"What answers must I know to pass this test?" and "Is boot camp
sufficient to achieve my certification?" are recurring questions
on CompTia- and Microsoft-related Internet newsgroups.
Individuals changing careers and wanting to enter the
Information Technology (IT) field view the CompTia and MCSE
certifications as tickets to success. IMO the CompTia and
MCSE certifications are tickets that get IT travelers' feet
in the IT employer's door -- they are *not* tickets guaranteeing
that IT travelers successfully reach their goals. IMO achieving
IT success requires professional competence based upon initial
study, accumulated technical and Customer Relations experience,
and continueing professional education.

Why Customer Relations skills? I have worked as a programmer,
a systems engineer, a software engineer, a service technician,
a network administrator, an engineering manager and as a
consultant. I worked with different "people types" in each of
these employments -- the rules were different in each of these
environments. Yet all of these environments shared one common
factor: in each case I served a Customer and satisfying that
Customer was my job. In cases where I did not interact (directly
or telephonicly) with paying Customers, my supervisor and his
sales representatives were my Customers and I was visible daily.
The same skills required for good Customer Relations also assist
when working with your supervisor and colleagues.

My Customer Relations philosophy reflects my experience --
on-site at the Customer facility. A service technician or MCSE
on-site at the Customer facility is a guest in the Customer's
"house" and has been invited in good faith to assist the Customer.
In this case I believe the service technician's and MCSE's job
combines technical skills with *marketing* -- marketing
her/himself (and her/his organization) as a cost-effective
problem-solver. Technical skills solve the problems, but
marketing skills maintain the attendent Customer *anguish* below
the threshold of pain -- a level that reflects back at the
service technician or MCSE. For these reasons I believe that
competent service technicians and MCSEs must (and should) develop
*both* technical skills and Customer Relations (marketing) skills.

I believe that appropriate clothing is part of effectively
representing your organization. 'Appropriate' is a vague word --
clothing that is appropriate for climbing under desks and squeezing
between server racks might not be appropriate when repairing the
workstation that your Customer's CEO uses. Clean, neat and
properly-fitting are mandatory -- style depends upon environment.
I believe that service technician and MCSE clothing should reflect
comfortable professionalism, and should reflect the resources of
the service organization.

I believe that the rules are changing in IT hardware and software
maintenance. IMO falling hardware prices will encourage
workstation replacement rather than repair -- less repair work
despite a *larger* number of less expensive workstations. I also
believe that increased OEM usage of "field replaceable modules"
in quality workstations [and 'server slices' -- compact server
hardware modules exclusive of hard disk storage for use in a NAS
(network-attached storage) environments] will encourage
"troubleshooting by module/slice replacement" at the Customer
facility rather than carry-in backroom bench repair -- hardware
troubleshooting at the Customer facility will replace carry-in
backroom bench repair. Similarly, standardized software
configurations, automated software installation and upgrade, and
remote access technology will reduce the amount of backroom
software maintenance -- a smaller number of highly-skilled
technicians and MCSEs will maintain and upgrade workstation and
server software configurations.

All of these trends reflect decreased Total Cost of Ownership
(decreased TCO) for IT systems. Yet if I am correct the number
of required IT service technicians and MCSEs will *not* increase
indefinitely, and IT service technicians and MCSEs will spend
more of their time interacting with Customers.

Employers want to hire IT service technicians and MCSEs with
good Customer Relations skills -- an inducement for IT service
technicians and MCSEs to perfect those skills. Smart employers
will help their IT service technicans and MCSEs enhance *all*
of their skills, increasing technicians' and MCSEs' technical
expertise while making them better representatives for their
organizations. And good peoples' skills get sharper (not rusty)
as they age.

If an individual has no IT experience and wants to become an
MCSE I recommend that they first complete their A-PLUS
certification and use their A-PLUS certification to qualify
for an entry-level position. Most employers will fund
continueing education courses for productive employees,
and the employee can learn new skills building upon the
experience base they acquire in the workplace. This is
analogous to building your house on rock, as opposed to
building your house on paper.

Why is experience important? Experience teaches valuable
lessons. Experience teaches prospective MCSEs to acquire
needed documentation from OEM and vendor websites and faxback
services *before* visiting the Customer site, and to record
the changes made to the Customer's hardware and software.
Experience teaches the necessity of carrying extra consumable
items (tested FD drives and cables; tested HD, power and
network drop cables, floppy disks and CD-Rs) as part of your
"trunk stock" when you go on-site for a Customer service call
-- minimize absences required to retrieve low-cost consumable
items. Experience teaches small lessons like carrying band-aids
in your service kit so that when you slice your fingers on a
sharp chassis edge you will not bleed on Customer carpeting.
Experience teaches small lessons like checking your handtools
and software tools *before* leaving for the Customer site to
ensure nothing was "borrowed". Experience teaches the value of
educating Customers about using high-quality, non-fouling print
cartridges and media in precision color laser printers.

Once again, I believe a prospective MCSE's goal should
be professional competence based upon initial study,
accumulated technical and Customer Relations experience,
and continueing professional education. What is the
alternative? Occasionally you read reference to the
'paper MCSE'. What's a paper MCSE?

1) A paper MCSE is a person with a lot of wallpaper (test
passed certificates) but no practical experience.

2) A paper MCSE is someone who (when faced with a network
outage) locks the server room door, unplugs the telephone,
turns off their cellular telephone/pager, and (assuming that they
did not sell their texts after passing the tests) frantically
pages through the texts trying to locate *any* reference to the
problem. They also might ask vaguely-defined questions on
IT-related Internet newsgroups and then WAIT ..... The Help Desk
and IT Managers receive no idea of the outage's cause. The Help
Desk and IT Managers receive no Expected-Time-To-Restore/Repair
estimate. People are muttering and milling about outside the
server room door. Suddenly the value of prior networking
experience is evident.

This is a reactive scenario. What is the PROactive scenario?
If your employer does not provide a non-production test network
for you to "break and fix" (one basis of practical experience),
you must provide your own home network upon which to experiment.
You also get the benefit of applying operating system upgrades,
application upgrades, and security upgrades to your home network,
a task that another individual might perform on your employer's
or Customer's production network. And you should apply these
upgrades to the test/home system *before* you apply them to a
production network where (due to unanticipated difficulties)
they might cause production network failure.

What 'unanticipated difficulties'? Modern networking operating
systems and applications are complex multifunctioned software
packages -- the wealth of functions can result in unanticipated
difficulties. For example, one night I participated in a server
OS upgrade that stalled in mid-script. Through manual
troubleshooting our team was able to determine that a large number
of files had been DELETEd but not PURGEd [i.e., the files were
recoverable on the server hard disk (a standard network OS feature),
but the DELETEd files occupied hard disk space not acknowledged by
the OS directory functions and not checked by the script.] The
DELETEd unPURGEd files consumed so much hard disk space that
there was insufficient hard disk capacity to complete the OS upgrade.
Our team relaxed, then PURGEd the DELETEd files and completed the
OS upgrade manually -- we got home before dawn.

I also advocate home technical libraries to supplement the
technical library provided by employers -- technical texts are
"IT tools of the trade". My Amazon.com "Friends and Favorites"
webpage (referenced in my sig) contains links to a number of
MCSE-related "Listmania" reading lists, including "A Windows
Desktop OS Reading List", "A Windows NT4 Server Reading
List", "A BackOffice / SBS 4.5 Reading List" (reflects two
distinct Microsoft Corporation products), "A Computer Security
Reading List", "An MCSE Consultant's Business Reading List",
and (preliminary) "A Small Business Server 2000 Reading List"
(reflects one distinct Microsoft Corporation product).

I also recommend that prospective MCSEs become familiar
and skilled using the Microsoft Corporation Knowledge Base.
Microsoft Corporation provides an *extensive* collection of
detailed technical information in its Knowledge Base, and
the Knowledge Base is *keyword-searchable*. To answer a
specific question I would search the Microsoft Corporation
Knowledge Base *before* I posted questions to IT-related
Internet newsgroups -- no wait.

Knowledge Base article ###### currently can be accessed on
a no-cost basis at URL
"http://support.microsoft.com/default.aspx?scid=kb;en-us;q######"
(no quotes).

The Microsoft Corporation Knowledge Base is valuable, but IMO it
does *not* replace paper texts and searchable e-books on CD-ROM.
Occasionally an MCSE might require information while at a
Customer site where Internet access is *not* available, and
marginal notes in paper texts and e-books add true value.

This message was not solicited by Amazon.com, any author,
or their agent(s). I receive no remuneration of any kind from
Amazon.com .

This message was not solicited by CompTia. I receive no
remuneration of any kind from CompTia.

This message was not solicited by Microsoft Corporation. I
receive no remuneration of any kind from Microsoft Corporation.

This message was not solicited by Xerox Corporation. I
receive no remuneration of any kind from Xerox Corporation.

My opinions.

Richard Ballard MSEE CNA4 KD0AZ
--
Consultant specializing in computer networks, imaging & security
Listed as rjballard in "Friends & Favorites" at www.amazon.com
Last review: "Will: The Autobiography of G. Gordon Liddy"

Report this post to a moderator

On 09 Dec 2002 06:01:28 GMT, rball84213@aol.com (Richard Ballard)
wrote:

>"What answers must I know to pass this test?" and "Is boot camp
>sufficient to achieve my certification?" are recurring questions
>on CompTia- and Microsoft-related Internet newsgroups.
>Individuals changing careers and wanting to enter the
>Information Technology (IT) field view the CompTia and MCSE
>certifications as tickets to success. IMO the CompTia and
>MCSE certifications are tickets that get IT travelers' feet
>in the IT employer's door -- they are *not* tickets guaranteeing
>that IT travelers successfully reach their goals. IMO achieving
>IT success requires professional competence based upon initial
>study, accumulated technical and Customer Relations experience,
>and continueing professional education.

If so, then why do you want to know in advance what questions will be
asked on this entry level certification?

IMHO, the cert. should not show how well you can retain what you have
read, but what you know. Perhaps studying to recall acronyms and
correct terminology would be acceptable but a certification should
indicate how well you could perform in a real life situation.

>
>Why Customer Relations skills? I have worked as a programmer,
>a systems engineer, a software engineer, a service technician,
>a network administrator, an engineering manager and as a
>consultant. I worked with different "people types" in each of
>these employments -- the rules were different in each of these
>environments. Yet all of these environments shared one common
>factor: in each case I served a Customer and satisfying that
>Customer was my job. In cases where I did not interact (directly
>or telephonicly) with paying Customers, my supervisor and his
>sales representatives were my Customers and I was visible daily.
>The same skills required for good Customer Relations also assist
>when working with your supervisor and colleagues.
>
>My Customer Relations philosophy reflects my experience --
>on-site at the Customer facility. A service technician or MCSE
>on-site at the Customer facility is a guest in the Customer's
>"house" and has been invited in good faith to assist the Customer.
>In this case I believe the service technician's and MCSE's job
>combines technical skills with *marketing* -- marketing
>her/himself (and her/his organization) as a cost-effective
>problem-solver. Technical skills solve the problems, but
>marketing skills maintain the attendent Customer *anguish* below
>the threshold of pain -- a level that reflects back at the
>service technician or MCSE. For these reasons I believe that
>competent service technicians and MCSEs must (and should) develop
>*both* technical skills and Customer Relations (marketing) skills.

Partially right except I don't agree totally with your anology to
being a guest. Most companies would be hiring a 'skilled' technician
because of their qualifications and technical abilities. The company
should also have policies in place as to what is acceptable practice
with regards to their employees accessing their network assets. Part
of our job is to assist in instructing our clients on this policy and
to maintain the Service Level Agreement. We are also responsible for
monitoring potential Network Security issues as they arrise.
>
>I believe that appropriate clothing is part of effectively
>representing your organization. 'Appropriate' is a vague word --
>clothing that is appropriate for climbing under desks and squeezing
>between server racks might not be appropriate when repairing the
>workstation that your Customer's CEO uses. Clean, neat and
>properly-fitting are mandatory -- style depends upon environment.
>I believe that service technician and MCSE clothing should reflect
>comfortable professionalism, and should reflect the resources of
>the service organization.

I agree, but I have also been sent to rooms where I was asked to dress
more casually because I was making the clients feel uncomfortable. We
need to learn the environment we are walking into and respect their
culture while retaining our professionalism.

>
>I believe that the rules are changing in IT hardware and software
>maintenance. IMO falling hardware prices will encourage
>workstation replacement rather than repair -- less repair work
>despite a *larger* number of less expensive workstations. I also
>believe that increased OEM usage of "field replaceable modules"
>in quality workstations [and 'server slices' -- compact server
>hardware modules exclusive of hard disk storage for use in a NAS
>(network-attached storage) environments] will encourage
>"troubleshooting by module/slice replacement" at the Customer
>facility rather than carry-in backroom bench repair -- hardware
>troubleshooting at the Customer facility will replace carry-in
>backroom bench repair. Similarly, standardized software
>configurations, automated software installation and upgrade, and
>remote access technology will reduce the amount of backroom
>software maintenance -- a smaller number of highly-skilled
>technicians and MCSEs will maintain and upgrade workstation and
>server software configurations.
>
>All of these trends reflect decreased Total Cost of Ownership
>(decreased TCO) for IT systems. Yet if I am correct the number
>of required IT service technicians and MCSEs will *not* increase
>indefinitely, and IT service technicians and MCSEs will spend
>more of their time interacting with Customers.

There is a growing trend toward automation and much of the work will
be performe offsite and presented through the Login process. Fewer
technicians will be kept on staff merely to put out the fires that
start up when this semi-proactive systems fails.

>
>Employers want to hire IT service technicians and MCSEs with
>good Customer Relations skills -- an inducement for IT service
>technicians and MCSEs to perfect those skills. Smart employers
>will help their IT service technicans and MCSEs enhance *all*
>of their skills, increasing technicians' and MCSEs' technical
>expertise while making them better representatives for their
>organizations. And good peoples' skills get sharper (not rusty)
>as they age.
>
>If an individual has no IT experience and wants to become an
>MCSE I recommend that they first complete their A-PLUS
>certification and use their A-PLUS certification to qualify
>for an entry-level position. Most employers will fund
>continueing education courses for productive employees,
>and the employee can learn new skills building upon the
>experience base they acquire in the workplace. This is
>analogous to building your house on rock, as opposed to
>building your house on paper.

A+, Net+, or anyother+ certification is an entry level cert. at best.
I consider mine to be additional tools in my network utility belt.

>
>Why is experience important? Experience teaches valuable
>lessons. Experience teaches prospective MCSEs to acquire
>needed documentation from OEM and vendor websites and faxback
>services *before* visiting the Customer site, and to record
>the changes made to the Customer's hardware and software.
>Experience teaches the necessity of carrying extra consumable
>items (tested FD drives and cables; tested HD, power and
>network drop cables, floppy disks and CD-Rs) as part of your
>"trunk stock" when you go on-site for a Customer service call
>-- minimize absences required to retrieve low-cost consumable
>items. Experience teaches small lessons like carrying band-aids
>in your service kit so that when you slice your fingers on a
>sharp chassis edge you will not bleed on Customer carpeting.
>Experience teaches small lessons like checking your handtools
>and software tools *before* leaving for the Customer site to
>ensure nothing was "borrowed". Experience teaches the value of
>educating Customers about using high-quality, non-fouling print
>cartridges and media in precision color laser printers.
>
>Once again, I believe a prospective MCSE's goal should
>be professional competence based upon initial study,
>accumulated technical and Customer Relations experience,
>and continueing professional education. What is the
>alternative? Occasionally you read reference to the
>'paper MCSE'. What's a paper MCSE?
>
>1) A paper MCSE is a person with a lot of wallpaper (test
>passed certificates) but no practical experience.
>
>2) A paper MCSE is someone who (when faced with a network
>outage) locks the server room door, unplugs the telephone,
>turns off their cellular telephone/pager, and (assuming that they
>did not sell their texts after passing the tests) frantically
>pages through the texts trying to locate *any* reference to the
>problem. They also might ask vaguely-defined questions on
>IT-related Internet newsgroups and then WAIT ..... The Help Desk
>and IT Managers receive no idea of the outage's cause. The Help
>Desk and IT Managers receive no Expected-Time-To-Restore/Repair
>estimate. People are muttering and milling about outside the
>server room door. Suddenly the value of prior networking
>experience is evident.

And that is why they created the escalations team or fourth level
support. If the task takes 4 hours then so be it, but if you have
been scratching your head for longer than 15 minutes and you still
dont' know what the problem is or how to fix it, call someone in to
assist. Most SLA's in a production environment include a time period
where no server maintenance other than unlocking accounts is
permitted. Anything that could potentially disrupt access to the
network needs to be done after the clients have stopped working for
the day.

>
>This is a reactive scenario. What is the PROactive scenario?
>If your employer does not provide a non-production test network
>for you to "break and fix" (one basis of practical experience),
>you must provide your own home network upon which to experiment.
>You also get the benefit of applying operating system upgrades,
>application upgrades, and security upgrades to your home network,
>a task that another individual might perform on your employer's
>or Customer's production network. And you should apply these
>upgrades to the test/home system *before* you apply them to a
>production network where (due to unanticipated difficulties)
>they might cause production network failure.

Reactive is calling in the bucket brigade when the fire gets out of
hand. Proactive is using fire retardent materials in the environment,
and a few well placed extinguishers to catch the sparks that may fly
outside of your safety net.

>
>What 'unanticipated difficulties'? Modern networking operating
>systems and applications are complex multifunctioned software
>packages -- the wealth of functions can result in unanticipated
>difficulties. For example, one night I participated in a server
>OS upgrade that stalled in mid-script. Through manual
>troubleshooting our team was able to determine that a large number
>of files had been DELETEd but not PURGEd [i.e., the files were
>recoverable on the server hard disk (a standard network OS feature),
>but the DELETEd files occupied hard disk space not acknowledged by
>the OS directory functions and not checked by the script.] The
>DELETEd unPURGEd files consumed so much hard disk space that
>there was insufficient hard disk capacity to complete the OS upgrade.
>Our team relaxed, then PURGEd the DELETEd files and completed the
>OS upgrade manually -- we got home before dawn.

Installing a NOS is much different from a Workstation install.
The server should ber prepared with a pristine install prior to
bringing it to the site in the first place. Scripts should be written
to handle the room specific details such as building the PO, account
creations, etc.

>
>I also advocate home technical libraries to supplement the
>technical library provided by employers -- technical texts are
>"IT tools of the trade". My Amazon.com "Friends and Favorites"
>webpage (referenced in my sig) contains links to a number of
>MCSE-related "Listmania" reading lists, including "A Windows
>Desktop OS Reading List", "A Windows NT4 Server Reading
>List", "A BackOffice / SBS 4.5 Reading List" (reflects two
>distinct Microsoft Corporation products), "A Computer Security
>Reading List", "An MCSE Consultant's Business Reading List",
>and (preliminary) "A Small Business Server 2000 Reading List"
>(reflects one distinct Microsoft Corporation product).
>
>I also recommend that prospective MCSEs become familiar
>and skilled using the Microsoft Corporation Knowledge Base.
>Microsoft Corporation provides an *extensive* collection of
>detailed technical information in its Knowledge Base, and
>the Knowledge Base is *keyword-searchable*. To answer a
>specific question I would search the Microsoft Corporation
>Knowledge Base *before* I posted questions to IT-related
>Internet newsgroups -- no wait.
>
>Knowledge Base article ###### currently can be accessed on
>a no-cost basis at URL
>"http://support.microsoft.com/default.aspx?scid=kb;en-us;q######"
>(no quotes).
>
>The Microsoft Corporation Knowledge Base is valuable, but IMO it
>does *not* replace paper texts and searchable e-books on CD-ROM.
>Occasionally an MCSE might require information while at a
>Customer site where Internet access is *not* available, and
>marginal notes in paper texts and e-books add true value.
>
>This message was not solicited by Amazon.com, any author,
>or their agent(s). I receive no remuneration of any kind from
>Amazon.com .
>
>This message was not solicited by CompTia. I receive no
>remuneration of any kind from CompTia.
>
>This message was not solicited by Microsoft Corporation. I
>receive no remuneration of any kind from Microsoft Corporation.
>
>This message was not solicited by Xerox Corporation. I
>receive no remuneration of any kind from Xerox Corporation.
>
>My opinions.
>
>Richard Ballard MSEE CNA4 KD0AZ

You make an intersting dissertation, and I hope you aren't overly
offended by my comments,
Millimeter

Report this post to a moderator

In article < fnd9vu876brqln5hqiari7b7srdjh5
p3sk@4ax.com>,
Millimeter <millimeter.NOMOSPAM@sympatico.ca> writes:

>On 09 Dec 2002 06:01:28 GMT,
>rball84213@aol.com (Richard Ballard) wrote:
>
>>"What answers must I know to pass this test?" and "Is boot camp
>>sufficient to achieve my certification?" are recurring questions
>>on CompTia- and Microsoft-related Internet newsgroups.
>>Individuals changing careers and wanting to enter the
>>Information Technology (IT) field view the CompTia and MCSE
>>certifications as tickets to success. IMO the CompTia and
>>MCSE certifications are tickets that get IT travelers' feet
>>in the IT employer's door -- they are *not* tickets guaranteeing
>>that IT travelers successfully reach their goals. IMO achieving
>>IT success requires professional competence based upon initial
>>study, accumulated technical and Customer Relations experience,
>>and continueing professional education.
>
>If so, then why do you want to know in advance what questions
>will be asked on this entry level certification?

You have misread the quoted paragraph. I did *not* ask what
questions would be asked on any certification test. Nevertheless,
this *is* a recurring question on CompTia- and Microsoft-related
Internet certification newsgroups.

>IMHO, the cert. should not show how well you can retain what you have
>read, but what you know. Perhaps studying to recall acronyms and
>correct terminology would be acceptable but a certification should
>indicate how well you could perform in a real life situation.

Certification tests and testing formats are improving. Yet I
believe that the tests' scopes are *not* sufficient to "indicate
how well you could perform in a real life situation". This is
one reason I stress the value of experience and continueing
professional education for IT technicians and MCSEs.

>>Why Customer Relations skills? I have worked as a programmer,
>>a systems engineer, a software engineer, a service technician,
>>a network administrator, an engineering manager and as a
>>consultant. I worked with different "people types" in each of
>>these employments -- the rules were different in each of these
>>environments. Yet all of these environments shared one common
>>factor: in each case I served a Customer and satisfying that
>>Customer was my job. In cases where I did not interact (directly
>>or telephonicly) with paying Customers, my supervisor and his
>>sales representatives were my Customers and I was visible daily.
>>The same skills required for good Customer Relations also assist
>>when working with your supervisor and colleagues.
>>
>>My Customer Relations philosophy reflects my experience --
>>on-site at the Customer facility. A service technician or MCSE
>>on-site at the Customer facility is a guest in the Customer's
>>"house" and has been invited in good faith to assist the Customer.
>>In this case I believe the service technician's and MCSE's job
>>combines technical skills with *marketing* -- marketing
>>her/himself (and her/his organization) as a cost-effective
>>problem-solver. Technical skills solve the problems, but
>>marketing skills maintain the attendent Customer *anguish* below
>>the threshold of pain -- a level that reflects back at the
>>service technician or MCSE. For these reasons I believe that
>>competent service technicians and MCSEs must (and should) develop
>>*both* technical skills and Customer Relations (marketing) skills.
>
>Partially right except I don't agree totally with your anology to
>being a guest. Most companies would be hiring a 'skilled' technician
>because of their qualifications and technical abilities. The company
>should also have policies in place as to what is acceptable practice
>with regards to their employees accessing their network assets. Part
>of our job is to assist in instructing our clients on this policy and
>to maintain the Service Level Agreement. We are also responsible for
>monitoring potential Network Security issues as they arrise.

You appear to be speaking from the perspective of providing
on-site contract personnel (who replace Customer employees).
I was speaking from the perspective of service personnel who
are called on-site to assist Customers -- "guests" at the
Customer site. Some of my comments also are relevant to
on-site contract employees and to Customer employees --
I am *not* going to categorize the differences.

I will make one comment, however. I believe that skilled
Customer employees have *ultimate responsibility* for Customer
network security -- IMO that ultimate responsibility can *not*
be contracted out. Contract personnel can assist in security
matters, but IMO skilled Customer employees must supervise
(and monitor?) contract security personnel. I acknowledge that
people some will disagree with my comment.

>>I believe that appropriate clothing is part of effectively
>>representing your organization. 'Appropriate' is a vague word --
>>clothing that is appropriate for climbing under desks and squeezing
>>between server racks might not be appropriate when repairing the
>>workstation that your Customer's CEO uses. Clean, neat and
>>properly-fitting are mandatory -- style depends upon environment.
>>I believe that service technician and MCSE clothing should reflect
>>comfortable professionalism, and should reflect the resources of
>>the service organization.
>
>I agree, but I have also been sent to rooms where I was asked to dress
>more casually because I was making the clients feel uncomfortable. We
>need to learn the environment we are walking into and respect their
>culture while retaining our professionalism.

I have not encountered this problem. I knew a Senior Network
Administrator who had been a Senior Service Technician for a
previous employer. That previous employer required service
technicians to wear (seasonally-appropriate-weight) wool business
suits on service calls. My friend complained that when you
climb under desks wearing wool trousers the trouser knees are
stretched out of shape permanently -- replace the suit.

I believe that if contract services are reasonably priced,
Customers will not worry about well-dressed professional service
technicians and MCSEs. OTOH, if contract services are
*exorbitantly priced* I can understand a Customer muttering about
"gold plated clothing". Earlier I stated "'Appropriate' is a
vague word" -- appropriate applies both to technician and MCSE
clothing styles and also applies to ***service contract cost***.
Earlier I also stated "style depends upon environment" -- I
believe that this earlier statement is consistent with your
"respect their culture" statement.

One additional comment: One of my favorite scenes from the
film "M*A*S*H" is when Hawkeye and Trapper journey to Tokyo
to "save the Congressman's kid". There is no medical emergency
in Tokyo, and Hawkeye and Trapper proceed to run wild on the
base golf course, giving the justification "We are the pros from
Dover". Customers pay ***premium costs*** for contract service
personnel because they expect excellence *above* their own
employees' skill levels. When IT equipment in the executive
suite requires service, IT managers usually send their best --
the contract service personnel. I believe it is imperative that
contract service personnel exude professionalism to justify their
higher cost, and IMO their clothing is part of that image. IMO
*contract service personnel have their own culture* that is
different (and *must* be superior) to the Customer employees'
culture -- otherwise why hire contract service personnel?

>>I believe that the rules are changing in IT hardware and software
>>maintenance. IMO falling hardware prices will encourage
>>workstation replacement rather than repair -- less repair work
>>despite a *larger* number of less expensive workstations. I also
>>believe that increased OEM usage of "field replaceable modules"
>>in quality workstations [and 'server slices' -- compact server
>>hardware modules exclusive of hard disk storage for use in a NAS
>>(network-attached storage) environments] will encourage
>>"troubleshooting by module/slice replacement" at the Customer
>>facility rather than carry-in backroom bench repair -- hardware
>>troubleshooting at the Customer facility will replace carry-in
>>backroom bench repair. Similarly, standardized software
>>configurations, automated software installation and upgrade, and
>>remote access technology will reduce the amount of backroom
>>software maintenance -- a smaller number of highly-skilled
>>technicians and MCSEs will maintain and upgrade workstation and
>>server software configurations.
>>
>>All of these trends reflect decreased Total Cost of Ownership
>>(decreased TCO) for IT systems. Yet if I am correct the number
>>of required IT service technicians and MCSEs will *not* increase
>>indefinitely, and IT service technicians and MCSEs will spend
>>more of their time interacting with Customers.
>
>There is a growing trend toward automation and much of the work will
>be performe offsite and presented through the Login process. Fewer
>technicians will be kept on staff merely to put out the fires that
>start up when this semi-proactive systems fails.

Your comment is difficult to interpret, but you have *not*
contradicted anything that I said.

>>Employers want to hire IT service technicians and MCSEs with
>>good Customer Relations skills -- an inducement for IT service
>>technicians and MCSEs to perfect those skills. Smart employers
>>will help their IT service technicans and MCSEs enhance *all*
>>of their skills, increasing technicians' and MCSEs' technical
>>expertise while making them better representatives for their
>>organizations. And good peoples' skills get sharper (not rusty)
>>as they age.
>>
>>If an individual has no IT experience and wants to become an
>>MCSE I recommend that they first complete their A-PLUS
>>certification and use their A-PLUS certification to qualify
>>for an entry-level position. Most employers will fund
>>continueing education courses for productive employees,
>>and the employee can learn new skills building upon the
>>experience base they acquire in the workplace. This is
>>analogous to building your house on rock, as opposed to
>>building your house on paper.
>
>A+, Net+, or anyother+ certification is an entry level cert. at best.
>I consider mine to be additional tools in my network utility belt.

Your comment is difficult to interpret, but you have *not*
contradicted anything that I said.

>>Why is experience important? Experience teaches valuable
>>lessons. Experience teaches prospective MCSEs to acquire
>>needed documentation from OEM and vendor websites and faxback
>>services *before* visiting the Customer site, and to record
>>the changes made to the Customer's hardware and software.
>>Experience teaches the necessity of carrying extra consumable
>>items (tested FD drives and cables; tested HD, power and
>>network drop cables, floppy disks and CD-Rs) as part of your
>>"trunk stock" when you go on-site for a Customer service call
>>-- minimize absences required to retrieve low-cost consumable
>>items. Experience teaches small lessons like carrying band-aids
>>in your service kit so that when you slice your fingers on a
>>sharp chassis edge you will not bleed on Customer carpeting.
>>Experience teaches small lessons like checking your handtools
>>and software tools *before* leaving for the Customer site to
>>ensure nothing was "borrowed". Experience teaches the value of
>>educating Customers about using high-quality, non-fouling print
>>cartridges and media in precision color laser printers.
>>
>>Once again, I believe a prospective MCSE's goal should
>>be professional competence based upon initial study,
>>accumulated technical and Customer Relations experience,
>>and continueing professional education. What is the
>>alternative? Occasionally you read reference to the
>>'paper MCSE'. What's a paper MCSE?
>>
>>1) A paper MCSE is a person with a lot of wallpaper (test
>>passed certificates) but no practical experience.
>>
>>2) A paper MCSE is someone who (when faced with a network
>>outage) locks the server room door, unplugs the telephone,
>>turns off their cellular telephone/pager, and (assuming that they
>>did not sell their texts after passing the tests) frantically
>>pages through the texts trying to locate *any* reference to the
>>problem. They also might ask vaguely-defined questions on
>>IT-related Internet newsgroups and then WAIT ..... The Help Desk
>>and IT Managers receive no idea of the outage's cause. The Help
>>Desk and IT Managers receive no Expected-Time-To-Restore/Repair
>>estimate. People are muttering and milling about outside the
>>server room door. Suddenly the value of prior networking
>>experience is evident.
>
>And that is why they created the escalations team or fourth level
>support. If the task takes 4 hours then so be it, but if you have
>been scratching your head for longer than 15 minutes and you still
>dont' know what the problem is or how to fix it, call someone in to
>assist. Most SLA's in a production environment include a time period
>where no server maintenance other than unlocking accounts is
>permitted. Anything that could potentially disrupt access to the
>network needs to be done after the clients have stopped working for
>the day.

Multilevel help desks and SLAs characterize contract service
agreements with *large* organizations. Smaller organizations
might not have this depth of support -- they trade Mean-Time-To-
Repair/Restore for cost savings, and they have texts, e-Books
and the Internet rather than in-house "network gods". Also,
this is Internet newsgroup alt.certification network-plus and my
original comments were addressed to people pursueing their
initial certifications -- the "front door" of the Help Desk tier.

>>This is a reactive scenario. What is the PROactive scenario?
>>If your employer does not provide a non-production test network
>>for you to "break and fix" (one basis of practical experience),
>>you must provide your own home network upon which to experiment.
>>You also get the benefit of applying operating system upgrades,
>>application upgrades, and security upgrades to your home network,
>>a task that another individual might perform on your employer's
>>or Customer's production network. And you should apply these
>>upgrades to the test/home system *before* you apply them to a
>>production network where (due to unanticipated difficulties)
>>they might cause production network failure.
>
>Reactive is calling in the bucket brigade when the fire gets out of
>hand. Proactive is using fire retardent materials in the environment,
>and a few well placed extinguishers to catch the sparks that may fly
>outside of your safety net.

Your comment is difficult to interpret, but you have *not*
contradicted anything that I said.

>>What 'unanticipated difficulties'? Modern networking operating
>>systems and applications are complex multifunctioned software
>>packages -- the wealth of functions can result in unanticipated
>>difficulties. For example, one night I participated in a server
>>OS upgrade that stalled in mid-script. Through manual
>>troubleshooting our team was able to determine that a large
>>number of files had been DELETEd but not PURGEd [i.e., the files
>>were recoverable on the server hard disk (a standard network OS
>>feature), but the DELETEd files occupied hard disk space not
>>acknowledged by the OS directory functions and not checked by
>>the script.] The DELETEd unPURGEd files consumed so much hard
>>disk space that there was insufficient hard disk capacity to
>>complete the OS upgrade. Our team relaxed, then PURGEd the
>>DELETEd files and completed the OS upgrade manually -- we got
>>home before dawn.
>
>Installing a NOS is much different from a Workstation install.
>The server should ber prepared with a pristine install prior to
>bringing it to the site in the first place. Scripts should be written
>to handle the room specific details such as building the PO, account
>creations, etc.

OS installation procedures for a *new* server are different from
procedures designed to upgrade the OS of an existing server (and
*not destroy* the server data contents during an interrupted
scripted upgrade process). BTW, in the example I provided
previously, the DELETEd but unPURGEd files were directory files
from obsolete tape backups -- worthless, but difficult for an
automated script to determine.

>>I also advocate home technical libraries to supplement the
>>technical library provided by employers -- technical texts are
>>"IT tools of the trade". My Amazon.com "Friends and Favorites"
>>webpage (referenced in my sig) contains links to a number of
>>MCSE-related "Listmania" reading lists, including "A Windows
>>Desktop OS Reading List", "A Windows NT4 Server Reading
>>List", "A BackOffice / SBS 4.5 Reading List" (reflects two
>>distinct Microsoft Corporation products), "A Computer Security
>>Reading List", "An MCSE Consultant's Business Reading List",
>>and (preliminary) "A Small Business Server 2000 Reading List"
>>(reflects one distinct Microsoft Corporation product).
>>
>>I also recommend that prospective MCSEs become familiar
>>and skilled using the Microsoft Corporation Knowledge Base.
>>Microsoft Corporation provides an *extensive* collection of
>>detailed technical information in its Knowledge Base, and
>>the Knowledge Base is *keyword-searchable*. To answer a
>>specific question I would search the Microsoft Corporation
>>Knowledge Base *before* I posted questions to IT-related
>>Internet newsgroups -- no wait.
>>
>>Knowledge Base article ###### currently can be accessed on
>>a no-cost basis at URL
>>"http://support.microsoft.com/default.aspx?scid=kb;en-us;q######"
>>(no quotes).
>>
>>The Microsoft Corporation Knowledge Base is valuable, but IMO it
>>does *not* replace paper texts and searchable e-books on CD-ROM.
>>Occasionally an MCSE might require information while at a
>>Customer site where Internet access is *not* available, and
>>marginal notes in paper texts and e-books add true value.

<snip>

This message was not solicited by Amazon.com, any author,
or their agent(s). I receive no remuneration of any kind from
Amazon.com .

This message was not solicited by CompTia. I receive no
remuneration of any kind from CompTia.

This message was not solicited by Microsoft Corporation. I
receive no remuneration of any kind from Microsoft Corporation.

This message was not solicited by Xerox Corporation. I
receive no remuneration of any kind from Xerox Corporation.

My opinions.

Richard Ballard MSEE CNA4 KD0AZ
--
Consultant specializing in computer networks, imaging & security
Listed as rjballard in "Friends & Favorites" at www.amazon.com
Last review: "Will: The Autobiography of G. Gordon Liddy"

Report this post to a moderator

On 09 Dec 2002 20:48:13 GMT, rball84213@aol.com (Richard Ballard)
wrote:

>In article < fnd9vu876brqln5hqiari7b7srdjh5
p3sk@4ax.com>,
>Millimeter <millimeter.NOMOSPAM@sympatico.ca> writes:
>
>>On 09 Dec 2002 06:01:28 GMT,
>>rball84213@aol.com (Richard Ballard) wrote:
>>
>>>"What answers must I know to pass this test?" and "Is boot camp
>>>sufficient to achieve my certification?" are recurring questions
>>>on CompTia- and Microsoft-related Internet newsgroups.
<snip>
>>
>>If so, then why do you want to know in advance what questions
>>will be asked on this entry level certification?
>
>You have misread the quoted paragraph. I did *not* ask what
>questions would be asked on any certification test. Nevertheless,
>this *is* a recurring question on CompTia- and Microsoft-related
>Internet certification newsgroups.

Yes, I should have noticed you were imitating the typical question on
this ng. This may have affected they way I interpreted much of your
original posting.

<snip> [colo
r=darkred]
>>>My Customer Relations philosophy reflects my experience --
>>>on-site at the Customer facility. A service technician or MCSE
>>>on-site at the Customer facility is a guest in the Customer's
>>>"house" and has been invited in good faith to assist the Customer.[/color]
<snip>
>>
>>Partially right except I don't agree totally with your anology to
>>being a guest. Most companies would be hiring a 'skilled' technician
>>because of their qualifications and technical abilities. The company
>>should also have policies in place as to what is acceptable practice
>>with regards to their employees accessing their network assets. Part
>>of our job is to assist in instructing our clients on this policy and
>>to maintain the Service Level Agreement. We are also responsible for
>>monitoring potential Network Security issues as they arrise.
>
>You appear to be speaking from the perspective of providing
>on-site contract personnel (who replace Customer employees).
>I was speaking from the perspective of service personnel who
>are called on-site to assist Customers -- "guests" at the
>Customer site. Some of my comments also are relevant to
>on-site contract employees and to Customer employees --
>I am *not* going to categorize the differences.
>
>I will make one comment, however. I believe that skilled
>Customer employees have *ultimate responsibility* for Customer
>network security -- IMO that ultimate responsibility can *not*
>be contracted out. Contract personnel can assist in security
>matters, but IMO skilled Customer employees must supervise
>(and monitor?) contract security personnel. I acknowledge that
>people some will disagree with my comment.
>

I have been a self employed (consultant for lack of a better title)
for several years. My most relevant, real world experience was with a
major financial institution in Canada. The corporation consisted of
more than 40 functional business units, one of which was the technical
support team.

My first bit there was in their Head Office group of buildings were
the majority of our clients were executives and long term project
teams suchas Media Affairs, Risk Management, etc. I chose to wear a
tie, suit pants and good quality Sports Jacket. I was slightly above
the dress code for some of our clients but definitely below that of
the executives. My goal was to look professional, but not afraid of
getting my hands a little dirty.

One of my co-workers however wore a sweater and workboots. His
biggest complaint was that he was often asked if he was there to fix
the toilette. :-)
[colo
r=darkred]
>>>I believe that appropriate clothing is part of effectively
>>>representing your organization. 'Appropriate' is a vague word --
>>>clothing that is appropriate for climbing under desks and squeezing
>>>between server racks might not be appropriate when repairing the
>>>workstation that your Customer's CEO uses. Clean, neat and
>>>properly-fitting are mandatory -- style depends upon environment.
>>>I believe that service technician and MCSE clothing should reflect
>>>comfortable professionalism, and should reflect the resources of
>>>the service organization.
>>
>>I agree, but I have also been sent to rooms where I was asked to dress
>>more casually because I was making the clients feel uncomfortable. We
>>need to learn the environment we are walking into and respect their
>>culture while retaining our professionalism.
>
>I have not encountered this problem. I knew a Senior Network
>Administrator who had been a Senior Service Technician for a
>previous employer. That previous employer required service
>technicians to wear (seasonally-appropriate-weight) wool business
>suits on service calls. My friend complained that when you
>climb under desks wearing wool trousers the trouser knees are
>stretched out of shape permanently -- replace the suit.[/color]

My second bit there was in setting up 3 new Branch Support units.
This was definitely a production environment. In my previous bit, I
could walk into a clients office and ask "Is it okay if I use your
chair", and the executive would get up and say I'll be back in an
hour.
In this production environment I would get a response of "no, because
I need to get my work done" I would respond with "That's okay, but
it's going to be a little awkward for me to reach over your shoulder
while I'm working on your system. Do you think you could handle a 15
minute break? I should be done by the time you get back.

>
>I believe that if contract services are reasonably priced,
>Customers will not worry about well-dressed professional service
>technicians and MCSEs. OTOH, if contract services are
>*exorbitantly priced* I can understand a Customer muttering about
>"gold plated clothing". Earlier I stated "'Appropriate' is a
>vague word" -- appropriate applies both to technician and MCSE
>clothing styles and also applies to ***service contract cost***.
>Earlier I also stated "style depends upon environment" -- I
>believe that this earlier statement is consistent with your
>"respect their culture" statement.
>
>One additional comment: One of my favorite scenes from the
>film "M*A*S*H" is when Hawkeye and Trapper journey to Tokyo
>to "save the Congressman's kid". There is no medical emergency
>in Tokyo, and Hawkeye and Trapper proceed to run wild on the
>base golf course, giving the justification "We are the pros from
>Dover". Customers pay ***premium costs*** for contract service
>personnel because they expect excellence *above* their own
>employees' skill levels. When IT equipment in the executive
>suite requires service, IT managers usually send their best --
>the contract service personnel. I believe it is imperative that
>contract service personnel exude professionalism to justify their
>higher cost, and IMO their clothing is part of that image. IMO
>*contract service personnel have their own culture* that is
>different (and *must* be superior) to the Customer employees'
>culture -- otherwise why hire contract service personnel?

That is a good analogy to most corporate structures.
I often compare others experiences to my own. In the process, I
forget that most companies do not have 100,000+ staff or an IT
department of several hundred.

<snip>
>>
>>There is a growing trend toward automation and much of the work will
>>be performe offsite and presented through the Login process. Fewer
>>technicians will be kept on staff merely to put out the fires that
>>start up when this semi-proactive systems fails.
>

One of the projects we started was to centralize the Management of the
network. The goal was to monitor client workstations and catch
problem situations as they occured, create a trouble ticket, repair
the problem either automatically or at least remotely, and finally
contact the client to let them know we fixed their problem and to
verify everything was working as expected. Our ultimate goal was to
fix the problem before the client was even aware there had been a
problem.

<snip>
>>And that is why they created the escalations team or fourth level
>>support. If the task takes 4 hours then so be it, but if you have
>>been scratching your head for longer than 15 minutes and you still
>>dont' know what the problem is or how to fix it, call someone in to
>>assist. Most SLA's in a production environment include a time period
>>where no server maintenance other than unlocking accounts is
>>permitted. Anything that could potentially disrupt access to the
>>network needs to be done after the clients have stopped working for
>>the day.

Again, as I was working directly for the Banks IT department, which
was a functional business unit, the SLA's which we operated under were
our guidebook. Security issues are not always evident to a sys admin
who resides in a different building. One example would be, attending
a clients desk and noticing they had a Network connection as well as
an open Dial-up Modem connection on the same workstation. My first
step was to instruct the client on the seriousness of having these 2
connections active at the same time. If this did not rectify the
situation, I would contact my manager (I was a direct report) and
inform them about the potential security risk and contravention to the
SLA.

>
>Multilevel help desks and SLAs characterize contract service
>agreements with *large* organizations. Smaller organizations
>might not have this depth of support -- they trade Mean-Time-To-
>Repair/Restore for cost savings, and they have texts, e-Books
>and the Internet rather than in-house "network gods". Also,
>this is Internet newsgroup alt.certification network-plus and my
>original comments were addressed to people pursueing their
>initial certifications -- the "front door" of the Help Desk tier.
>

Yes. Being I was the deskside technician, I often forget there is a
call center and second level support process that takes place, before
I get the trouble ticket.
[colo
r=darkred]
>>>This is a reactive scenario. What is the PROactive scenario?
>>>If your employer does not provide a non-production test network
>>>for you to "break and fix" (one basis of practical experience),[/color]

From a support perspective, I was lucky. There is a team of over 100
staff within their IT group that exists specifically to pretest all
possible scenarios, equipment, application software, and the many
combinations of these.

>>
>>Reactive is calling in the bucket brigade when the fire gets out of
>>hand. Proactive is using fire retardent materials in the environment,
>>and a few well placed extinguishers to catch the sparks that may fly
>>outside of your safety net.
>
>Your comment is difficult to interpret, but you have *not*
>contradicted anything that I said.
>

PROactive means we either expected the problem and are already
repairing it, or we had a backup plan which is now being implemented.

REactive means we are dumfounded as to why the entire network went
down and we will now scramble to figure out what happened.

<snip>
Again, I apologize for misreading your opening and missing the tone of
your message. You are obviously concerned, as am I, that we maintain
and even improve the integrity of the Technical Support Profession.

Thank you for writing, I have learned alot.
Millimeter

Report this post to a moderator

In article < suqavuosm9rph1rafrqisign42f1cr
8l91@4ax.com>,
Millimeter <millimeter.NOMOSPAM@sympatico.ca> writes:

>On 09 Dec 2002 20:48:13 GMT,
>rball84213@aol.com (Richard Ballard) >wrote:
>
>>In article < fnd9vu876brqln5hqiari7b7srdjh5
p3sk@4ax.com>,
>>Millimeter <millimeter.NOMOSPAM@sympatico.ca> writes:
>>
>>>On 09 Dec 2002 06:01:28 GMT,
>>>rball84213@aol.com (Richard Ballard) wrote:

<snip>

>My first bit there was in their Head Office group of buildings were
>the majority of our clients were executives and long term project
>teams suchas Media Affairs, Risk Management, etc. I chose to wear a
>tie, suit pants and good quality Sports Jacket. I was slightly above
>the dress code for some of our clients but definitely below that of
>the executives. My goal was to look professional, but not afraid of
>getting my hands a little dirty.

It is possible to remove a sport coat or sweater, and a necktie
and to roll up one's shirtsleeves. I do not hesitate to crawl
under desks in wash-and-wear Dockers.

>One of my co-workers however wore a sweater and workboots. His
>biggest complaint was that he was often asked if he was there to fix
>the toilette. :-)

When there is snow on the ground and I receive a night call, I
usually show up in light climbing boots (i.e., boots whose soles
are just a little too light for crampons). But I show up.
[colo
r=darkred]
>>>>I believe that appropriate clothing is part of effectively
>>>>representing your organization. 'Appropriate' is a vague
>>>>word -- clothing that is appropriate for climbing under desks
>>>>and squeezing between server racks might not be appropriate
>>>>when repairing the workstation that your Customer's CEO uses.
>>>>Clean, neat and properly-fitting are mandatory -- style depends
>>>>upon environment. I believe that service technician and MCSE
>>>>clothing should reflect comfortable professionalism, and should
>>>>reflect the resources of the service organization.
>>>
>>>I agree, but I have also been sent to rooms where I was asked to dress
>>>more casually because I was making the clients feel uncomfortable. We
>>>need to learn the environment we are walking into and respect their
>>>culture while retaining our professionalism.
>>
>>I have not encountered this problem. I knew a Senior Network
>>Administrator who had been a Senior Service Technician for a
>>previous employer. That previous employer required service
>>technicians to wear (seasonally-appropriate-weight) wool business
>>suits on service calls. My friend complained that when you
>>climb under desks wearing wool trousers the trouser knees are
>>stretched out of shape permanently -- replace the suit.
>
>My second bit there was in setting up 3 new Branch Support units.
>This was definitely a production environment. In my previous bit, I
>could walk into a clients office and ask "Is it okay if I use your
>chair", and the executive would get up and say I'll be back in an
>hour.
>
> In this production environment I would get a response of "no, because
>I need to get my work done" I would respond with "That's okay, but
>it's going to be a little awkward for me to reach over your shoulder
>while I'm working on your system. Do you think you could handle a 15
>minute break? I should be done by the time you get back.[/color]

I have encountered unanticipated problems that require
more than 15 minutes to correct.

When a user workstation requires an upgrade I make an
appointment, providing in advance an Estimated Time To
Restore.

When a user workstaton is broken I make an appointment.
The appointment schedule is affected by the user's identity
(in any organization all animals are not equal) and whether
the workstation outage is a critical outage - often users can
utilize a different networked workstation to complete their
work. I work through "normal" lunchtime, and I work
afterhours as required.

I advocate a professional appearance and demeanour when
introducing yourself to your Customer.

I do *not* advocate working with worried Customers looking
over your shoulder -- this helps nobody. Security issues
are the exception to my "worried Customer looking over your
shoulder while you work" caveat. IMO skilled Customer
security personnel *must* supervise contract personnel in
security matters -- security ultimately is the Customer's
responsibility. I acknowledge that some people will
disagree with my opinion.

>>I believe that if contract services are reasonably priced,
>>Customers will not worry about well-dressed professional service
>>technicians and MCSEs. OTOH, if contract services are
>>*exorbitantly priced* I can understand a Customer muttering about
>>"gold plated clothing". Earlier I stated "'Appropriate' is a
>>vague word" -- appropriate applies both to technician and MCSE
>>clothing styles and also applies to ***service contract cost***.
>>Earlier I also stated "style depends upon environment" -- I
>>believe that this earlier statement is consistent with your
>>"respect their culture" statement.
>>
>>One additional comment: One of my favorite scenes from the
>>film "M*A*S*H" is when Hawkeye and Trapper journey to Tokyo
>>to "save the Congressman's kid". There is no medical emergency
>>in Tokyo, and Hawkeye and Trapper proceed to run wild on the
>>base golf course, giving the justification "We are the pros from
>>Dover". Customers pay ***premium costs*** for contract service
>>personnel because they expect excellence *above* their own
>>employees' skill levels. When IT equipment in the executive
>>suite requires service, IT managers usually send their best --
>>the contract service personnel. I believe it is imperative that
>>contract service personnel exude professionalism to justify their
>>higher cost, and IMO their clothing is part of that image. IMO
>>*contract service personnel have their own culture* that is
>>different (and *must* be superior) to the Customer employees'
>>culture -- otherwise why hire contract service personnel?
>
>That is a good analogy to most corporate structures.
>I often compare others experiences to my own. In the process, I
>forget that most companies do not have 100,000+ staff or an IT
>department of several hundred.

There are problems associated with overly large staffs. I
worked as a network administrator at a previous employer.
My collegue was called off-site for a extended period to
upgrade a facility. My supervisor hired a contract employee
to fill the void. On day one the contract employee appeared,
sat down at my colleague's desk, pulled out a "Exam Cram"
and submerged. "What ya doin'?", I asked. "Studying for
my MCSE," he replied. I said "We have work to do." "My
MCSE test is scheduled for Friday," he replied. "We have
work to do on Friday", I said. Silence. I discussed the
situation with my supervisor and we had a different contract
employee the next day.

I have other stories (and details) that I choose not to tell.

I believe that contract employees and service personnel
should present a professional appearance and demeanour.

<snip>

My opinions.

Richard Ballard MSEE CNA4 KD0AZ
--
Consultant specializing in computer networks, imaging & security
Listed as rjballard in "Friends & Favorites" at www.amazon.com
Last review: "Will: The Autobiography of G. Gordon Liddy"

Report this post to a moderator

On 10 Dec 2002 07:53:24 GMT, rball84213@aol.com (Richard Ballard)
wrote:

>In article < suqavuosm9rph1rafrqisign42f1cr
8l91@4ax.com>,
>Millimeter <millimeter.NOMOSPAM@sympatico.ca> writes:
>
>>On 09 Dec 2002 20:48:13 GMT,
>>rball84213@aol.com (Richard Ballard) >wrote:
>>
>>>In article < fnd9vu876brqln5hqiari7b7srdjh5
p3sk@4ax.com>,
>>>Millimeter <millimeter.NOMOSPAM@sympatico.ca> writes:
>>>
>>>>On 09 Dec 2002 06:01:28 GMT,
>>>>rball84213@aol.com (Richard Ballard) wrote:
>
> <snip>
>
>>My first bit there was in their Head Office group of buildings were
>>the majority of our clients were executives and long term project
>>teams suchas Media Affairs, Risk Management, etc. I chose to wear a
>>tie, suit pants and good quality Sports Jacket. I was slightly above
>>the dress code for some of our clients but definitely below that of
>>the executives. My goal was to look professional, but not afraid of
>>getting my hands a little dirty.
>
>It is possible to remove a sport coat or sweater, and a necktie
>and to roll up one's shirtsleeves. I do not hesitate to crawl
>under desks in wash-and-wear Dockers.
>
>>One of my co-workers however wore a sweater and workboots. His
>>biggest complaint was that he was often asked if he was there to fix
>>the toilette. :-)
>
>When there is snow on the ground and I receive a night call, I
>usually show up in light climbing boots (i.e., boots whose soles
>are just a little too light for crampons). But I show up.
>
<snip>
>> In this production environment I would get a response of "no, because
>>I need to get my work done" I would respond with "That's okay, but
>>it's going to be a little awkward for me to reach over your shoulder
>>while I'm working on your system. Do you think you could handle a 15
>>minute break? I should be done by the time you get back.
>
>I have encountered unanticipated problems that require
>more than 15 minutes to correct.

Yes. If you know how to do the fix and it takes time, that's o.k.

If you don't have a clue, call for experienced assistance.
15 Minutes should be long enough for onsite trouble shooting in most
cases. A tech. professional can't be afraid to admit when he's
stumped in a production environment.

<snip>
>>
>>That is a good analogy to most corporate structures.
>>I often compare others experiences to my own. In the process, I
>>forget that most companies do not have 100,000+ staff or an IT
>>department of several hundred.
>
>There are problems associated with overly large staffs.

As I said, we were a functional business unit covering everything from
qualifying hardware/software, to end user support.

The Home Office incorporated 7 buildings and approximately 40,000
staff. As well as the number of Branches, Investment units, etc. I
wouldn't say they were overly bloated.

>I worked as a network administrator at a previous employer.
>My collegue was called off-site for a extended period to
>upgrade a facility. My supervisor hired a contract employee
>to fill the void. On day one the contract employee appeared,
>sat down at my colleague's desk, pulled out a "Exam Cram"
>and submerged. "What ya doin'?", I asked. "Studying for
>my MCSE," he replied. I said "We have work to do." "My
>MCSE test is scheduled for Friday," he replied. "We have
>work to do on Friday", I said. Silence. I discussed the
>situation with my supervisor and we had a different contract
>employee the next day.

Definitely a bonehead. Didn't realize that the experience would be
worth more than a certification, long term.

>
>I have other stories (and details) that I choose not to tell.
>
>I believe that contract employees and service personnel
>should present a professional appearance and demeanour.
>

I agree, although I have never acted as a contract employee hired
through an agency or a third party. I was hired for a contract
period, but I was a direct hire by the bank.

What is a KD0AZ ?
Millimeter

> <snip>
>
>My opinions.
>
>Richard Ballard MSEE CNA4 KD0AZ

Report this post to a moderator

Richard Ballard wrote:
>
> "What answers must I know to pass this test?" and "Is boot camp
> sufficient to achieve my certification?" are recurring questions
> on CompTia- and Microsoft-related Internet newsgroups.
> Individuals changing careers and wanting to enter the
> Information Technology (IT) field view the CompTia and MCSE
> certifications as tickets to success. IMO the CompTia and
> MCSE certifications are tickets that get IT travelers' feet
> in the IT employer's door

I wish that were true. I've got my MCSE and A+. Not a lot of work
experience, but quite a bit of at home network experience. I've been
trying for a year now just to get my foot in the door. I'm not looking
to make a million dollars, (although, I wouldn't turn down the offer)
I'm just looking to get my foot on the first rung of the IT ladder and
see where I can climb from there. But with the economy right now...I'm
having a hard time finding a ladder.


Wayland

Report this post to a moderator