MSP companies suck

thomas_

I agree with @JDMurray.  It gets annoying when people can’t do simple, f***ing tasks.  I try to give people the benefit of the doubt that maybe they just got busy, but when they habitually forget to do certain tasks especially when you have reminded them multiple times it gets to the point where it seems like the task is beneath them or unimportant.  This is especially true since I’m their supervisor and I have no problem doing said task and because if it wasn’t important to do I wouldn’t have them doing it in the first place.

It’s also annoying/frustrating when they keep making the same mistakes over and over again no matter how many times you tell them about it, document the process, etc.  It gets to the point where you start thinking do I need to start counseling them to make them stop making those mistakes?

I don’t know a couple of @AODIT ‘s posts rubbed me the wrong way especially when he/she starts ralking about coaching for the hiring manager.

DatabaseHead

Jon_Cisco said:

There is more then one thing going on in this thread. At it's core it is about the original posters desire for a job. If he is gainfully employed and satisfied then I suggest moving on from this interview is absolutely acceptable. Possibly the best choice that could be made.

However there is some hesitation because he continues by asking if he is going to need this type of company to build his career. This gives us a sense that he is still fairly new and has ambitions. Now we know he is confident because he is not going to follow some procedure when he is fully capable of winging it. What we don't know is where he stands in his career and his abilities. I think it is a great thing to be able to pass on work that does not fit your needs as long as you are finding other work that does. So I suggest finishing any interview the best you can and simply declining the position if you are uncomfortable with it.

Agreed and to answer their last question IMO (Do I need them as I'm building IT experience or are there other avenues to take while building my career? ) The answer is no, absolutely not.......   and yes their are PLENTY of other avenues to building your career.  Countless

I know a lot of IT professionals who don't set up printers or fix outlook, never have.....  I'm sure they can google and fix their own stuff, but they don't have to fix other peoples gear....

*** I'm not saying these roles are bad either......  

Jon_Cisco

DatabaseHead said:

Good grief is this really what management has come too? 

My experience is mostly outside of IT but I discuss work situations with others enough to know there is great variations between companies. Some companies will Silo people into very specific roles. Some companies will accept no boundaries.

When I took my last management position I had to make a point of declining to handle lavatory maintenance as part of my job. It had absolutely no relation to the work I do but the previous manager someone became responsible for it. When I took the position I was successful in removing that duty but I did receive some minor push back first! You really just never know what you might deal with and for the most part I am happy to pitch in when needed. I feel I am usually to flexible which has its good and bad days.

DatabaseHead

Jon_Cisco said:

DatabaseHead said:

Good grief is this really what management has come too? 

My experience is mostly outside of IT but I discuss work situations with others enough to know there is great variations between companies. Some companies will Silo people into very specific roles. Some companies will accept no boundaries.

When I took my last management position I had to make a point of declining to handle lavatory maintenance as part of my job. It had absolutely no relation to the work I do but the previous manager someone became responsible for it. When I took the position I was successful in removing that duty but I did receive some minor push back first! You really just never know what you might deal with and for the most part I am happy to pitch in when needed. I feel I am usually to flexible which has its good and bad days.

First of all that is a different paradigm.  You stepped into a role that had that responsibility baked into it.  You did the right thing pushing back and turning the role into what YOU wanted, bravo more people should do this honestly......   Chipping in is fine, AS LONG AS it's understood by management this is above and beyond the call of duty.  If not and it's not part of the job description then it's flat out exploitation and unethical management.  

Companies who accept no boundaries are horrible companies to work for.  Success has to be defined, if not it's usually at the whim of the manager, generally tainted by feelings and void of facts....   This is why you should always get a job description and make sure you find out what the definition of success is within that role.  If not, wow.....

DatabaseHead

thomas_ said:

I agree with @JDMurray.  It gets annoying when people can’t do simple, f***ing tasks.  I try to give people the benefit of the doubt that maybe they just got busy, but when they habitually forget to do certain tasks especially when you have reminded them multiple times it gets to the point where it seems like the task is beneath them or unimportant.  This is especially true since I’m their supervisor and I have no problem doing said task and because if it wasn’t important to do I wouldn’t have them doing it in the first place.

It’s also annoying/frustrating when they keep making the same mistakes over and over again no matter how many times you tell them about it, document the process, etc.  It gets to the point where you start thinking do I need to start counseling them to make them stop making those mistakes?

I don’t know a couple of @AODIT ‘s posts rubbed me the wrong way especially when he/she starts ralking about coaching for the hiring manager.

In regards to your second paragraph.  If the role has been defined correctly and the employee or contractor agreed to terms and they are unable to deliver on the duties assigned then you should most certainly console them.  If they are unable to meet defined expectations then that employee should be terminated, with the help of your HR department, legal council etc......

Unless of course you see value in them in a different capacity, but that is a different story.....

AvgITGeek

JDMurray said:

When you see very specific questions in a job interview this might be a clue as to the problems the organization has been experiencing with its employees or in hiring qualified candidates. In this case with the printer example, I would assume it is just an exercise allowing the candidate to demonstrate how technically detailed, thorough, and efficient their thought process is regarding a common task. Someone who would take exception at performing such a menial exercise in a job interview would be likely to also refuse to perform work given to them that they considered or beneath their skill level. As a hiring manager, I would never want to hire such a candidate that would pick-and-choose how they wanted to help the organization.

I agree with @JDMurray 100%

Having worked for an MSP for several years, it has the down side and the up side. The down side is that we needed to be able to document and reproduce every single task, like installing a printer at a particular client location. This way, it was cookie cutter and verified to work 99% of the time. I don't know why the backlash against an MSP is showing up here other than being the feeling that one was offended by one. The experience is great, and I've got to work with technologies I'd never get an opportunity to work with but yes, I've been asked to install printers and document the process. The next day, I'm helping an end user configure Word to print properly then I'm working with WAN load balancing hardware and Active/Standby ASA configurations.

@DatabaseHead seems to be sharing the same ax.

This is my last comment in this post. Good night folks!

JDMurray

DatabaseHead said:
...but if you went in for a role you thought was much more "technical" and they started asking you basic IT task, it would be an indicator that the role wasn't good for you?  In fact wouldn't it be better to move on?  I think the OP did the right thing......

The candidate should ask the interviewer if this question was an accurate representation of the work required of the position or merely hypothetical. Questions are often asked not to hear if the candidate will give a correct answer (quantitative) but instead to hear whatever answer the candidate will give (qualitative). Interviewers want to hear how the candidate thinks and not just what the candidate thinks.

DatabaseHead said:
One other thing to note, which bothered me a little.  As a hiring manager, I would never want to hire such a candidate that would pick-and-choose how they wanted to help the organization.  That is an awful approach in management.  The scoped defined in the job description should align with the task assigned to the individual.  I would hope you wouldn't ask a .net developer who is making 160,000 a year to help Lois in accounting troubleshoot Excel.....   If you did and I was your boss we would be having a chat..... 

If that 160K resource was the best person to help "Lois" with her Excel problem then I would expect that "resource" to see the bigger picture of how his/her Excel SME expertise would help the entire organization by helping Lois. The only time I expected to hear, "Sorry, that's not my job!" is in a union shop. In any other place, it's a career-limiting attitude.