July 9, 2012 at 11:13 am
The idea is that you want to prove you have value to the company, whatever your position. Make sure they see you as valuable, or I would advise you move on.
I totally agree. I once had a IT Director say in a very large meeting "I'm not sure what our DBA's do here." I could not let that go, and I immediately replied, but respectively. "Well sir, if you attended our Change Control meetings every week you would definitely find out. You get the invitation in Outlook every week.." The moral of the story is don't say things about the DBA's if you don't know or care what they do for you.:-D
"Technology is a weird thing. It brings you great gifts with one hand, and it stabs you in the back with the other. ...:-D"
July 9, 2012 at 11:38 am
If your employer doesn't know what you do and why they pay you then you have already lost the battle. Get out while the getting is good.
Cheers
July 9, 2012 at 2:54 pm
jfogel (7/9/2012)
If your employer doesn't know what you do and why they pay you then you have already lost the battle. Get out while the getting is good.
It's also time to educate that employer on what you do.
Jason...AKA CirqueDeSQLeil
_______________________________________________
I have given a name to my pain...MCM SQL Server, MVP
SQL RNNR
Posting Performance Based Questions - Gail Shaw[/url]
Learn Extended Events
July 9, 2012 at 5:11 pm
TravisDBA (7/9/2012)
The idea is that you want to prove you have value to the company, whatever your position. Make sure they see you as valuable, or I would advise you move on.
I totally agree. I once had a IT Director say in a very large meeting "I'm not sure what our DBA's do here." I could not let that go, and I immediately replied, but respectively. "Well sir, if you attended our Change Control meetings every week you would definitely find out. You get the invitation in Outlook every week.." The moral of the story is don't say things about the DBA's if you don't know or care what they do for you.:-D
Be careful what you ask for. You could end up writing a weekly report, instead.
--Jeff Moden
Change is inevitable... Change for the better is not.
July 10, 2012 at 6:41 am
TravisDBA (7/9/2012)
The idea is that you want to prove you have value to the company, whatever your position. Make sure they see you as valuable, or I would advise you move on.
I totally agree. I once had a IT Director say in a very large meeting "I'm not sure what our DBA's do here." I could not let that go, and I immediately replied, but respectively. "Well sir, if you attended our Change Control meetings every week you would definitely find out. You get the invitation in Outlook every week.." The moral of the story is don't say things about the DBA's if you don't know or care what they do for you.:-D
You need to take two or three weeks off from work, and then your IT Director will know exactly what it is you do.
"Do not seek to follow in the footsteps of the wise. Instead, seek what they sought." - Matsuo Basho
July 10, 2012 at 7:51 am
That's correct. They never appreciate a DBA until disaster strikes. Also, on the topic of telling them what I do, that's not my job to tell the Director what I do. It's his job as Director of Operations to KNOW what I do and the protection I provide to his multi-million dollar business daily. If they don't have their data they don't have doodly squat. Like jfogel said, basically, if they are too lazy to find that out for themselves what you do and provide then you are better off leaving in the long run. 😀
"Technology is a weird thing. It brings you great gifts with one hand, and it stabs you in the back with the other. ...:-D"
July 10, 2012 at 2:51 pm
Eric M Russell (7/10/2012)
TravisDBA (7/9/2012)
The idea is that you want to prove you have value to the company, whatever your position. Make sure they see you as valuable, or I would advise you move on.
I totally agree. I once had a IT Director say in a very large meeting "I'm not sure what our DBA's do here." I could not let that go, and I immediately replied, but respectively. "Well sir, if you attended our Change Control meetings every week you would definitely find out. You get the invitation in Outlook every week.." The moral of the story is don't say things about the DBA's if you don't know or care what they do for you.:-D
You need to take two or three weeks off from work, and then your IT Director will know exactly what it is you do.
I don't understand. What does it mean when you say "take time off from work"?
Let's see, over the past two years I have had to exit waiting lines at Disney so I could handle issues, I have had to pull my kids out of a play area at another vacation spot to handle an issue, I have been on field trips taking calls on a bus filled with kids yelling and screaming, and being told I need to find a quieter place to call from.
Seriously, especially in today's economic mess created by our so called governmental leaders, employers seem even less interested in whether your vacation is actually a vacation or not. I know I am not unique in my experience.
Dave
Dave
July 10, 2012 at 3:12 pm
djackson 22568 (7/10/2012)
Eric M Russell (7/10/2012)
TravisDBA (7/9/2012)
The idea is that you want to prove you have value to the company, whatever your position. Make sure they see you as valuable, or I would advise you move on.
I totally agree. I once had a IT Director say in a very large meeting "I'm not sure what our DBA's do here." I could not let that go, and I immediately replied, but respectively. "Well sir, if you attended our Change Control meetings every week you would definitely find out. You get the invitation in Outlook every week.." The moral of the story is don't say things about the DBA's if you don't know or care what they do for you.:-D
You need to take two or three weeks off from work, and then your IT Director will know exactly what it is you do.
I don't understand. What does it mean when you say "take time off from work"?
Let's see, over the past two years I have had to exit waiting lines at Disney so I could handle issues, I have had to pull my kids out of a play area at another vacation spot to handle an issue, I have been on field trips taking calls on a bus filled with kids yelling and screaming, and being told I need to find a quieter place to call from.
Seriously, especially in today's economic mess created by our so called governmental leaders, employers seem even less interested in whether your vacation is actually a vacation or not. I know I am not unique in my experience.
Dave
Right, and when you reply to all those emergency requests, I hope you remember to copy your boss, so he knows that issues get resolved during your vacation... only because your vacation gets intrerrupted. If you were to really drop off the map while on vacation, maybe spend a couple of weeks on the Appalachian Trail or in a Buddhist temple, then your boss would truely appreciate what it is you do. He'd be a fool to hold it against you.
"Do not seek to follow in the footsteps of the wise. Instead, seek what they sought." - Matsuo Basho
July 14, 2012 at 3:04 pm
Steve Jones - SSC Editor (7/9/2012)
djackson 22568 (7/9/2012)
I agree with the point that I believe you were intending to make. No arguments whatsoever.
...
Good points, and I won't argue with you on this. There are any number of managers who do think the DBA is a tax and shouldn't be paid. They are happy to get by with less. Nothing to be done there, except to prove you're an asset, not an expense.
Yes, I think that happens. Unless the DBA (or anyone else for that matter) directly produce whatever it is that company/organization sells or produces, then that person is seen as a liability rather than an asset.
Rod
July 16, 2012 at 7:27 am
Doctor Who 2 (7/14/2012)
Steve Jones - SSC Editor (7/9/2012)
djackson 22568 (7/9/2012)
I agree with the point that I believe you were intending to make. No arguments whatsoever.
...
Good points, and I won't argue with you on this. There are any number of managers who do think the DBA is a tax and shouldn't be paid. They are happy to get by with less. Nothing to be done there, except to prove you're an asset, not an expense.
Yes, I think that happens. Unless the DBA (or anyone else for that matter) directly produce whatever it is that company/organization sells or produces, then that person is seen as a liability rather than an asset.
If the DBA's daily routine consist almost entirely with monitoring jobs, troubleshooting, and performing manual tasks that could be automated, then I can see why the executive management would (perhaps mistakingly) believe that the DBA is an unnecessary expense, especially if the DBA is locked away in the server room and not visible at meetings that include management. In all honesty, those type of tasks could be automated or outsourced to a 3rd party.
"Do not seek to follow in the footsteps of the wise. Instead, seek what they sought." - Matsuo Basho
July 16, 2012 at 7:49 am
Eric M Russell (7/16/2012)
Doctor Who 2 (7/14/2012)
Steve Jones - SSC Editor (7/9/2012)
djackson 22568 (7/9/2012)
I agree with the point that I believe you were intending to make. No arguments whatsoever.
...
Good points, and I won't argue with you on this. There are any number of managers who do think the DBA is a tax and shouldn't be paid. They are happy to get by with less. Nothing to be done there, except to prove you're an asset, not an expense.
Yes, I think that happens. Unless the DBA (or anyone else for that matter) directly produce whatever it is that company/organization sells or produces, then that person is seen as a liability rather than an asset.
If the DBA's daily routine consist almost entirely with monitoring jobs, troubleshooting, and performing manual tasks that could be automated, then I can see why the executive management would (perhaps mistakingly) believe that the DBA is an unnecessary expense, especially if the DBA is locked away in the server room and not visible at meetings that include management. In all honesty, those type of tasks could be automated or outsourced to a 3rd party.
<rant on>
Holy crap Batman! This is the main reason our country is so screwed right now. "Just out source it, nobody does anything important!" We have outsourced our own missile programming to our enemies! When will it end! Just because something can be done does not mean it should be done.
As to automation - I do the same job that is done at similar companies where those companies the same size have anywhere between 5-10 people doing the same job. I used to do purchasing, and similarly sized competitors had 4 times OR MORE as many people doing the same job. Automation I get. I automate things in my sleep! A coworker used to spend 8 hours a week doing a task that I wrote a script to handle - it takes 5 minutes a week now. They didn't have time to write it. (Huh? We will ignore their obvious ignorance.)
As to outsourcing - What happens when something goes wrong, when automation sends you an alert that something failed? Good luck getting that guy in India or China to fix it! They are sleeping right now. Good luck getting them to understand the issue, most of their companies don't train any better than any other company. There are very good technical people all over the world, they just don't tend to work for the kind of companies that focus on taking away "simpler jobs". Why would they. I am NOT disparaging people from other countries. I have worked with a large number of foreign workers. Probably 80% or so were absolutely outstanding workers, very intelligent, able to communicate. Some of those were among the most brilliant people I have ever met! The other 20% were just like the 20% of poor workers we have here. Summary - foreign workers are no different than domestic workers except you pay them less, they have no committment to our country or organization, and in fact are frequently working against us to help their country. Studies have shown that outsourcing costs companies more money than it saves, sometimes even when the outsourcing is done to other domestic companies.
<rant off>
I am positive you were making a point that does not deserve the rant above, so I put it in rant tags in the hopes you would understand I am attacking the situation, not the person.
What is the issue here? Management. They are too willing to simply cut expenses without looking at why they spend money on something. They need to understand that you have to employ a lot of people in cost centers to run the company, so those people in revenue generating areas have the support they need to actually obtain any revenue.
Dave
July 16, 2012 at 8:10 am
djackson 22568 (7/16/2012)
. . .
I am positive you were making a point that does not deserve the rant above, so I put it in rant tags in the hopes you would understand I am attacking the situation, not the person.
What is the issue here? Management. They are too willing to simply cut expenses without looking at why they spend money on something. They need to understand that you have to employ a lot of people in cost centers to run the company, so those people in revenue generating areas have the support they need to actually obtain any revenue.
True, my main point was that executive management is often clueless about how vital a DBA is to keeping the IT department running. However, I also believe that many DBA positions actually could be outsouced. Notice I said "outsourced" not "offshored". Outsourcing could simply be a local independent contractor or 24x7 DBA support company (based in the US) who monitors the organization's databases remotely. Many organizations simply don't need a full-time DBA to keep a seat warm in their server room. Many organization don't even need a server room or even an onsite server for that matter.
I also beleive that a SQL Server DBA has to also know SQL and the Microsoft BI stack to remain employable.
"Do not seek to follow in the footsteps of the wise. Instead, seek what they sought." - Matsuo Basho
July 16, 2012 at 8:46 am
Eric M Russell (7/16/2012)
djackson 22568 (7/16/2012)
. . .
I am positive you were making a point that does not deserve the rant above, so I put it in rant tags in the hopes you would understand I am attacking the situation, not the person.
What is the issue here? Management. They are too willing to simply cut expenses without looking at why they spend money on something. They need to understand that you have to employ a lot of people in cost centers to run the company, so those people in revenue generating areas have the support they need to actually obtain any revenue.
True, my main point was that executive management is often clueless about how vital a DBA is to keeping the IT department running. However, I also believe that many DBA positions actually could be outsouced. Notice I said "outsourced" not "offshored". Outsourcing could simply be a local independent contractor or 24x7 DBA support company (based in the US) who monitors the organization's databases remotely. Many organizations simply don't need a full-time DBA to keep a seat warm in their server room. Many organization don't even need a server room or even an onsite server for that matter.
I also beleive that a SQL Server DBA has to also know SQL and the Microsoft BI stack to remain employable.
There are companies that are small enough that they might benefit from this. What is bothersome is the larger companies that think they can save money.
Simple logic will show that if both the company doing the outsourcing and the provider employ comparable quality people doing the same job, the cost of the employee should be the same. We will ignore minor differences. Then you must add in the profit motive. Nobody does anything for free. Granted I am ignoring economies of scale at the provider, but I don't believe they exist nearly to the degree they are sold at. We have looked at outsourcing a large number of systems, and in every case it was far more expensive.
If I have one database, and it takes me 5% of my day to manage it, outsourcing may be a good idea. If I have 100 databases...
I appreciate you reading my rant in the manner in which it was offered, and I am happy I did not annoy you or cause you any angst!
Dave
Dave
July 16, 2012 at 10:16 am
djackson 22568 (7/16/2012)
Eric M Russell (7/16/2012)
djackson 22568 (7/16/2012)
. . .
I am positive you were making a point that does not deserve the rant above, so I put it in rant tags in the hopes you would understand I am attacking the situation, not the person.
What is the issue here? Management. They are too willing to simply cut expenses without looking at why they spend money on something. They need to understand that you have to employ a lot of people in cost centers to run the company, so those people in revenue generating areas have the support they need to actually obtain any revenue.
True, my main point was that executive management is often clueless about how vital a DBA is to keeping the IT department running. However, I also believe that many DBA positions actually could be outsouced. Notice I said "outsourced" not "offshored". Outsourcing could simply be a local independent contractor or 24x7 DBA support company (based in the US) who monitors the organization's databases remotely. Many organizations simply don't need a full-time DBA to keep a seat warm in their server room. Many organization don't even need a server room or even an onsite server for that matter.
I also beleive that a SQL Server DBA has to also know SQL and the Microsoft BI stack to remain employable.
There are companies that are small enough that they might benefit from this. What is bothersome is the larger companies that think they can save money.
Simple logic will show that if both the company doing the outsourcing and the provider employ comparable quality people doing the same job, the cost of the employee should be the same. We will ignore minor differences. Then you must add in the profit motive. Nobody does anything for free. Granted I am ignoring economies of scale at the provider, but I don't believe they exist nearly to the degree they are sold at. We have looked at outsourcing a large number of systems, and in every case it was far more expensive.
If I have one database, and it takes me 5% of my day to manage it, outsourcing may be a good idea. If I have 100 databases...
I appreciate you reading my rant in the manner in which it was offered, and I am happy I did not annoy you or cause you any angst!
Dave
Well, there is one more dimension to this problem.
What if you outsource and build a facility in a place where labor is cheap, but lots of other companies do the same and the local price of qualified labor goes up and up? And you are locked in a 20 year agreement?
This is not a speculation, this has been happening and that is one of the reasons why the enthusiasm for outsourcing is ebbing off.
July 16, 2012 at 6:01 pm
Loved the article! Over the years I have found that the more we expose data, and the better understood the data is the more data is required and the higher the quality the better. As long as there is a need to make information out of the data artifacts we collect there will be an increasing need for professionals who can clean, prep, and show that data.
We are not a tax, nor a luxury but a business necessity.
M.
Not all gray hairs are Dinosaurs!
Viewing 15 posts - 16 through 30 (of 44 total)
You must be logged in to reply to this topic. Login to reply