How do you do your IT staff?
Recently, we have changed out IT Tech method. It went from knowing how to do one specific thing, to everyone should know how to do everything about the organization where I work. What way do you think is best? How should you do it? Why? What do you do?
We currently have 8 techs and they have to know how to do everything such as AD, Mail, Phones, Wireless Access Points, Networking, etc. The reason is that if that one person is out for "Phones" and we have a phone issue they can't solve the problem. Is this correct? How can we solve the issue? What is the best method about IT staff?
There are definite benefits to cross training, but expecting your whole staff to be equally capable in each area is not realistic, nor is it a good use of human resources. Let your specialists concentrate on what they do best and become the expert. Then let them cross train others.
But by making everyone responsible for everything, you'll have an entire staff that is familiar with a lot of things but no one who knows anything in depth.
One needs to specialize, everyone needs to know a little of everything, if only to refer to the "one".
You need to have someone who will own a system, but that everyone can fix/maintain/work out, but when it really hits the fan, #1 comes in.
Its also really good for junior staff to get exposure to different systems, career advancing.
Depends on the size of the organization but with 8 techs this is probably not reasonable.
Everyone needs to have an overview knowledge of everything but each Specialty is too complicated to have an in-depth knowledge of all of them.
In my situation I am the only one there and I make it clear to them that I an not an expert in everything. I do know a lot about most things but it takes me a lot more time to do, what a specialist, would consider simple.
So the compromise they will have to live with is no in-depth knowledge of anything so when something goes wrong it will take a lot longer to resolve than if the had a highly trained specialist on staff to deal with it.
Will they be happy with that?
I think you should allow people to find their niche as it adds to job satisfaction. I don't like the idea of everyone crossing over like that, no-one then takes responsibility for an area when something goes wrong.
It does make sense for a little cross-pollination to cover for holidays/sickness etc but not 100%.
I would say a much better approach is easy to understand documentation and sensible holiday cover handover processes.
Let people find their own niche but you do need cross training. It seems rather unprofessional to have to say, sorry, so and so is out so no one can fix your problem.
Each member of the team should have an overview of all systems as much as possible as first line and then have someone that has overall ownership that can tackle the core issues that arise. @ lwbm...its good to give junior staff exposure to different systems...keeps the job interesting and shows the team care about their development.
We try to have 3 people who can do every job, even outside of IT. We are still training to accomplish that, but it would give us enough backups to feel secure. There is no reason to have everyone know every job though.
Think of it as if it were a battlefield. No one is irreplaceable. Should someone take a bullet, the next person in line needs to be able to step up.
So, your VM expert should also know AD. Your AD expert should also know email. And so on.
You don't need everyone to know everything. But every ﻿thing﻿ should be known by at least two people.
Good documentation for common tasks would be a good place to start, and probably some sort of buddy system.
You should let them specialize otherwise you will have an IT group that just has a general idea on everything where there not good at any one thing but is ok at everything. It is better to have a team of people that are all good at something different that way you actually work as a team not just a bunch of lone wolves. Sure, you may want more people to know the bare necessities of everything but after that they should be in one field especially if they show interest.
If you expect everyone to be an expert at everything, expect them to want way more money.
I enjoy cross-training with SME (subject matter expert). Everyone should be trained on the basics, but the deep dive or the insane issues? Fire them off to the SME. Its worked well in my career. My team has a mobile device SME, a Printer / Scanner SME, ...a networking SME (He's our Network Engineer, but he demands to be called a SME...), etc. Everyone can chip in, but if they come up against something outside their level, they ping the expert and keep on moving.
This (in bold). It's really all about risk management. You still get some degree of specialty with the ability to manage risk if someone is off on vacation or sick leave.
I lean towards having two specialists in each area if possible that way one can be back up for the other. But if this is not possible have at least one specialist and then cross train someone of the need to know items that way they can at least be dangerous and can work on the normal issues.
I'm a firm believer in cross training. Everyone should have a basic knowledge in as many areas as possible. It just makes sense to have your resources flexible. Not that everyone couldn't have their strengths.. but NOT knowing how to check a server, or not knowing how to install a driver... is foolish in my opinion.
I would think it would be a good idea to have a few generalists and a few specialists on a team.
I agree with Robert5205, some redundancy is necessary in all processes; including employees duties/skillsets.
1. Documentation. As others have pointed out, you cannot have all staff equally as experienced and knowledgeable about a system, but cross-training is valuable. This means that maintenance or common issues should be documented by the "primary" or "lead" tech so that other techs will know how to do the basics. Some training will need to be done for troubleshooting purposes, but that lead tech should be relied upon when all other avenues fail, and said tech should be working with other staff during those problems so that people can learn and grow in that area.
2. Training. As mentioned above, some training will be required. Since they want to go from a "silo" approach to a flat support team, I'd heavily suggest they allow you some training time on the clock, and assist in any materials you may need (test lab, books, online resources, certifications, etc). If they refuse to support their own initiative, it may be time to work elsewhere unless you have a lot of free time and money.
3. Job Title/pay. I've been in a horrid scenario where the staff was restructured with overlapping job responsibilities, but management didn't change their staff model and adjust salaries accordingly. This lead to almost a third of techs walking out in the span of a few weeks. If you were previously the VOIP guy, but are now asked to manage AD, LAN/WLAN, email, etc, then you better be getting a raise or else you'll find a better job as soon as you are trained up. This is great for you, but a bad strategy for the company, as they just lost a ton of time and resources increasing your value and then watching you walk away because they didn't pay you accordingly.
Use both on your team, that's the way to do it.
Cross training is definitely necessary, but I have never worked on an IT team where EVERYONE knew how to do EVERYTHING. On a team of 8, I'd expect at least 2 others besides the primary are familiar enough with a particular device or technology to provide support should another be on PTO or decide to leave the company.
Generally, IT people are pretty resourceful on the debugging part, but what kills the ability to support quickly and efficiently is not knowing logins/passwords for devices, contact #s and methods for reaching vendors, and having documented account numbers on data and voice lines. A knowledge-base of some of the recurring problems doesn't hurt either. Get that stuff documented and centralized with appropriate security on the documentation and the stand-ins will be able to do a much better job when called upon.
Generally, I think it's good to have specialists, but it's especially important to make sure they have a general knowledge of everything.
Seriously though, Robert & SQLRage hit it on the head. It's a combination of the two, a couple who know an area inside and out, and some basic knowledge in all areas for everyone. Simple tasks can get handled as quick as possible, and more complex task go to the appropriate person for that area of expertise, or their backup if they are out that day.
I started off as a specialist in the sysadmin/networking aspect. But after we outsourced the other two techs I quickly had to become a generalist.
Not complaining though as it it was a good opportunity to learn other aspects of the companies needs and technology which I would not of touched on otherwise.