why is it that CIOs don't have to be trained in IT???

deneb829

deneb829 wrote: »

This is an interesting topic for me because I have been going through this for the past 18 months. I was hired to replace a retiring network administrator. I got to work right away on analyzing the problems about the slow networks. 7 sites, each site with between 100-250 computers all connected to 100mbps unmanaged switches. Each unmanaged switch was connect to an old Cisco 2900 by one of the 100mbps ports. Some of the switches were 10mbps. A single, flat network.

Unfortunately, the old administrator leaving created a political vacuum. I was taking orders from a math teacher who understood little about network infrastructure, but told me in a meeting that she understands networks and knows everything that I know about computers and networks. Uh ... no. I have been doing this for 15 years, with almost 10 in networking, and I certainly don't know everything.

I was told to give every computer (nearly 1000) static IP addresses because of network issues they have been having over the past few years and the computers with static IP addresses have not experienced the problems. Well, 10 minutes with Wireshark revealed rouge DHCP servers (wireless access points routers with their default settings installed by users). The problem was fixed in a day, but when I explained what the problem was it was like talking to a wall. Another location "needed" a new server because the installed one was 'messed up'. Again, a few minutes on site revealed the DNS settings on the clients were pointing to the external, authoritative DNS server and not the domain controller. When I adjusted the DHCP server to point at the Domain Controller, **it hit the fan - despite the fact that 90% of the computers on that network were static. When the new server was installed - surprise! the old problems still existed. There's dozens of stories like this.

Every available dollar seemed to go to new computers and servers instead of the infrastructure. Users were frustrated when new computers seemed to run as slow as the old ones. I was told to fix a newly purchased $16,000 video conferencing system between sites, when I explained 'again' about the infrastructure issues, I was told to just make it work. I was excluded from meetings with network and internet vendors. When she announced that we were going to VoIP, I balked. "We can't prioritize a single packet on this network, and most of the connections between sites are single T1s!" to which I was told that I was not a visionary and it was going to happen. It got back to me that the idea was finally dropped when two VoIP vendors came onsite and told her that our networks would not support it - of course I was excluded from these meetings.

The just like that a couple of weeks ago - she resigns. She took another job somewhere else. Turns out she was making alot of enemies. Every chance she got, she got into someone else's business and started treating them the same way - even though she wasn't anyone's boss. I don't know the real reasons she left, but she is someone else's problem now. Right away, people started coming to me for IT decisions (what I was hired to do in the first place). I have been able to effect more change in 2 weeks than in the past 18 months. Money's tight, but it looks like we're going to start getting some decent switches and internet upgrades.

I know this post is nearly a year old, but I wanted to give an update on what has changed since the above post.

At 5 of the 7 schools and the District Office, all of the 100meg unmanaged layer 2 switches (connected to 12+ year old Cisco 1900 series 100meg switches) have been replaced at the access level with layer 2 managed 3Com switches with dual gig uplinks to a layer 3 gigabit switch at the core. Before, on one of the networks , the theoretical maximum speed was 1200MBPS (12, 100mbps switches connected to 100mbps core) now that same network has 20 gig uplinks to the core gig switch. We were blown away on how fast that network can now move files.

The remaining 2 elementary schools are a bit trickier. I guess around 10 years ago or so (I've been here for 2.5), one of the people making technology decisions decided that these schools needed fiber to the desktop. There is no CAT5 anywhere. Just multi-mode fiber and CAT3. What they have now is either a CAT3 connection (which needs some PC NICs forced to 10mbps) or MMF fiber to 10mbps Ethernet hubs. So, in the labs, we installed the 3COM switches and connected them to a core layer 3 fiber switch, so the connection from the labs to the switch is 1000mbps. We are going to need to pull some cable and install some jacks in some of the classrooms (eventually all of them). We're going to leverage the MMF to connect access switches located near the classrooms to the core.

5 schools have one T-1 and 2 have two T-1s back to the District Office (10mbps to the WAN) where they share a 6mbps Internet pipe. This month, fiber has been pulled into 6 of the 7 schools (1 is out of our ISP territory so they will go from 1 to 2 T1's for now). The initial speeds from the schools to the District Office will be 10mbps where it will have 70mbps to the schools. Internet bandwidth is increasing from 6mbps to 30mbps.

On top of that, we have added (or replaced) nearly 400 computers, 80 projectors, and a dozens of document cameras and smart boards. We are also doing distance learning between our four high schools. Now students at a smaller high school can take classes in real-time from a larger school that were previous unavailable because their school did not have a teacher qualified to teach AP, foreign language, or college credit courses.

It is amazing in such a challenging financial environment where we have lost all but 2 full-time technology coordinators (with one tethered to a single school) we have been able to procure this type of technology upgrade, but we're a poor county and have been able to get help from grants and available federal funds. Less than $1000 has come out of the general fund for these improvements. This has been far from a 1 man job. Key people from IT, Instructional Technology, Curriculum, finance, and grants have all been working together to make this happen.

I am exhausted and am welcoming the summer where the district will be down to a few dozen 12-month employees. All of our techs are 10-month, and I've got more projects than I will be able to finish, but they are prioritized on their impact to operations, so no matter what gets finished this summer, the effect should be noticeable.

N2IT

itdaddy wrote: »

Catherine Doran, Director of Corporate Development - CIO50 2009 at Silicon.com


I don't get it..why why why is it that people don't higher as their CIOs someone who is money savvy and IT savvy..her degree is in math and geography??? huh? and you are leading and directing hundreds of IT professionals. That is like my boss who knows nothing of IT barely and he runs the IT show. I can tell you countless times how money has been spent wrongly! My God am I the only one who sees this??? She may be smart, great, but they just dont know IT systems to the core. Doing computers as a hobby to me isnt enough.

I would rather higher a network engineer who is business savvy not a
math and geography person. Experience is essential but so is really knowing IT systems and how they really work together....I have seen it hundreds of times where our money has been spent wrongly..help why is this? So what if she understands computers big woopy..but does she really understand IT systems??

Crap I might as well **** my hard earned Computer Science degree and get a degree in fishing!

CIOs have it made they can be called an IT person but not really and get to lead IT pros that is like a Electronics Technician leading Electronic Engineers but that Eletronic tech and a business degree and is telling the EEs how to design circuits and
what to do here and there..just doesn't seem right!

Because IT support business processes. It's not the other way around.

Zartanasaurus

I worked with a programmer who had a degree in timber harvesting, so anything is possible I guess.

deneb829

deneb829 wrote: »

I know this post is nearly a year old, but I wanted to give an update on what has changed since the above post.

At 5 of the 7 schools and the District Office, all of the 100meg unmanaged layer 2 switches (connected to 12+ year old Cisco 1900 series 100meg switches) have been replaced at the access level with layer 2 managed 3Com switches with dual gig uplinks to a layer 3 gigabit switch at the core. Before, on one of the networks , the theoretical maximum speed was 1200MBPS (12, 100mbps switches connected to 100mbps core) now that same network has 20 gig uplinks to the core gig switch. We were blown away on how fast that network can now move files.

The remaining 2 elementary schools are a bit trickier. I guess around 10 years ago or so (I've been here for 2.5), one of the people making technology decisions decided that these schools needed fiber to the desktop. There is no CAT5 anywhere. Just multi-mode fiber and CAT3. What they have now is either a CAT3 connection (which needs some PC NICs forced to 10mbps) or MMF fiber to 10mbps Ethernet hubs. So, in the labs, we installed the 3COM switches and connected them to a core layer 3 fiber switch, so the connection from the labs to the switch is 1000mbps. We are going to need to pull some cable and install some jacks in some of the classrooms (eventually all of them). We're going to leverage the MMF to connect access switches located near the classrooms to the core.

5 schools have one T-1 and 2 have two T-1s back to the District Office (10mbps to the WAN) where they share a 6mbps Internet pipe. This month, fiber has been pulled into 6 of the 7 schools (1 is out of our ISP territory so they will go from 1 to 2 T1's for now). The initial speeds from the schools to the District Office will be 10mbps where it will have 70mbps to the schools. Internet bandwidth is increasing from 6mbps to 30mbps.

On top of that, we have added (or replaced) nearly 400 computers, 80 projectors, and a dozens of document cameras and smart boards. We are also doing distance learning between our four high schools. Now students at a smaller high school can take classes in real-time from a larger school that were previous unavailable because their school did not have a teacher qualified to teach AP, foreign language, or college credit courses.

It is amazing in such a challenging financial environment where we have lost all but 2 full-time technology coordinators (with one tethered to a single school) we have been able to procure this type of technology upgrade, but we're a poor county and have been able to get help from grants and available federal funds. Less than $1000 has come out of the general fund for these improvements. This has been far from a 1 man job. Key people from IT, Instructional Technology, Curriculum, finance, and grants have all been working together to make this happen.

I am exhausted and am welcoming the summer where the district will be down to a few dozen 12-month employees. All of our techs are 10-month, and I've got more projects than I will be able to finish, but they are prioritized on their impact to operations, so no matter what gets finished this summer, the effect should be noticeable.

I know THIS post is over 7 years old, but I was looking for some unrelated information on certification and came across this website and thought to myself - "Hey! I used to be a member on that site!" Turns out, I still am. Much has changed since that last post. Our schools now have all enterprise-grade switches - some with 10gig LAN backbones back to the datacenter at 1gig (to a 10gig aggregate circuit) and 1gig of dedicated Internet bandwidth. Our 10 month techs are now 12 month. We have a centrally managed WiFi infrastructure and are starting to install our first 802.1ac APs.

Personally, I have got a few more vendor certifications (Extreme and iBoss) but had primary working on my degrees. I finished a bachelors in 2010 and finished my MBA (focused in Information Systems) in 2015. It was a blast from the past to read how things were 7 years ago and how much has changed. I am really happy to see that techexams is still alive and kicking!

hurricane1091

We have a CTO and a CIO.

CTO is very technical. Decent understanding of everything. Consults with department managers about issues and initiatives.

CIO is very business oriented. Understands the industry, has a lot of buddies at other firms. Unsure what he really does to be honest. He looks at technology as a facilitator of business basically I am sure. What can we do to make more money? Has no idea how the technology works probably, but consults the CTO and it works its way down the chain I imagine.

CIO could probably say X Y Z regulations are being passed by the government, and we are going to need to get in compliance. We need to do this generic thing, and the CTO probably starts looking on how to proceed.

Or I'm making stuff up, but I'm pretty sure I'm not. For example, we want to do iWAN. We build a lab, explain to CTO how it works, and then present to CIO. CIO wants to know what it cost, why it can make us money, and then he makes a decision (said no 4 times actually lol). So, there ya go.

DatabaseHead

Hurricane agree for the most part. Good way of looking at it.

Our CIO was very similar to that. Understood the pricing landscape of storage, facilities etc. Our budget was always right on par, guy knew what the heck he was doing. Had no idea about anything technical. I am NOTHING. Failed to add: He was amazing a presenting and VERY charismatic, like a politician.

deneb829

Before I got into IT management, I used to wonder what my bosses did all the time and also why we could not do more projects. As IT professionals, networking people want to build and work on networks and know what it takes to make the best ones. Our worlds are very small and focused. There is not much thought to the bigger, organizational picture.

At the end of the day, upper management and users do not care what switches we use, how fast our networks run, or our business continuity design ... and seriously, why should they? Do most of us really think about how water and electricity get to our houses, how the roads get built and maintained, or how Walmart manages their supply chains? We just want that stuff to work or to pay less for our clothing and groceries. Still, all of that stuff is important to someone. To most end users, technology is a tool that they use to do their jobs - to us, technology is an end in itself - and there lies the disconnect. As a manager, I am responsible for enabling users to effectively use technology to do their jobs while working within the confines of the budgets approved by upper management. It is up to me to take my limited resources and make this happen.

I started out over 20 years ago as a bench tech. I moved from there to help desk, desktop support, network engineering, Windows network admin and a Linux sysadmin. I worked my way up the ladder, and I understand why techs feel like their bosses do not do anything. As an IT manager, Karma took care of that one day when I was at lunch with the team and being hassled by my network admin about a project that I did not feel we should do. I looked at this tech and said "you must feel like you have to do my job". He immediately looked at one of the other techs who said "I didn't say anything to him!" He did not, but I used to be the guy sitting in his seat getting on to the manager. The network admin was at the peak of the tech world's version of adolescence - 3 to 5 years experience. When you have some real world skills, but do not have a clue what you "do not know" and just assume that you know everything. I understood his role on the team ... and he was good at it, but he did not understand my role. He was better at managing the servers day-to-day in the data center than I was - that is why I hired him! The problem was that he knew it, and since that was his whole world, he thought he knew more about my job than I did. If I wanted to put the time and energy into learning what just one of my team members knew, neither one of us would have a job at that place.

IT management requires an understanding of the organizational environment, what the company does, and the roles of your employees. His or her job is to manage resources, personnel, and ensure that IT services are being delivered efficiently. My job is to make sure that the help desk, desktop support, and network services are doing just that. I cannot run everything by myself, and I know it. I need a team of competent and qualified employees helping me with it. The help desk workers roles are to answer calls and resolve what they can, desktop support goes to the customer and helps there. Network services keeps everything connected and running. Can I answer the phones? Sure! Can I fix a computer? You betcha! Can I manage servers, switches, and routers? Heck yes, and I love it and miss it - and jump in when I get the chance. But at the end of the day, I am accountable for the actions and outcomes of everyone of those systems and employees. I picked them because they are good at what they do and make a good team. I am an IT manager first because that is what my company hired me to do.

Ironically, employees question their managers when they do not have the same skill set as them, but the worst IT managers are the ones who think they know everything. They stand over your shoulders and try and micromanage everything you do - instead of trusting you to do what you know. Look, I know there are some bad IT managers out there - but not signing off on every project, hiring more staff, or wanting to take time to plan upgrades does not make a bad manager. You may not know this until you have to walk in their shoes - still try and keep in mind that there is usually a reason behind management decisions.

DatabaseHead

deneb829

Great post, wanted to add that the best CIO's in the companies I worked for usually had 0 knowledge of the nuts and bolts of IT.

hurricane1091

Thinking about the big picture should be everything that we all do, I would like to say. I was asked what is one initiative we should focus on this year. I said guest wireless, simply because it is something that most firms have but we do not. It's almost expected that there is free wireless, wherever you go. Not the manager, but trying to think like one, I am suggesting that we need to route this over backup circuits instead of primary MPLS circuits. I will be doing the nuts/bolts of this project if it gets approved, but I'll keep going. How do we go about authentication? Surely we do not want this to be open to everyone and have the circuits flooded by people that should not be connected, but having a client ask for a log in, and having the receptionist call the help desk and getting an account created is not a good option. I think a better option is to tie client account credentials to our website be used to authenticate with the WiFi. I have no idea how this is going to be done, but I know this is better than the first option and better than sending the password out to every branch. I assume it is possible, since I am able to log into an Xfinity hotspot with my account credentials and connect. Big picture is good for all to consider.

DatabaseHead

Hurricane love the guest wireless project. I agree, almost all the companies I have worked for except a (govt contract and a start up) had guest wireless.