a government agency.
Why yes, I am.
I'm assuming from your self-richeous point of view that you take that attitude whenever dealing with IT too.
It's not self-righteous to try to get things done on behalf of my customer. I have people asking me to do things, and in turn I need the support of IT. If you don't like the fact that I'm trying to do things for my customers then you should take it up with them.
I'm sorry if that angers you, but either you want to do it yourself and should be expected to support yourself, or you want us to support it for you, and you need to use what we provide.
I don't think that you really want me doing everything myself. Seriously. In the case that I cited, I needed to connect to our corporate wireless network that requires a special cert to be on the machine. Can I do it myself? Sure, but if you're really telling me that I should do whatever I want then I'll just plug an unsecured wireless access point into the network in my office and solve the problem that way. I don't think that that's the right solution to the problem, and I'm sure that's not how my IT or security people want the problem fixed.
What I don't understand is why this has to be an "either-or" problem. Sure, IT is going to spend time fixing a problem that my configuration creates, but if they don't then I will. From a perspective of which is cheaper for the company, it's probably much less expensive for the IT department to at least be involved in helping me fix the problem than it is for me to be fixing the problem all on my own.
Did you stop to wonder why they called you "unprofessional"?
To be honest with you, the only reason that I can conclude is that they don't care about their customer. I didn't call the guy that I was talking to unprofessional because I've tried really hard to understand where IT is coming from. I understand that supporting untested configs costs them a lot of time and energy. I understand that it often costs less to push everyone into the same solution. What I would appreciate from IT is a little understanding in return. I need my IT department to understand that my job is to push the envelope and come up with new ways of doing things. It is what my customer demands.
If you don't want crime to pay, let the government run it.
_Unlocking the Clubhouse_ talks about the experience of CS undergrads at CMU. They conclude it was a "death of a thousand cuts" phenomenon. No one thing drove talented hard-working women out of the field, it was the steady drip of one problem after another. The culture was only one of the problems, but a real one. A lot of the women looked at it and figured that they'd given up parties and sleep to get into CMU, but no way were they giving up showers to become a "real" geek.
Slamming customers isn't acceptable in any other profession; doctors don't call their patients "meatbags" -- at least, not publicly.
About 15 years ago, I was jogging daily. I started having a pain in my ankle, not from an accident or anything, it just slowly started, so I stopped running, but the pain was getting worse every day, so I went to see the doctor. I get into his office, tell him the story and his response is, "Do I really need to tell you what you did to your ankle?"
That's more or less the kind of stuff this author is talking about. It happens in every profession. The fun part of the story is this: He says, "You've sprained your ankle, walk it off." Two days later I was using a crutch and the following day, two crutches. I go to see a podiatrist, tell her what happened and tell her about the first doctor. She says, "This other doctor, did he take x-rays?" "No." I reply. "I see. Did he have x-ray vision?", she asked. After x-rays, it was clear that I had torn a ligament in my ankle and was tearing a second one by walking on it.
But anyway, the point is simply it happens in every profession. It's probably a bit more exaggerated in IT, but the reasons for it, I think, are pretty obvious. First of all, many people in IT are geeks and got started early. They've always known more than others about IT stuff and they have a tendency to carry the same attitude of superiority in that area onto adulthood with them. Many probably weren't athletes or the "cool kids" in their schools and therefore have the feeling that their superiority in IT and the need for their skills is, as young adults, their time has finally come to "get even", so to speak.
Comparing this to a doctor is simply apples and oranges. To be a doctor, you need to get pretty damn good grades all through college, pass the MCAT, and then do 4 years of med school and 3-7 years of residency, depending on the specialty. Medical schools tend to look for a certain degree of maturity in candidates and if they don't have it coming in, they tend to get it as they go through. It's a completely different world than what "normal" people go through and thus, it's going to tend to produce much more mature people.
As for other fields, people tend to enter at a much lower level and tend to need maturity to move up. IT is just different. They'll take just about anyone with the skills. IT people do gain experience at their jobs, but they tend to move up faster, or they move out. Maturity usually has less to do with advancement than skill, unlike other jobs where maturity is often integral to advancement. Maturity in IT gets you into management which is where a lot of geeks don't want to go.
I seriously doubt that Asperger's is nearly as prevalent in the IT field as jackasses with bad attitudes are.
I agree with the parent totally, there is no one industry that has a monopoly of this sort of attitude, but to bring it back to the topic at hand:
Speaking as a member of this technical group, I can honestly say that there are three major groups of client. The honestly clueless, the willfully ignorant and the technically savvy.
I personally enjoy working with the honestly clueless, as they admit they don't know much, and are willing to learn the things they don't know. I don't cop abuse or arrogance from them, and we work together to solve the problem.
I also don't mind working with the technically savvy, as they often have pinpointed the problem, but don't have the access to actually fix the issue.
The willfully ignorant are the problem. They often create their own problems, and then refuse to listen to the solution. They think that they know better than the technician, which in 99% of ALL cases is simply incorrect. They are almost always abusive and condescending to technical staff, and spend much of their time not only making our lives miserable, but also putting road blocks in front of us when we try to fix things for them.
Courtesy is a two way street, and while I agree that it is lacking from the IT industry as a whole, to say that we are the only ones guilty of it is very short sighted.
Comment removed based on user account deletion
Keep telling me I'm worthless to you, see how happy I am to ask "how high?" next time you tell me to jump.
It's mainly our frustration with the people we have to admin for. I've had my share of support work. In my experience, you run into the first person you want to kill after no longer than a month, on average.
How do you feel when someone belittles your work as "pushing buttons and drinking coffee, if you're not surfing"? How do you feel when someone makes the same frigging moronic mistake after you've been there three times, showing him how it's done? How do you feel when he still claims it's your fault? How do you feel when people start fiddling with the setup who don't have a clue at all just what they're doing? How do you feel when they install software to bypass your security, sometimes even succeed only to cause a network wide problem (and blaming you)? How do you feel when someone's solution to a program being blocked by the virus scanner (because it's infected) is to turn off the scanner (and blaming you for the infection)?
I could rant on, but I guess you get the picture.
So yes, you start to hate the user. You start to belittle him, you start to be condescending, not out of spite (ok, with some users it's plainly spite), but simply because he effing is a moron. It's amazing how normal, rather intelligent people turn into bumbling fools in the presence of a computer. Just to hear them rant about that "stupid machine" and them telling you in no uncertain terms that they think you and your whole computer nonsense should be thrown out of the window.
Yes, I have shirts with certain "information" to the people around me on them, and yes, I wear them proudly. Get a friggin' clue or feel addressed.
I have a lot of patience with people who don't know. There is no shame in not knowing. There is shame in not wanting to learn. And the people who should feel the message is for them are the latter ones.
We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.