September 21, 2009 at 12:34 pm
I'm not sure it's the role that has changed so much - more people having the job title DBA who clearly are not. Whilst the breadth of SQL Server has certainly grown since SQL 6.0 when I started ( or Ingres if we if I include prior to sql server ) I still figure I do much the same as I did before - and to be honest I can't think of a job title which covers it better than DBA ( and it's simple to the point title, although I do sometime prefix it with development/production to satisfy those who think the roles don't overlap.
( not forgetting Grumpy of course !! )
[font="Comic Sans MS"]The GrumpyOldDBA[/font]
www.grumpyolddba.co.uk
http://sqlblogcasts.com/blogs/grumpyolddba/
September 21, 2009 at 12:41 pm
Thanks, Bill.
I'd be happy to write something, but wouldn't know where to begin.
It's a matter of knowing the basics, and I'd need some help in figuring out how to present the concepts in a useful way (instead of the ramblings of an old man).
I'm thinking that the problem I perceive can be blamed on the educational system that seems to focus on specific skills as opposed to foundation concepts. This gets their students through their certification exams because they now know which command to use to make abc do xyz, but they do NOT know WHEN to do it.
As I wrote in my PM to you, I believe that once you know (understand) 3 of something (language, database, communications protocol) you pretty much can handle anything thrown in that ballpark. Heck - it applies to almost anything. If you've worked on 3 types of motor vehicle, built 3 different kinds of building, etc.
September 21, 2009 at 3:57 pm
I concur :).
Although I am technically a DBA, my role includes script writing using T-SQL, VBScript and Powershell, development using .NET, BIDS and managemnet of databases and servers. Then to top it off, I also get pulled into managing ISA, Exchange, Active Directory, Terminal Severs etc and additonal software products like Mailmarshal and Webmarshal for example.
So many applications these days use some form of SQL Server database as a backend. Therefore, by association, you also need to be an application specialist when it comes to supporting these too.
These days, IT roles are so varried, and the products we are dealing with are getting bigger and more sophisticated with every new iteration that is released. Many people don't realise how difficult it can be just to keep up let alone trying to create some form of expertise. I'm still using Visual Studio 2005 and 2010 is just around the corner :(.
September 22, 2009 at 2:43 am
Much of the naming problem would be gone if companies recognize the true roles people fill in and make job descriptions accordingly. Right now it is indeed 'someone + database equals DBA'. This makes looking for a matching job that much harder.
Personally I see myself more of a system developer as did loads of assembler and did neat things making algorithms and libraries back in the days. But due to my educational background and first work I ended up in application development, followed by web application development and during this, started picking up more and more database related skills.
So what am I? The only right answer is what the job demands from me and matches my skill set. It is therefore the responsibility for companies to make a good jobdescription and matching title. They can keep the term DBA in there for searching, but it needs to be augmented with a good role description or else everyone will be chasing windmills.
September 25, 2009 at 7:06 am
If I may throw my 2 cents into the ring....I feel that the whole title issue has been brought more to the forefront by people who want a title/label to understand what it is you/we/I do. When I go on a job interview or talking with a potential and the person asks me what title I held at my previous/current employer I ask how much space they have to write or how much time they have. In our field (IT in general) we have to be wary of how we answer these questions because if they are looking for a specific title and their understanding of that title is different that what we think it is, then we may or may not have a client or job. I myself am everything short of the bartender where I work (if we had a bar, I would probably do that as well!! :hehe: ) so to attach a single title or moniker that does not sound pompous like 'IT Guru', 'IT God' (or gawd for the leet speakers) is very difficult and often demeaning because we tend to be so much more. I also understand that this is the case with many professions - even healthcare these days and instead of handing over a title or expecting a title, ask/give a full and thorough explanation of what it is you do. The only downside is if they have questions, you had best hope you can fully explain it!!
Best wishes and best of luck to all those whose hats are many and diverse!! 😀
dminder
September 25, 2009 at 11:28 am
All true, but does anyone have any ideas how to get by the idiots in HR that do nothing but title and acronym matching?
I have no problems landing clients once I can actually talk with the decision maker, but getting past the gatekeeper is a big issue.
September 25, 2009 at 11:46 am
Agreed. I don't know how many headhunters I've talked to who are reading off a job description and want me to change a resume to exactly fit the requirement. HR, recruiters, even the hiring managers themselves can't see the forest for the trees. Like dminder, I have many hats I wear and I feel compelled to list it all out lest some anal HR geek passes me up because I haven't spelled everything out. Which brings us back to an all-encompassing term like DBA which can neatly describe what we do, but miss a lot as well. :crazy:
October 29, 2009 at 4:43 pm
SimpleSimon (9/19/2009)
Outgrown the term DBA? Unfortunately, yes.I am from the time when there weren't any DBAs, nor any other specialists. There were application programmers and systems programmers. And oh yes, some "senior" apps guys became analysts of one flavor or another. That was the beginning of the downfall.
Specialization is detrimental.
I couldn't agree more. It's been hard to find generalists for a couple of decades now, specialisation is taking over, and it's very detrimental.
P.S. To all those youngsters that think that Intel invented virtual storage with the 80386, you're wrong. They were 20 years after the fact (IBM/Cambridge, 1967).
No. English ELectric Computers released their 4-75, which was very like a 360 with VS, in 1966 or 67 and I guess IBM had VS before that. But actually VS was invented at Manchester University at least 5 or 6 years earlier. The first computers to use it were built by Ferranti in collaboration with the University and were available long before 1967. I think Burroughs had VS about 1966 or 67 too.
Incidentally, there's something else that's gone away since the old days - as well as overspecialisation we suffer from overprotectiveness of corporate knowledge; in 1967 there was no problem with me ringing up IBM and asking for documentation on one of their internal research projects - it would come in a couple of days, no charge; same ringing up anyone else in the business, or if anyone else rang us. These days everyone seems to want to keep it all secret, not tell anyone what they are doing, certainly not release technical documentation.
And the mouse was invented years before that!
True, but it wasn't called the "mouse". The people who get usually the credit for it now are the guys at PARC who invented the term "mouse" for it long after the "pointing device" went into industrial use, and I see you noticed that they came to it rather late.
Tom
Viewing 8 posts - 16 through 22 (of 22 total)
You must be logged in to reply to this topic. Login to reply