Burning question

I have a burning question that i want to ask those of you that are serious about working in "IT"

I search through the job boards and I have been noticing that one companies administrator is another's engineer etc etc. Here recently my job title has changed to system administrator and i know good and d@#$% well that i am no where close to a systems administrator.

My question is does it really matter what your title is anymore. I use to think that being a network administrator etc etc was a big deal and that it would make you a big shot in the world of "IT". I have heard horror stories about being a net admin and i am starting to wonder if thats
the direction i still want to go after.

Find more posts tagged with

Save $250 on 2025 certification boot camps from Infosec!

Book now with code EOY2025

Button

Comments

Tech109

Yeah, I see all sorts of goofy titles for jobs, and wonder just who thinks them up. I wish there was more of a standard of job titles across the board.

Sometimes I think it's just political-correctness, akin to someone wanting to be called a "Sanitation Engineer" instead of a "Garbage Man."

snadam

RATTLERMAN wrote:

I have a burning question that i want to ask those of you that are serious about working in "IT"

I search through the job boards and I have been noticing that one companies administrator is another's engineer etc etc. Here recently my job title has changed to system administrator and i know good and d@#$% well that i am no where close to a systems administrator.

My question is does it really matter what your title is anymore. I use to think that being a network administrator etc etc was a big deal and that it would make you a big shot in the world of "IT". I have heard horror stories about being a net admin and i am starting to wonder if thats
the direction i still want to go after.

i think its commonplace anymore. Even if you dont think it is what youre looking for; look at the description. I have seen "Windows Admin" postings, only to read that they are literally looking for a Cisco network architect with no indication of working with ANY MS products...

it can be frustrating at times...

networker050184

Like snadam stated you usually have to read the description.

A lot of places even call their helpdesk engineers. I'm not sure if that's to make it sound important or some kind of company naming convention policy...

dynamik

Anyone want to take a shot at defining admin, engineer, and architect? I'm curious to see how you all interpret/define them as it seems the lines between them are often blurred.

networker050184

I'll give it a shot from my experience:

Admin - maintains an organizations IT infrastructure day to day

Engineer - works complex issues (break-fix, implement new technologies, testing, redesign etc.) not day to day

Architect - high level design

snadam

networker050184 wrote:

I'll give it a shot from my experience:

Admin - maintains an organizations IT infrastructure day to day

Engineer - works complex issues (break-fix, implement new technologies, testing, redesign etc.) not day to day

Architect - high level design

+1 Id say thats pretty accurate to my thinking. Except only the 'chosen one' will ever visit the architect. Led by 'the oracle' and company, the chosen one will have the most James Lipton-like conversation with said Architect; thus confusing the plot even more and leave you hanging for the last episode of the anti-climactic trilogy

EDIT: Even MORE ironic is that I completely forgot about RATTLERMAN's avatar

sorry, this is my poor attempt at 'forum humor'

darkerosxx

I saw a "Director of IT" position that was nothing more than a microsoft sysadmin based on the job description. Don't be fooled!

darkerosxx

networker050184 wrote:

I'll give it a shot from my experience:

Admin - maintains an organizations IT infrastructure day to day

Engineer - works complex issues (break-fix, implement new technologies, testing, redesign etc.) not day to day

Architect - high level design

So what would an admin working in an engineering department do?

networker050184

Maintain the IT infrastructure for that department.

darkerosxx

Hehe, I was kidding. I'm a sys admin in engineering and we do basically what you said an engineer does. Just throwing it out there...

MCPWannabe

This certainly sounds better than some of the job ad descriptions that I've seen lately:

Example:

Network Administrator:

Windows Server 2003, DHCP, Cisco Routing and Voice, Exchange, MOSS, Java and VB.NET programming, SQL Server and scripting, must be good at queries and triggers, Oracle 10g/P-SQL.

Pay range: $40,000 - $45000 a year.

Require Bachelors in Computer Science or Related Field AND 4 to 8 years of experience.

You've got to wonder what some of these HR departments are smoking and who is advising them.

bertieb

You think IT is bad? Jeez, you even hear of such things as 'Revenue Protection Officer' (ticket collector to you and me) or 'Vision Clearance Engineer' (window cleaner) on job boards these days.

I wouldn't get so hung up on job titles. I suppose I have a silly job title and I'd rather it was something much simpler and straight forward

Perhaps I should change careers and be an 'Education Centre Nourishment Production Assistant' (Dinner Lady

)

Forsaken_GA

RATTLERMAN wrote:

I have a burning question that i want to ask those of you that are serious about working in "IT"

I search through the job boards and I have been noticing that one companies administrator is another's engineer etc etc. Here recently my job title has changed to system administrator and i know good and d@#$% well that i am no where close to a systems administrator.

My question is does it really matter what your title is anymore. I use to think that being a network administrator etc etc was a big deal and that it would make you a big shot in the world of "IT". I have heard horror stories about being a net admin and i am starting to wonder if thats
the direction i still want to go after.

Each company is different, and sometimes you have to equate what the companies name for the job is to the 'real world' title.

For example, assuming I get the bump I'm working towards in the next year, I think my official title will be something along the lines of Assistant Director of Network Engineering.

The real world knows this job as 'junior network administrator'.

But Assistant Director will look better on my business cards and resume!

networker050184

Definitely a plus when the word director is in your job title!

Anonymouse

I was just a desktop support tech at my last job but my job title was programmer analyst for some reason haha.

flares2

I hear ya. I'm the Telecom Admin, even though I primarily work on the network. The network admin is more of a Systems Admin. We have a Hospitality Admin who maintains the point of sales databases in a SQL server, making him more of a Database Admin.

I just miss when you could call the Director's Secretary, a secretary. You give them a new long title (with the word Admin in it) and they let it go to their heads and think they have more power than the admins do.
For example: Executive Administrative Assistant to the Director of the Information Technology Department.

Forsaken_GA

flares2 wrote:

I just miss when you could call the Director's Secretary, a secretary. You give them a new long title (with the word Admin in it) and they let it go to their heads and think they have more power than the admins do.
For example: Executive Administrative Assistant to the Director of the Information Technology Department.

I used to be the same way until I had to do support for a law firm. That's when you find out who *really* runs the place. For a few lawyers, I was firmly convinced that the secretary knew more law than the lawyer did. I suspect it's the same for alot of businesses.

flares2

I understand where you're coming from Forsaken and with some of our other departments I can agree with you. But in IT, the secretary is like one of those problem users who thinks they know everything when they don't.

astorrs

I have to agree with many of you here, titles mean nothing. I've met IT Director/Managers who are the IT department, and Technical Analysts who are architects. You always need to read the job description - and ask details.

On a side note, here in Canada (and in many other countries) the term "Engineer" is protected by law and cannot be used by someone who is not a Professional Engineer (with an engineering degree). That is also one of the reasons why the Microsoft Certified Systems Engineer as a cert name is dead, Microsoft has for years been having litigation problems outside of the US and it was easier to change the title during the next revision. In fact in Germany, Microsoft asks you to just call it the MCSE or spell it out, just don't call yourself an Engineer because of the MCSE - I think it was a part of a out of court settlement.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Engineer#Non-academic_professional_certification

dynamik

Yea. I'm surprised Red Hat is still clinging to the RHCE.

astorrs

dynamik wrote:

Yea. I'm surprised Red Hat is still clinging to the RHCE.

Ah you'll be clinging to it when you get it too.

HeroPsycho

Where I work, I was asked if I'd like to become a Principal Consultant, as in it was dangled in front of me that I could be potentially rewarded. So I asked what the job responsibilities were, and what work I'd be doing as that, and the answer was the same work, but I'd also need to be "a leader" in the company and produce corporate documentation on top of what I do now, but I'd still be doing everything I do now, including fixing desktops, etc.

Translation: In exchange for the title, my duties would increase. Best part is there would be no pay raise, because I was told principal consultants make more through bonuses, not through higher base salary. It's common knowledge where I work the bonuses are virtually nonexistent.

I said no thanks.

networker050184

astorrs wrote:

On a side note, here in Canada (and in many other countries) the term "Engineer" is protected by law and cannot be used by someone who is not a Professional Engineer (with an engineering degree).

That is one of the most ridiculous things I have ever heard. Man, those Canadian engineers need to realize a degree shouldn't make an engineer, knowledge should......

I guess they were scared someone smarter than them with out a degree would steal their precious title, how sad.

Kaminsky

flares2 wrote:

For example: Executive Administrative Assistant to the Director of the Information Technology Department.

Yep ... She makes the tea, organises the calander and does a bit of short hand. 9 times out of 10 they end up thinking they have the same power as the director. Keep them in chocky biscuits and your job gets a lot easier

astorrs

networker050184 wrote:

astorrs wrote:

On a side note, here in Canada (and in many other countries) the term "Engineer" is protected by law and cannot be used by someone who is not a Professional Engineer (with an engineering degree).

That is one of the most ridiculous things I have ever heard. Man, those Canadian engineers need to realize a degree shouldn't make an engineer, knowledge should......

I guess they were scared someone smarter than them with out a degree would steal their precious title, how sad.

Actually its more than the degree, on top of the degree you need to be a member in good standing of the Association of Professional Engineers and Geoscientists of British Columbia (APEGBC - each province will have their own association) and have worked (after getting your B.Eng.) as an Engineer-in-Training for a few years before you get to call yourself a P.Eng - think of it like an internship/residency like a medical doctor has to do. Only then are you an Engineer. A lot of this holds true in Europe as well (Gernmany is a stickler for it).

It's treated the same as and protected under law in the same way as a Medical Doctor, Chartered Accountant, Certified General Accountant, etc is. Most countries have post-nomials that are protected and some have protected the words themselves. Otherwise I could run around calling myself an accountant - even though I'm not qualified - this prevents that. Same goes for engineering.

networker050184

I can see having a program to be a recognized engineer by certain councils, but protecting the term engineer is just stupid to me.

If you look up the word engineer in the dictionary its not going to read "an individual signed of by a certain council/association."

undomiel

Main Entry:
1en·gi·neer
Pronunciation:
\ˌen-jə-ˈnir\
Function:
noun
Etymology:
Middle English engineour, from Anglo-French, from enginer to devise, construct, from engineering
Date:
14th century
1: a member of a military group devoted to engineering work
2obsolete : a crafty schemer : plotter
3 a: a designer or builder of engines b: a person who is trained in or follows as a profession a branch of engineering c: a person who carries through an enterprise by skillful or artful contrivance
4: a person who runs or supervises an engine or an apparatus

Edit:
I love the pronounciation key. Engineer is really a mouthful!

networker050184

Main Entry:
2engineer
Function:
transitive verb
Date:
1843

1: to lay out, construct, or manage as an engineer <engineer a bridge>
2 a: to contrive or plan out usually with more or less subtle skill and craft <engineer a business deal> b: to guide the course of <engineer a rally>3: to modify or produce by genetic engineering <corn engineered to resist crop pests>

Mishra

Admin - Works on the daily duties of the IT infrastructure. Things like creates accounts, check logs, exchange database maintenance, fixes backups.

Engineer - The person who creates all the policies and procedures for new projects coming down the pipes. If a company wants to implement Solarwinds the engineer is the one who setups all the equipment, the software, documents, trains staff, and basically readies for the admin to take over duties once the project is completed.

Architect - I basically see the architect as only needed by large infrastructures. The architect is the guy who oversees all implementations by the engineers and throws in his ideas on how it needs to be changed. He is basically the knowledge hub of the organization and is who everyone comes to when they need answers. For example he would be the one who told the management that Solarwinds would be a good solution to their monitoring problem and pitched the reasons why the company needed to introduce it.

astorrs

networker050184 wrote:

I can see having a program to be a recognized engineer by certain councils, but protecting the term engineer is just stupid to me.

Should you be allowed to call yourself an Accountant? how about a Physician then?