Slashdot Mirror


Ask Slashdot: What's the Best Way to Retrain Old IT Workers?

A medium-sized company just hired a new IT manager who wants advice from the Slashdot community about their two remaining IT "gofers": These people have literally been here their entire "careers" and are now near retirement. Quite honestly, they do not have any experience other than reinstalling Windows, binding something to the domain and the occasional driver installation -- and are more than willing to admit this. Given many people are now using Macs and most servers/workstations are running Linux, they have literally lost complete control over the company, with most of these machines sitting around completely unmanaged.

Firing these people is nearly impossible. (They have a lot of goodwill within other departments, and they have quite literally worked there for more than 60 years combined.) So I've been tasked with attempting to retrain these people in the next six months. Given they still have to do work (imaging computers and fixing basic issues), what are the best ways of retraining them into basic network, Windows, Mac, Linux, and "cloud" first-level help desk support?

Monster_user had some suggestions -- for example, "Don't overtrain. Select and target areas where they will be able to provide a strong impact." Any other good advice?

Leave your best answers in the comments. What's the best way to retrain old IT workers?

7 of 343 comments (clear)

  1. For crying out loud by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Interesting

    If two employees haven't been used effectively for the entirety of their careers, whose fault is that -- theirs, or management's? YOU owe THEM for sticking around through decades of shitty leadership.

  2. Values by Bongo · · Score: 4, Interesting

    A thing with people that's often overlooked is that different people have different values. The main ones are

    traditional authoritarian
    individualistic achiever
    egalitarian community
    and systemic integrative [1]

    For example, the traditional mindset is happy so long as there is a hierarchy which is dictating what needs doing, with a sense of loyalty and appreciation. So change for change's sake is not welcome, but change in the context of stability and loyalty, can be welcome. The core point is, safety and loyalty and conforming to the norms.

    Whereas, the individualistic achiever is happier being able to do independently driven, the typical "modern thinker", the self-made man, etc. Here you might be more concerned with, asking people what do they want? Where do they want to go with this job? What are their interested? What do they personally want to develop? And then just letting them get on with developing any opportunity which appeals to them and which is useful for the company.

    The egalitarian community type is motivated somewhat differently to the first two. This is anti-hierarchy and is looking more for meaning and purpose in the job. This person want to work for a charity which is devoted to a good humanitarian cause. They have a need for personal meaning and a sense of being equally valued as everyone else. Their own voice matters. The group is important, and so it is about helping people to voice their own experience and do so in a way which helps them relate to the group more, in a more meaningful way.

    So that's three main "values" and there is one more crucial point: people's values change over decades. So you might find that, people who were happy in the same job doing the same standard thing for 30 years -- which would suit them if they were traditional authoritarian ie. they valued stability and being told what to do -- may by now be in the achiever value or the egalitarian value, simply because as individuals, they grew as people and now have new needs.

    So part of retraining isn't just swapping out one set of work tasks for another -- that may be done perfectly well, yet kinda fail -- because as a person one may now wish for a different kind of expression of values in their work, and in their training.

    Another way to out this is that as people grow they tend to become more complex and have more complex aspirations.

    Actually my reason for writing this is that the article description suggests that the "problem" is how to deal with people who seem stuck in old patterns and unable to change... so I thought it worth mentioning that the people may have indeed changed... they have become more complex individuals, but the work itself hadn't changed... so the opportunity here is to tap into whatever new complexities these individuals may now be capable of. Older may well mean wiser.

  3. Domain knowledge is sometimes more important by MrDozR · · Score: 5, Interesting

    We had a not too similar situation when we decommissioned our old COBOL system. The developers were of more mature years (50+), but instead of just letting them go, they were moved into more of a BA role. They have a lot of domain knowledge built up from years of working on a monolithic system, it transferred quite well to doing business analysis and converting it into specs for devs on the new tech. They also had better people skills than green devs, which is rather important when trying to understand WTF the business wants or means

  4. Use their expertise by Opportunist · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Old workers in mid/large companies have one incredibly useful superpower: They know people and their quirks, and they know processes better than SAP and process managers combined (especially how those processes really run, not just what's on paper) and more importantly, they know how to bypass them. They know how to cut the red tape and who to talk to to get on the fastpass for resources. They can sit down with some other old fart in another department, have a cup of coffee and get a "free" test machine for you, they know the people who know where hardware is being hoarded that isn't used (and can be put to good use). And so on.

    We had one such "old guy" in our team. His knowledge was dated and we mostly needed him for the ancient servers that we just couldn't turn off yet but aside of that, he was incredibly valuable whenever we needed something and couldn't go the formal way (or when we didn't have the time to wait for official channels to clear). When he retired, we lost our main source for "free" hardware, quick access and useful "connections" to other departments. He was also very useful in deadlocked meetings where he could take someone he knew personally from another department aside, ask for the real reason why they're stalling (or give him the hint why we have to) and they could hash out an "informal" solution together that both sides can work with. Saved us literally weeks of pointless meetings.

    Yes, such people are poison and bane for process managers, but they're a boon for your department, especially if you're drowning in bureaucracy.

    --
    We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
  5. Buy them out? by bromoseltzer · · Score: 3, Interesting

    If they are close to retirement, the easiest and friendliest course might be to give them a buyout -- early retirement with a substantial bonus and a gold watch. Company politics may be against that, but you could make the case to management that they would be ahead over the next few years if they take this course, considering the new (and yes cheaper) talent that would replace them.

    --
    Fiat Lux.
  6. Re:What's the point? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Interesting

    Or, the company made a poorly managed bullshit switch without any thought to training its infrastructure workers.

    The problem isn't the workers, it's gaslighting fuckturds like the "anonymous coward" who blames the workers rather than whatever fucktarded managers/CEO types ordered a shift without planning anything for worker training on it.

  7. Calling Bullshit by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Ya...I am very skeptical that these people had been there for 30 years each and didn't learn anything except installing drivers and Windows reinstall.

    More likely the Tool that submitting the question has no real clue as to what they do.

    "Reinstalling windows" Does he mean creating standard images that include the latest patches, implement company policies regarding installed software, access rights, etc and then loading that image on new computers and refreshing older computers? Not to mention periodic patching, etc.

    Maybe these are the guys who people know they can call when something stops working. And when customers say they need help with X, these guys know what X is and know how to fix it.

    Desktop support is the Red Headed stepchild of he information industry, but with out it, especially in a company with strict standards, you are doomed to be spending all your time addressing hose issues instead of your precious scripts trying to cram as much functionality as you can into one line of unsupportable code.

    Ya... I be the submitter is just another asshole management puke who brings preconceptions and bias to his job.

    In other words, a shitty manager.