How to succeed with your IT department
marcusblankenship.com
marcusblankenship.com
He's right that IT consists of people too, and not automatons. It's not through sheer malice that we don't answer your support tickets, it's because there's 100 other support tickets also up in the air. There's very few IT people dedicated to projects, most of us have to mix our projects with the cries for help. The more interrupts we get, the harder it is to do productive work.
On the subject of tickets, the thing that will earn you IT gratitude is to file good tickets. The difference between "I'm getting X when I do Y" and "Is Y broken?" is immense. I explained it once to a user that if you went to the auto mechanic with "My car makes a noise", they'll be more than happy to find your noise, and they'll charge you for the time they spent finding it. If you add just a little bit more detail, they can get you on your way faster. The only difference is that you're not paying me out of pocket like you would the mechanic, so you can't tell how much time I spend tracking down nothing.
If you make it easy to work with IT, we'll make it easy to work with you. We want to work together, not against each other. If you're constantly demanding, not making clear requests, changing requirements, or dropping bureaucracy on us, then we'll concentrate our limited time on other projects with higher ROI unless there's been some kind of edict from above. With Marcus's Scott example, we want to work on his projects since they historically demonstrate high ROI. It's a win-win all around (Scott, the IT guy, and the business).
However, I think many non-technical people (and let's be honest, they are the ones causing a lot of the issues) simply assume that "the computer guys know what's going on" because they just assume it's all magic anyway. The idea that we aren't wizards and actually have to figure stuff out may not even occur to them.
That, and some people are just dicks.
I haven't found the perfect answer, other than refusing to work on the ticket until more detail is provided (of course, sending them a nice note asking them to explain more).
Maybe in the ticketing system you could have 2 explicit text fields, "What are you seeing?" and "When do you see it?". The what are you seeing could let them type or upload a screenshot, since people like sending screenshots.
1. What did you do? 2. What did you expect? 3. What happened instead?
Just these three questions really help focus the task of entering a problem ticket.
Writing a good problem description takes time, but in my experience it almost always pays off.
Another thing I learned over the years: I also always try to ensure that I have only one ticket open for a given issue. This takes effort, especially when (first level) support is payed per ticket, but multiple tickets too often lead to chaos.
Always ask for the ticket number when you file a ticket, always first tell the ticket number in subsequent requests and insist that they add to the original ticket instead of opening a new one. Helped me a lot.
lol ;-)
First, it doesn't solve the underlying root problems for everyone, it just gets someone special attention. It's a workaround, not a solution.
Second, you should strive to have good professional relationships with everyone in your company. The odds are high that even if you work with thousands of people, you really only work with a tribe's worth in any given year. Take the time to get to know all of them. It's much more valuable in terms of building cross-connections and sharing insights than it is in terms of cronyism and special favors.
Nowhere did I see suggestion for a change in how projects are communicated, which I would assume is the #1 issue.
Among other things, it means that issues with that manager's jobs get taken directly to him, rather than ran up past another layer of management, with the resulting extra sugar coating.
If you're only doing this to get better service, stop doing it. That's an douchebag move.
Hmm... maybe I need to add that to the post! ;-)
But... the whole point of the article is how to get better service from your IT department.
Here is what you can do: understand your needs, communicate them clearly and have realistic goals. That's it.
Everyone should try to be friendly and professional, and clearly being rude won't win you any favors, but you shouldn't get moved to the front of the line because you stopped by to talk about last nights game or how my kids are doing. That's not a solution that can scale.
My have tremendous fondness for people that work in Corporate IT. I've worked there in the lowest levels, managed them, protected them, fought for them, and ultimately have seen that the larger system at play works against them. I believe they are usually the smartest, hardest-working, most creative, most driven people in the company.
I should have set the context of my comments for those working within dysfunctional companies where IT is at the bottom of the pecking order. In my experience, this is when the need for strong relationships will go the farthest.
If things in an IT org are great, professionalism is key. Otherwise, I stand by the idea that being nice is more important than being clear.
How to work with IT: Communicate your needs properly and get buy in from people who write the checks. Make it so your IT staff only has to solve technology problems not political ones.
I think the advice in here is solid and is something that's been forgotten by too many. While the "jocks" in high school were getting this right, the "nerds" never had to learn. This is great advice for those of us where it doesn't come naturally.
Are you really saying that people with disrespectful and derisive attitudes don't bother you, and you do your best work for them?
To restate my point: While you shouldn't be a jerk, friendship as described in the article is unnecessary. Clarity is more important, and often lacking.
Yet the rest of the piece is clearly sincere. Perhaps that just goes to show how wide the chasm is.
And do you want people to perform their job for you, or do want them to care about the quality and outcomes of the work? I want the second, not the first...
I have such a person in my own job. She's perfectly capable, but she gives zero fucks and is happy to let it pile up until someone orders her to do her job.
My remedy? Show up, in person, with the request form in my hand and say hi. Chat with her, ask about her day, etc. She deals with idiots on the phone all day faxing things and then calling ten minutes later complaining that they aren't done. By showing up and chatting, I get my work pushed straight up to the top of the queue.
Personally, I wish that I could fax my stuff in and get my response back promptly. Instead, I make do with what I have.
Unfortunately, this leads to my boss calling her my girlfriend and joking about the hot steamy affair I'm having whenever I go over to her office.
Sorry, I'm a person, not a robot (who likes donuts and coffee if you can spare it). I do my job and do it damn well, but I'll make time for you if you treat me nicer. I might even work evenings and weekends, but that might require steak and beer.
So yes, it was a problem for the losers in the equation.
Shocking.