|
[Study Article]
When I read the article above, its typical and make my eyes roll. Execs don't trust their internal IT, but when they go ahead and acquired a solution from 3rd party, 91% of them are useless. One thing comes to mind, most executives don't invested enough in their own organization.
|
|
|
|
|
Good news for consultants! 
"Go forth into the source" - Neal Morse
|
|
|
|
|
|
Same one. I just didn't see it.
|
|
|
|
|
I have a lengthy reply sitting on my computer at home that I have to finish. Basically, that survey is a very interesting mess.
- execs believe their IT doesn't have the skills, training, resources
- execs believe that whether developed in-house or 3rd party, the user experience sucks
- execs say IT, marketing, sales, and support have no idea how to market and support their mobile apps
Like the saying goes - when you point your finger at someone, you've got 3 fingers (thumb doesn't count) pointing back at you.
Just goes to prove what I've always known - execs are high paid but useless.
Marc
Latest Article - Create a Dockerized Python Fiddle Web App
Learning to code with python is like learning to swim with those little arm floaties. It gives you undeserved confidence and will eventually drown you. - DangerBunny
Artificial intelligence is the only remedy for natural stupidity. - CDP1802
|
|
|
|
|
LOL.
|
|
|
|
|
already posted here[^]
#SupportHeForShe
Government can give you nothing but what it takes from somebody else. A government big enough to give you everything you want is big enough to take everything you've got, including your freedom.-Ezra Taft Benson
You must accept 1 of 2 basic premises: Either we are alone in the universe or we are not alone. Either way, the implications are staggering!-Wernher von Braun
|
|
|
|
|
I didn't read the article, but I totally agree with the lack of trust in the industry. A job is like being married. A great marriage takes two people that need to communicate with each other. Same for business. The business and tech needs to communicate. A bad exec won't. And a bad tech person won't. Unfortunately there are a lot of people in tech who are in tech due to social anxiety issues. And there ain't go good communication that can be found from that typically.
Remember, businesses have no idea about tech. Zippo. So it's up to us to convey to them accurately what's what and do so in a way that doesn't bore them. Most C-level execs I know don't care about the details, they just want to understand the big picture. And that never gets conveyed.
Just my two cents.
Jeremy Falcon
|
|
|
|
|
It has been my experience that...
You don't trust what you don't understand.
Most execs do not understand IT, therefore, they do not trust IT. This will always be the case.
Simples.
|
|
|
|
|
Well said. 
"the debugger doesn't tell me anything because this code compiles just fine" - random QA comment
"Facebook is where you tell lies to your friends. Twitter is where you tell the truth to strangers." - chriselst
"I don't drink any more... then again, I don't drink any less." - Mike Mullikins uncle
|
|
|
|
|
Totally agree. Just to play devil's advocate though I'd say the same is true of tech though with not trusting or understanding the business side.
Jeremy Falcon
|
|
|
|
|
We don't need no stinkin' business side!
Coding is art.
Coding is love.
A pity we waste so much of it on users
| Ravings en masse^ |
|---|
| "The difference between genius and stupidity is that genius has its limits." - Albert Einstein | | "If you are searching for perfection in others, then you seek disappointment. If you are seek perfection in yourself, then you will find failure." - Balboos HaGadol Mar 2010 |
|
|
|
|
|
Jeremy Falcon
|
|
|
|
|
Jeremy Falcon wrote: the same is true of tech though with not trusting or understanding the business side.
I agree with this statement.
|
|
|
|
|
Unfortunately, the converse is also true... People don't trust what they _do_ understand.
They believe that some big corporation (MS, Oracle, CA) must produce better/more reliable products than someone they actually know and can speak with.
I can explain to my boss exactly how my code works and handles the unexpected, but he'll still prefer to buy something that doesn't do quite what he needs and requires six months to fix a bug or a add feature.
|
|
|
|
|
PIEBALDconsult wrote: but he'll still prefer to buy something that doesn't do quite what he needs
I never understood this behavior either.
We all are guilty of purchasing products that only gives us service for a small percentage of what we need, if that. The rest is wasted and hardly ever needed.
i.e. MS Word or Excel. I hardly use ALL of its features, ever, yet I have to buy the whole damn thing to get it. Now it is not very expensive these days and you do have cheaper products from other vendors, but most of them suffer from the same software design flaws.
I say all software should be Base+. You purchase the base software and pay for additional plugins, etc.
Anyhow, I digress.
|
|
|
|
|
Execs don't trust internal IT
I could have told you that without a study.
If it's not broken, fix it until it is.
Everything makes sense in someone's mind.
Ya can't fix stupid.
|
|
|
|
|
Yeah, but the word "study" makes it sound all scientific-y. And we loves our scientific-y sounding stuff.
Jeremy Falcon
|
|
|
|
|
I don't know, I think there's something to this. I mean look at your day-to-day; how much do you trust the people that you work with? If you're very lucky, your management vets every candidate so carefully that only the competent get through; but in my normal experience the people that work in IT are often wholly unprepared for the scope or environment before taking a position. I don't know if this is simply due to the prevalence of the canned technical interview or what; I just know that I've seen it more than once.
Article like this always remind me of an essay that Robert Martin wrote a couple of years ago about how programmers are an aggregation of individuals rather than members of a profession. Love him or hate him, Uncle Bob makes a point here that is very relevant to management perception of developers and IT guys in general. We are not licenced, bonded, insured, or regulated. There is no clear path that any of us have taken that can be reasonably assumed to be a professional template at this point. There's a certain Wild West feel to that which is nice and all, but doesn't do the perception of the discipline any favors.
The final piece of this puzzle is performance. Management is distrusting of internal IT often because they've set expectations that haven't been met. Now for in-house development, this often derives from unrealistic budgetary, personnel, and time constraints; but I would definitely argue that the lack of a professional standard is a major driver for any unrealistic expectations.
"There are three kinds of lies: lies, damned lies and statistics."
- Benjamin Disraeli
|
|
|
|
|
![Rose | [Rose]](https://codeproject.global.ssl.fastly.net/script/Forums/Images/rose.gif)
He played Chuck Yeager in "The Right Stuff" (one of my favorite movies).
Whenever you find yourself on the side of the majority, it is time to pause and reflect. ~ Mark Twain
|
|
|
|
|
He was the third one... [^]
- I would love to change the world, but they won’t give me the source code.
|
|
|
|
|
I got an email today: "Sander, can you mail said documents to John so he can test if the format is okay?"
I don't know John, but he is in the "To" field of the email as well, so I reply to all and send a mail with said document.
John's reply: "Hi Sander, what am I supposed to do with this?"
What the hell, maybe read your manager's mail right underneath mine and do as he says, test the document.
Me: "Hi John, I understood you were to test the format of this document."
John: "That's not my department, I know nothing of this file."
Well that's nice
I send an email to who I guess is the correct person based on past experiences 
|
|
|
|
|
Sander Rossel wrote: I got an email today: "Sander, can you mail said documents to John so he can test if the format is okay?"
I don't know John, but he is in the "To" field of the email as well, so I reply to all and send a mail with said document.
John's reply: "Hi Sander, what am I supposed to do with this?"
What the hell, maybe read your manager's mail right underneath mine and do as he says, test the document.
Manager opens outlook, starts writing a mail. Goes to the adres-book, types "John", selects the first one that comes up.
Trust is good. Validating is better.
Bastard Programmer from Hell 
If you can't read my code, try converting it here[^]
|
|
|
|
|
The actual guy's name isn't even close to "John"
|
|
|
|
|
insert random person here?
Bastard Programmer from Hell
If you can't read my code, try converting it here[^]
|
|
|
|
General 
News 
Suggestion 
Question 
Bug 
Answer 
Joke 
Praise 
Rant 
Admin 
Submit an article or tip
