The future of IT.....

Bl8ckr0uter

The future of IT jobs? It's in three types of roles | ZDNet

Find more posts tagged with

Free for TechExams community: Cybersecurity salary guide

Compare cert salaries and plan your next career move

Button

Comments

mrblackmamba343

The future of American IT is in India

never2late

LoMo wrote: »

Sad times.

Read that article and some of it I do not agree with. The statement that the younger workforce needs less technical assistance is not true. They may be more "tech savvy" at using technology but they are as clueless as the older workforce concerning how the technology actually works.

shodown

mrblackmamba343 wrote: »

The future of American IT is in India

I posted in a thread a few days ago. India is so 10 years ago. Its getting too expensive to setup shop there. People are going to other countries and doing the work from there. PI, Singapore, South America.

Armymanis

I personally agree with the IT consistent firms. I work for one and it seems like many organizations such as hospitals and schools hire IT consultant firms to do their IT work for them and they just have 1 or two people be a Network Admin. You can still get employed by the IT consultant firm, but you have to do many contracts in IT in order to get that full time job position within the IT consultant company.

At least that's what I am seeing as I have worked here for almost three months.

networker050184

mrblackmamba343 wrote: »

The future of American IT is in India

I have a story about outsourcing to India. The company I used to work for went through a big "cost saving" initiative to outsource the first line support to India. After about a year and numerous complaints with people threatening to take their business elsewhere, they were forced to move the support back stateside as the customer base was completely unhappy calling and trying to work with a non-native English speaker.

Moral of the story, companies can only get away with what their consumers are willing to accept. If we raise enough stink about it it will change.

it_consultant

never2late wrote: »

Read that article and some of it I do not agree with. The statement that the younger workforce needs less technical assistance is not true. They may be more "tech savvy" at using technology but they are as clueless as the older workforce concerning how the technology actually works.

I have to agree with this, often times I find the younger users are the ones I have to look out for the most. When it comes right down to it younger people are comfortable with the general GUI, facebook, iTunes, and web browsing. It is nice that they have an understanding of the GUI because they can be helped more readily over the phone, but stick them in a citrix environment and ask "is this on your computer or in the citrix application" and you realize they have no idea that the citrix app is streamed from another computer.

Obviously I am a consultant and I see a lot of business for us mostly it is because we are often some hybrid of tech and project manager. Very rarely to I walk into a screwed up business and the problem is solely a technical one. I have to understand the business and the people to see how I massage the technology around them.

MrRyte

Indeed. Where as the babyboomer generation was more technophobic, the younger generation has become "techno-over-confident". I'm willing to bet that a lot of IT departments have spent countless hours wasting time trying to fix a major issue on a desktop, laptop or in the network because the end user couldn't see the harm in downloading a song/video from some dubious website or clicking on a link saying "MAN-YOU GOTTA SEE THIS!!!!!!"

NOC-Ninja

shodown wrote: »

I posted in a thread a few days ago. India is so 10 years ago. Its getting too expensive to setup shop there. People are going to other countries and doing the work from there. PI, Singapore, South America.

Thats good. Maybe I can go back to PI if they pay me the same amount that they pay me right now. lol

veritas_libertas

shodown wrote: »

I posted in a thread a few days ago. India is so 10 years ago. Its getting too expensive to setup shop there. People are going to other countries and doing the work from there. PI, Singapore, South America.

Our company has setup shop with Colorado and Ireland for Help Desk calls. Our users get a kick out of talking to Ireland

erpadmin

veritas_libertas wrote: »

Our company has setup shop with Colorado and Ireland for Help Desk calls. Our users get a kick out of talking to Ireland

Do the Irish have to change their names too like those from Central Asia?

(e.g. My name is Sandeep Patel, but please, call me Charles Smith....)

(That annoys the ---- out of me...already you are lying to me by not saying what your real name is. I'd rather you fake your accent then your name...lmao.)

it_consultant

veritas_libertas wrote: »

Our company has setup shop with Colorado and Ireland for Help Desk calls. Our users get a kick out of talking to Ireland

More and more I seem to talk to people in Canada.

Rappeller

networker050184 wrote: »

I have a story about outsourcing to India. The company I used to work for went through a big "cost saving" initiative to outsource the first line support to India. After about a year and numerous complaints with people threatening to take their business elsewhere, they were forced to move the support back stateside as the customer base was completely unhappy calling and trying to work with a non-native English speaker.

Moral of the story, companies can only get away with what their consumers are willing to accept. If we raise enough stink about it it will change.

Sounds like Windstream, since they did that exact thing to me.

Turgon

never2late wrote: »

Read that article and some of it I do not agree with. The statement that the younger workforce needs less technical assistance is not true. They may be more "tech savvy" at using technology but they are as clueless as the older workforce concerning how the technology actually works.

Correct. One can google a hack to make something work, but astute design, one cannot google that. It requires insight and knowledge.

Turgon

mrblackmamba343 wrote: »

The future of American IT is in India

To a large degree yes.

Turgon

shodown wrote: »

I posted in a thread a few days ago. India is so 10 years ago. Its getting too expensive to setup shop there. People are going to other countries and doing the work from there. PI, Singapore, South America.

Correct and a lot of western jobs will go there.

Turgon

networker050184 wrote: »

I have a story about outsourcing to India. The company I used to work for went through a big "cost saving" initiative to outsource the first line support to India. After about a year and numerous complaints with people threatening to take their business elsewhere, they were forced to move the support back stateside as the customer base was completely unhappy calling and trying to work with a non-native English speaker.

Moral of the story, companies can only get away with what their consumers are willing to accept. If we raise enough stink about it it will change.

Sometimes things go out and come back in again this is true. But the offshoring options are getting better and it's very competitive. I have done contract network design and moved UK and North American work to the Phillopenes, Italian work to Croatia, Spanish work to Chile, French work to North Africa. The trend will continue and increasingly the money and expertise to get it 'right' will come from the west. It usually does. People whine about China. It was western venture capital and expertise that made it happen.

earweed

The people now are becoming more tech savvy but not necessarilly smarter. Last weekend I fixed 3 PCs that had those rogue anti-virus programs attached (the PC owners wanted to get a "free" scan to see how well their real antivirus was working). Tech support will always be needed but the corporations who handle the IT workforces need to get the big picture and stop outsourcing the jobs as that short term profit will eventually come back to bite them.

Turgon

MrRyte wrote: »

Indeed. Where as the babyboomer generation was more technophobic, the younger generation has become "techno-over-confident". I'm willing to bet that a lot of IT departments have spent countless hours wasting time trying to fix a major issue on a desktop, laptop or in the network because the end user couldn't see the harm in downloading a song/video from some dubious website or clicking on a link saying "MAN-YOU GOTTA SEE THIS!!!!!!"

Its not just endusers. We have gone through an aggressive recruiting drive for good support engineers. They are all from overseas and not cheap. Homegrown talent is taking point and click habits socially into their work. They do not read network fundamentals like they used to. The foreigners have less free time and less money and want a better life. They read books.

Plantwiz

Please continue to the state of eduction in the US/UK and such conversation in this thread here:
http://www.techexams.net/forums/off-topic/68656-split-potpourri-consulting-jobs-now-becoming-us-education-other-stuff.html

All other comments more in line with the OPs thread may remain here.

Thank you!

djfunz

I think the Project Manager shift is a reality. I see more of that around me then anything else. At some point I guess it just makes sense. Your no longer perceived as so much of a tech grunt but rather more of a suit and tie manager to the high brass. Speaking to them directly and such in corporate meetings. It's a serious consideration for people that have been in the industry for a while. For us who have not had the chance to be working so long in the field, I think it's best to work for a large provider, or for the government if job security is an issue.

Turgon

djfunz wrote: »

I think the Project Manager shift is a reality. I see more of that around me then anything else. At some point I guess it just makes sense. Your no longer perceived as so much of a tech grunt but rather more of a suit and tie manager to the high brass. Speaking to them directly and such in corporate meetings. It's a serious consideration for people that have been in the industry for a while. For us who have not had the chance to be working so long in the field, I think it's best to work for a large provider, or for the government if job security is an issue.

PM has morphed into it's own subculture these days. A lot of people move into it and once there the fellow IT professional is reduced to the status of a resource to be used. There are some good careers in PM but it's becoming competitive. A lot of techs deride PM as being common sense that slows obvious work and tasks down and an interference setting unrealistic objectives. All that happens. But the role carries it's own pressures and in my experience few people are truly good at it.

it_consultant

Turgon wrote: »

PM has morphed into it's own subculture these days. A lot of people move into it and once there the fellow IT professional is reduced to the status of a resource to be used. There are some good careers in PM but it's becoming competitive. A lot of techs deride PM as being common sense that slows obvious work and tasks down and an interference setting unrealistic objectives. All that happens. But the role carries it's own pressures and in my experience few people are truly good at it.

I don't deride PMs unless they are really bad. Project management is a very tough gig because you have to interface with so many people and keep everything straight. As a tech I can worry solely whatever affects my world, the PM has to get input from other departments etc. In consulting we must PM effectively otherwise we won't have a client. I can tell you the various brands of retinal cameras, portable EKG machines, air quality testers, hospital EMR programs, etc because I have to interface with those guys so my clients have a smooth IT environment. IT PM is truly a subset of normal PM because the nomenclature is so much different then in standard business. My wife's PM (insurance industry) is similar, you can't just drop a PM who works manufacturing into IT or insurance and expect great results.

erpadmin

it_consultant wrote: »

IT PM is truly a subset of normal PM because the nomenclature is so much different then in standard business. My wife's PM (insurance industry) is similar, you can't just drop a PM who works manufacturing into IT or insurance and expect great results.

I respectfully disagree with this. I think you are confusing use of industry jargon within respective industries for "subsets" of PM. The point of PM is that the methodology is the same and can be used in ANY industry.

Mind you, a PM needs to be very familiar with the industry he/she is PMing in order to have a successful project, but more often than not, if a PM who works in manufacturing drops into IT or insurance, that PM will surround him/herself with someone who is familiar with either (either inhouse, or outsourced) to get familiar with the jargon and other issues native to those industries.

My main point though is that the methodology does not change; it can be applied across any and all industries.

it_consultant

A PM who has never worked in IT and is dropped into an IT project is a disaster. I have seen it happen over and over again. Even PMs who have come from an ITIL background (I am mixed as to whether ITIL is actually useful, ever) struggle with IT projects. Same thing with insurance and probably the same thing with projects in other specialized fields that I am not familiar with.

I say this mainly based on experience. There are probably PMPs out there that have never touched an IT project that could drop in and rock my world, I have simply never seen that happen. An IT PM really needs to know the difference between POTS lines, hosted PBX, internal digital PBXs, IP PBXs, Databases, servers (platforms), developers, implementors, end users, end user experience, business workflow, backups, redundancy, Windows, Linux, web servers, front-end, back-end, etc. I have never seen any PM or manager without a 30,000 foot overview of these technologies succeed.

never2late

erpadmin wrote: »

My main point though is that the methodology does not change; it can be applied across any and all industries.

That is true to some extent, but some knowledge in the IT field determines the application. Though the basic processes are constant in PM, it requires more than management ability to see a project to successful completion especially in the IT field.

When you deal with budget, resources and scheduling management you must have a basic knowledge of the IT industry. If not, how can you be sure if a team member is being overly zealous in estimating the cost\time of a database integration or under estimating the complexity in developing a web app. Relying solely on team members without knowing some basic tenants of the industry can and probably will lead to failure.

erpadmin

it_consultant wrote: »

I say this mainly based on experience. There are probably PMPs out there that have never touched an IT project that could drop in and rock my world, I have simply never seen that happen. An IT PM really needs to know the difference between POTS lines, hosted PBX, internal digital PBXs, IP PBXs, Databases, servers (platforms), developers, implementors, end users, end user experience, business workflow, backups, redundancy, Windows, Linux, web servers, front-end, back-end, etc. I have never seen any PM or manager without a 30,000 foot overview of these technologies succeed.

I have been involved with three ERP implementations/upgrades that have been handled by PMs from outsourced vendors. I can assure you that a good PM isn't going to personally know ANY of that. That's what technical leads are for. No one looks for a PMP that is purely technical, but one that can manage ALL phases of the project.

You're only taking into account one aspect of a project...the technical end...the end that you as an it_consultant deals with (as you should, because you are it_consultant). You don't take into account the "big picture" though, and that's what a PM is supposed to do (fit-gap analysis with users, dealing with the executive sponsor, who is usually the CIO/CEO or his/her delegate who will report back to the C-Level person). It's not always technical. As long as the methodology is sound and the PM can work the methodology, the project has a chance to succeed.

All I'm saying is that your view on project management is narrow. When I first started dealing with PMs, I had the same view also until I started reading more and more about project management. This was well before I had even taken Project+ as a cert (well before I enrolled in WGU...I was and am still interested in taking the PMP certification...it would definitely add to my own IT experience).

erpadmin

never2late wrote: »

That is true to some extent, but some knowledge in the IT field determines the application. Though the basic processes are constant in PM, it requires more than management ability to see a project to successful completion especially in the IT field.

When you deal with budget, resources and scheduling management you must have a basic knowledge of the IT industry. If not, how can you be sure if a team member is being overly zealous in estimating the cost\time of a database integration or under estimating the complexity in developing a web app. Relying solely on team members without knowing some basic tenants of the industry can and probably will lead to failure.

Those are valid points. To deal with that though, from what I remember from the Sybex book, a PM may perhaps have access to past successful projects, assuming he works for a outsourcing shop, that may help him/her gauge how long a particular task took, what the budget was for that project, etc., etc. He good PM will be able to have contigency plans in case something goes over schedule and potentially over budget. It's all about proper planning and that should be a part of good PM methodology.

Prepping for the Project+ exam has given me, personally, a better understanding of how that methodology should work. Mind you, my Project+ cert doesn't make me a PM...only experience can do that. The most I've ever done in a project was as a technical lead.

it_consultant

erpadmin wrote: »

I have been involved with three ERP implementations/upgrades that have been handled by PMs from outsourced vendors. I can assure you that a good PM isn't going to personally know ANY of that. That's what technical leads are for. No one looks for a PMP that is purely technical, but one that can manage ALL phases of the project.

You're only taking into account one aspect of a project...the technical end...the end that you as an it_consultant deals with (as you should, because you are it_consultant). You don't take into account the "big picture" though, and that's what a PM is supposed to do (fit-gap analysis with users, dealing with the executive sponsor, who is usually the CIO/CEO or his/her delegate who will report back to the C-Level person). It's not always technical. As long as the methodology is sound and the PM can work the methodology, the project has a chance to succeed.

All I'm saying is that your view on project management is narrow. When I first started dealing with PMs, I had the same view also until I started reading more and more about project management. This was well before I had even taken Project+ as a cert (well before I enrolled in WGU...I was and am still interested in taking the PMP certification...it would definitely add to my own IT experience).

A PMP would certainly know at least a bit about all of the above, otherwise they are literally useless. Outsourced PMs are not uncommon for these projects, esp for smaller clients. That is where me and my team would come in. Large companies would not think to hire a PM that works on IT projects who doesn't have any IT experience at all. It is a recipe for disaster.

I agree it is not always technical, in fact a lot of it is business workflow, which I included in one of my other posts as being extremely important to understand. Understanding your departments and the type of attitudes that comprise each department is critical. Finding out the people who will resist change is important. Identifying the profitable parts of the company and streamlining their work processes is important. The point I am making is that you can know all of that, NOT know IT, and be a complete failure at the project. IT projects are complex, lots of moving parts with a lot of things that need to be done in a specific order. If the PM cannot intelligently interface with the technical staff - it wont be done correctly. This is important for a number of reasons, one of the main ones being that often times technical staff are spread across a couple of companies.

The principles of PM are the same but I can promise you that in at least two industries specialized knowledge is a necessity to execute the project properly.

erpadmin

it_consultant wrote: »

The point I am making is that you can know all of that, NOT know IT, and be a complete failure at the project. IT projects are complex, lots of moving parts with a lot of things that need to be done in a specific order. If the PM cannot intelligently interface with the technical staff - it wont be done correctly. This is important for a number of reasons, one of the main ones being that often times technical staff are spread across a couple of companies.

It is that point that I continue to disagree with.

Back in the good ol' days of the 90s, when MCSEs were making millions of dollars prior to the dot-com bubble (and I will remind you and other readers that this is an exaggeration, to bring home my point) IT was pretty much allowed to dictate business practices. It's all about the technology...blah, blah, blah. It's how poor saps got suckered into spending $8000 on his credit card to cash in on the IT gold rush.

Once the dot-com era went bust, businesses sobered up and went back to dictating to IT the direction the business has to go (the way it should be, as IT is a support function). We then saw the rise of the business analyst, the guy/gal who doesn't work in IT (typically), but is supposed to translate the needs of the business to the IT folks.

It is that translation that will make or break a project...whether your PM is a CCIE/Microsoft Architect guru/Nortel expert or some PM who is on a project who is more of a construction genius but got placed into implementing an IT project. I don't know what you define as small projects, but the PeopleSoft implementations I've been involved with are usually in the neighborhood of millions of dollars (at least the PeopleSoft ones I've been involved with). Licensing, hardware/infrastructure, training, contractors, new permanent employees, the length of time the implementation went through....

There are numerous implemenations I've read about that have gone to crap. When that happens, it is usually because things got lost in translation. However, because I've been involved in successful implementations, I can testify that as long as the methodology is in place and sound, project management works. A PM does not need to be an expert in technology, but have the means to find that baseline of what's worked based on like projects from the past.