Slashdot Mirror
Getting Company Owners To Follow Their Own Rules?
techmage writes "Recently we had an issue at our small company that resulted in the loss of a lot of important data. To prevent it from happening again, we created a company-wide policy that all computers would return to IT to have their contents backed up, and the computers would be formatted and reloaded for the next user. Consistently the owners of the company break this and other policies we set up to prevent data loss, theft, etc. How do I get through to the bosses that when they break with the policies, they are potentially shooting the company in the foot?"
Explain the risks, if they choose to ignore it document that they have not returned the laptop to be backed up so that they can't try and blame you if it goes wrong and data loss does occur.
I'd ask anyone who routinely overrides your authority in the data-protection sphere to sign a form indicating something to the effect that they've been informed of these policies and the potential risks and if it all comes crashing down because they don't listen to you, it's not your fault.
The World Wide Web is dying. Soon, we shall have only the Internet.
If they do -- shut up and work around it.
Quite simply, you don't. I've worked at large banks that do not follow their own rules. IT cannot drive policy if C level executives do not want to follow the policy. If you can get auditors or examiners to force the policy to be followed, then it can work. Otherwise, IT cannot do anything. They will only be seen as chicken little and IT will lose what little standing they have at the company already.
They who have the gold make the rule.
Your responsibility is to recommend and record your recommendation, and do your job as you can.
In the end, it is "their" company, not yours. It's the way of capitalism. You don't like that? Change your job.
For what it's worth, I didn't mean any of this in sarcastic/offensive way. I am being sincere.
Flip it around and see how you would see things if you were the owner.
Fuck systemd. Fuck Redhat. Fuck Soylent, too. Wait, scratch the last one.
It's funny, every year we prepare for auditors, and all we have to do is show them that we have a policy, not that we actually follow the policy. It's really quite hilarious and yet sad at the same time. For instance, we have to show them that we are doing scans of our network looking for vulnerabilities, but all they want is a log with someones name and a date on it. They don't care what was found or that anything was done with the information that we found. They could care less. The sad thing is, the company doing the audit is a very large company. The truth is that most management could care less about policies. Password complexity? Sure, just don't assign it to the management. Screensaver locks after 10 minutes? There better be an exceptions group for the CEO and her secretary. It's really quite sickening really. It's amazing what you can get people to do for you when you're the network admin's boss' boss' boss.
You've created a policy and don't have the owner-level execs onboard?
That's failure #1 right there. Good policy making for security purposes isn't "And IT saith THUS!". Operating in this kind of vacuum gets your enforcement NO PLACE. Fast!
You have to involve these people pretty much from the get-go. This way they understand why the policy is in place and have less self-provided incentive to circumvent it.
And yes, as others have said, a small amount of "horror story" can go a long way too. But only DURING the policy creation process. Afterwards, they look at it as simple justification of an arbitrary policy.
Right now you guys haven't got a leg to stand on.
Chas - The one, the only.
THANK GOD!!!
I mean you can't make the owners do anything. They own it, it is theirs to do with as they please. They could close up shop tomorrow for no reason if they wanted. So you can't force them to do as they should. Likewise, nagging them could be a bad career move. So the best thing is a CYA. Have something that says they understand the risks of not following the policy more or less. Then, if shit does break you should be covered. They'll either realize that they made a mistake and be fine, or they'll come looking to blame you and you can pull out the document and say "We made sure to inform you of the risks and you signed off saying you understood them and that it was up to you if you chose not to follow them."
That's the best you can do.
What makes you think the owner's information should be available to you in the IT department?
It has been shown (I can't google the study right now) that people in senior management have a much higher incidence of sociopathic and psychopathic behavior than the general population. If your management insists on rules for others that they don't follow themselves, and consciously flout, they may fall into that group. In that case, keep your resume and interview skills up-to-date.
1) Thank you for trying to save me money. Your recommendations are welcome as I'm paying you for your expertise and opinions.
2) If you're going to try to have me sign something like that I'm going to have a talk with you about bureaucracy and how we can't afford a BS cover your ass mentality in a small company. You may rest assured that if I don't back up and there's a crash there are two possible results: If I'm a bad manager I'm going to come back at you and no little piece of paper will stop me from firing you (though I'd expect you would receive unemployment as it's not really for cause). If I'm a good manager I'm going to write the check to cover the damages, feel foolish and accept your recommendation going forward.
3) If it's a dumbass relative that thinks they can ignore the rules because they're family working in a family business (and they don't sign the checks) then I expect to see their name (and possibly mine if I'm doing it too) on the report of IT security scofflaws that you periodically (though infrequently) prepare for me.
In a company controlled by a single or few owners it is reasonable to recommend, cajole, suggest or encourage proper owner behavior, but if you dictate it and attempt to threaten (for instance by saying in a confrontational manner 'ok, but I'm not taking responsibility then') you are writing checks that your expertise may not be able to cash. As an owner it's important that my IT works right, but it's absolutely imperative that I don't lose control of the company. Don't make me think that you're trying to take it away from me or lord your technical expertise over me unless you have a VERY secure position.
You know the knobs driving around your city right now with one hand on the wheel and a cellphone in the other? Imagine them in the air...
Reboot macht Frei.
"The owners may want to do that if the computers were used for storing some confidential information. Such a backup cannot be stored on your shelf among books and other assorted DVDs. If the owners know what they are doing, they perform backup of those computers themselves, and keep the media at home"
That's a very good point, it's quite likely that the owners know exactly what they are doing and why they are doing it. You won't get far in business by blindly trusting everyone who works for you.
And did you exchange a walk on part in the war for a lead role in a cage? - Pink Floyd.