Shouldn't system admins have non-technical managers?

Have you ever had a non-technical manager who didn't understand the IT world?

Most non-technical managers have no clue about complexity of tasks and sometimes what they say (and want) can be interfering and counterproductive.

It seems to me that doctors would have someone with an Arts degree who would tell them when to perform surgeries and take patients off of live-support

Find more posts tagged with

Free for TechExams community: Cybersecurity salary guide

Compare cert salaries and plan your next career move

Button

Comments

Mrock4

My former supervisor was not by any means a CCNP, or even a CCNA, but he understood the basic concepts very well, and was *always* asking for the tech guys to explain to him new things, and teach him about whatever was going on. I think that was great, since often, he knew more about the underlying concepts of what we were dealing with then some of the new guys who were actual "techs"...then he was replaced by a woman who had no idea, and insisted on putting people on certain jobs simply based on who submitted the workorder request. It was a bad way of business but....that was two completely different styles of managing. I highly prefer the first..also allows them to understand that doing a complex task is just that- and not to expect it to be done in 10 minutes!

binarysoul

I agree with you that not every task can be completed in 10 mins.

Maybe I'm being a bit biased, but I've rarely seen an IT pro who's not talented and smart. I'm pretty sure, if it wasn't for non-technical managers, IT world would have been much advanced than what it's today.

brad-

IMHO, non-technical leaders fail at grasping the big picture, because they dont understand the little picture.

dynamik

The owner of our company is not tech-savvy at all. He has me come out to his house to troubleshoot extremely trivial issues. I've been out there over a dozen times, and I've always spent more time in the 15-minute round trip than I did actually solving the problem (that includes booting the machine(s) up).

Despite having no IT background, he is an excellent supervisor in regards to our company's IT infrastructure. I can tell he can't really keep up when I go over technical details with him, but he understands the big picture, so his lack of knowledge doesn't hinder or frustrate me in the least.

However, I always detail why things cost what they do and why they will take the length of time they do, as well as what might possibly go wrong. If your manager isn't up to speed, it is your responsibility to educate them. You're the pro, right? If you act like a task isn't a big deal at the onset, you can't expect them to not raise an eyebrow if things cost more and/or take longer later on.

iowatech

Most non-technical managers have no clue about complexity of tasks and sometimes what they say (and want) can be interfering and counterproductive.

Managing an employee and being an employee are two far different things. Some people just lead naturaly and adapt to any environment, while others just follow. Each has their place in the workforce. I don't think there is any set standard.

Imagine a normal employee trying to dictate tasks to his counterparts and not grasping the "big picture" of where the company should be going, not just the network or the infrastructure.

[/quote]

seuss_ssues

I think a direct IT manager should be more adequate than his employees.

I think a CTO or CIO should have atleast a strong understanding of the technology. Not meaning they can necessarily configure the routers, but understand what can be done. They should be able to sit through a meeting with the other upper managemnet and correctly dictate what can and cannot be accomplished.

Mrock4

A little off subject, but to make a comment on binarysoul's comment about IT pro's almost all being smart/talented. This is mostly true, but not all..obviously, there is an always an exception. That being said, I think the key to success comes in your communication/people skills, and being good at
translating technical terms into simpler ones that the management can grasp. I am famous for drawing on a whiteboard in a room full of people to explain things..that, and I also do that when I'm trying to troubleshoot a routing issue, set up dial peers etc...

note to self..need to buy a big whiteboard for my CCNP studies now..

Pash

non technical manager at my main support site here. He is often counter productive and doesnt know how to properly prioritise issues or tasks. He never wishes to know the work required in any task which means hes in your face within a few minutes asking for something else to be done. I am tempted every day to tell him I think hes a **** IT manager and doesnt have a clue, but it could potentially cause friction as he is effectively our customer and we are the contracted support company.

Schluep

One of the best skills to have in IT is to be able to explain technical things in non-technical terms so that everyone can understand them. If Management or your immediate boss do not understand what is going on simply explain it in a way they can relate to so that they can make the best decisions based upon a given situation.

You aren't always going to have an ideal scenario, but can certainly make the best of it.

binarysoul

Pash wrote:

non technical manager at my main support site here. He is often counter productive and doesnt know how to properly prioritise issues or tasks. He never wishes to know the work required in any task which means hes in your face within a few minutes asking for something else to be done. I am tempted every day to tell him I think hes a **** IT manager and doesnt have a clue, but it could potentially cause friction as he is effectively our customer and we are the contracted support company.

I exactly know those "tempted" moments. Been there, done that

garv221

binarysoul wrote:

Have you ever had a non-technical manager who didn't understand the IT world?

Yes, my boss, the company president/CEO. He pays me to handle IT so he doesn't have to know or even think about it, just like every department in the company.

binarysoul wrote:

Most non-technical managers have no clue about complexity of tasks and sometimes what they say (and want) can be interfering and counterproductive.

I thought the same thing but once I got to upper management it made clear sense to me. Employee positions are created solely because the help and certain skill set is needed to complete a given set of tasks. A true non-technical manager should not be giving technical directions, ie recommending a new ACL on the firewall. However, he should have hired competent advisers (sys admin/engineers) who can give him recommendations and options that then can be discussed against the budget and forecast. There is no pretending that the non-technical manager knows how to add an ACL or even the slightest care how to do it, he seeks only results and if results are not seen he is held responsible for not seeking competent employees to carry out the tasks. I think smaller companies loose sight of this and end up with upset employees.

Claymoore

I would take a non-technical manager who knows how to manage over a highly-technical person who has no management skills. My company is (unfortunately) full of managers/supervisors who were promoted mainly because of tenure and not because of management skills. They may have been competent employees, but their inability to mange people leads to poor morale, high turnover and lower productivity. Their decisions and policies are so bad that my girlfriend used them as examples of what not to do when she was completing her MBA.

IBM made the mistake of promoting their best engineers into management in the 80s. This left them with poor managers and poor engineers - one of the reasons they lost market share. One of our vendors was slowly taken over by their engineers and it's now almost impossible to get any help from them. They are so far behind on other projects at other sites (probably because they can't properly manage time) that they don't have staff available for scheduled maintenance at our site.

Luckily my manager actually knows how to manage. As the senior systems engineer, he trusts my technical judgement and stays out of my way so I can do my job. Of course he is still technical enough that I know I can't bulls*** him.

Mrock4

Claymoore wrote:

Their decisions and policies are so bad that my girlfriend used them as examples of what not to do when she was completing her MBA.

Luckily my manager actually know how to manage. As the senior systems engineer, he trusts my technical judgement and stays out of my way so I can do my job. Of course he is still technical enough that I know I can't bulls*** him.

Ouch! That's pretty bad. I am almost in the same boat as you. My supervisor is the perfect blend (she) has a lot of skills on a server, whereas I'm more into the networking side. She gives me enough room to do what I need to do (without questions!), but at the same time, I can't BS too much...just a little...

binarysoul

Mrock4 wrote:

I can't BS too much...just a little...

Good, honest statement

msteinhilber

The director of technology in our organization would certainly fall into the non-technical background. His background is more so focused on management and accounting, but he does understand the very basics of technology.

Traits that he has which I believe are vital for a person in such a position is that he understands the company as a whole. He does not just focus on the technology itself, or the budget itself. He is paid to understand what the company does and how the technology department can make things smoother and intertwine with the rest of the organization. He is a trusting individual. If he has a certain need to meet, he will have a meeting with the management of each sub-department (networking, development, helpdesk, training, etc) and describe the need. Each of the managers for each section will focus on what role they will play and once a solution is achieved they meet again. Not once has he ever forced anything upon us. He has the trust in his staff that if we say it's going to take 90 days to implement this process, then that's what it is going to take. If it can be done sooner, great - if issues arise, no big deal either so long as the issue is beyond our control and not due to error.

I've been in organizations previously where technical managers ran the show. And the common trait that I found was the budget was blown quickly on "would be nice" items that weren't vital, but maybe made our jobs a little easier. However, the vital systems which could have used the money more were forced to wait till next years budget. My boss at a previous job about a year ago did just this - we had 6 of our main offices in the area routing to one of the central locations where a single T1 was provisioned. The remaining six offices were routing to the central office through fractal T1's (half voice, half data). Each of the six offices had anywhere between 40-150 people accessing the Internet through the fractal T's which were ultimately piped into the single T1. Internet access was vital to their job's as everything was web based - and it sucked, hard.

DMin

Most nontechnical managers are expected to manage, not provide support. They should be able to understand when you tell them that you need a firewall that the benefit outweighs the cost, but they don't need to know how to install that firewall, and believe me you don't want them having that level of skill...micromanagers suck.

That said, if your boss's title is "IT Manager" and he doesn't know a switch from a server, you're going to be in for some interesting times.