Comments on: The Dreaded Root Cause Meeting for the Engineer, Part 3 http://midwestitsurvival.com/2009/10/the-dreaded-root-cause-meeting-for-the-engineer-part-3/?utm_source=rss&utm_medium=rss&utm_campaign=the-dreaded-root-cause-meeting-for-the-engineer-part-3 Discussion on IT roles in non-Silicon Valley yet tech savvy companies Thu, 08 Sep 2011 05:14:26 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.2 By: Midwest IT Survival » The Dreaded Root Cause Meeting for the Engineer, Part 4 http://midwestitsurvival.com/2009/10/the-dreaded-root-cause-meeting-for-the-engineer-part-3/#comment-33 Midwest IT Survival » The Dreaded Root Cause Meeting for the Engineer, Part 4 Sun, 22 Aug 2010 22:12:30 +0000 http://www.midwestitsurvival.com/?p=209#comment-33 [...] at a true root cause for a system outage due to the interconnected players involved.  In the previous article, I outline a particular IT engineering resource approach entitled “Openly Be the Hero” to [...] [...] at a true root cause for a system outage due to the interconnected players involved.  In the previous article, I outline a particular IT engineering resource approach entitled “Openly Be the Hero” to [...]

]]> By: SKleefeld http://midwestitsurvival.com/2009/10/the-dreaded-root-cause-meeting-for-the-engineer-part-3/#comment-32 SKleefeld Mon, 05 Oct 2009 16:55:04 +0000 http://www.midwestitsurvival.com/?p=209#comment-32 Personally, I not only go with "Here are the facts" hero approach, but I bring them up as soon as I see potential issues. Which essentially covers my butt when the system does fail, and I can say, "Of course it failed. I identified problems X, Y and Z several months ago, alerted everyone, and nothing was done about it." The distinct downside to this approach is that it still has a tendency to piss people off. "He has a negative attitude; he's not a team player." And frankly, I've gotten railroaded out of companies because of it. (First to be laid off during a downturn once, and "suggested" to resign another time.) Which is certainly problematic from a personal cash-flow perspective, but I am able to maintain my personal integrity and say that, regardless of the consequences, I did the right thing. I can go to sleep each night with a clear conscience. Additionally, I've found that keeping that approach earns a great deal of respect from the people who, to me, matter. Often these are NOT the people who have political power within an organization, but I am only willing to play by their rules so long as it doesn't directly contradict my own. Again, it's caused me to commit political suicide, but in each case, I've gone down as a martyr in the eyes of those who remained. While I recognize that businesses are NOT a meritocracy, I still hold that the SHOULD be. The less meritocratic an organization is, the less I'm inclined to work for them, so I generally don't have an issue with being forced out of those situations. I think playing politics is BS; I don't like it and I'm not good at it. If my career depends on sucking up to the right people, then I'm willing to go do something else. Perhaps a bit idealistic, but I also hold to the belief that if I'm going to be doing something for 1/3 of my day, every day, I darn well better enjoy it! Personally, I not only go with “Here are the facts” hero approach, but I bring them up as soon as I see potential issues. Which essentially covers my butt when the system does fail, and I can say, “Of course it failed. I identified problems X, Y and Z several months ago, alerted everyone, and nothing was done about it.”

The distinct downside to this approach is that it still has a tendency to piss people off. “He has a negative attitude; he’s not a team player.” And frankly, I’ve gotten railroaded out of companies because of it. (First to be laid off during a downturn once, and “suggested” to resign another time.) Which is certainly problematic from a personal cash-flow perspective, but I am able to maintain my personal integrity and say that, regardless of the consequences, I did the right thing. I can go to sleep each night with a clear conscience.

Additionally, I’ve found that keeping that approach earns a great deal of respect from the people who, to me, matter. Often these are NOT the people who have political power within an organization, but I am only willing to play by their rules so long as it doesn’t directly contradict my own. Again, it’s caused me to commit political suicide, but in each case, I’ve gone down as a martyr in the eyes of those who remained.

While I recognize that businesses are NOT a meritocracy, I still hold that the SHOULD be. The less meritocratic an organization is, the less I’m inclined to work for them, so I generally don’t have an issue with being forced out of those situations. I think playing politics is BS; I don’t like it and I’m not good at it. If my career depends on sucking up to the right people, then I’m willing to go do something else. Perhaps a bit idealistic, but I also hold to the belief that if I’m going to be doing something for 1/3 of my day, every day, I darn well better enjoy it!

]]>